A lot of people don't know anything about this case. Probably even fewer who have heard of it have sifted through the mountains of document dumps. I see no reason to think the jury would necessarily be tainted.
I would tend to agree. Most of the publicity completely negative in nature has been limited to shows like NG and JVM. Other less-specialized mainstream shows have taken a much softer approach, and have allowed both the defense and the Anthony family to state their belief in KC's innocence (up to and including accusing LE of all kinds of malfeasance). These types of network shows (like GMA, CBS Morning Show, Today Show, Fox News, LKL, etc) appeal to a broader audience, and I suspect have a more typical jury pool demographic. than NG and JVM. Same goes for blogs and public forums - they may be overwhelmingly negative, but they attract a lot of readers interested in true crime stories who are also not likely to be chosen for any jury. Local Orlando news shows have tended to a similar curve (KB vs. Jennifer D for example) or continuum. Given the Anthony family's predilection toward media coverage and the rather bizarre behavior of their daughter, it would be hard to present the facts in a light that might not influence some (who may likely be weeded out by expensive jury consultant firms).
We have certainly seen LE and the prosecution restrict their remarks. No information has been "leaked" to the public that was unlawful. In fact, I suspect that some of the information that should have lawfully been offered for public view in this case has been unduly delayed by the defense given what the SA reports it has given the defense in discovery and how long it has taken us to receive it. Even so, it appears to be a very small segment of any potential jury pool that is either very familiar with, or has made up their mind about culpability in this case.
So, in essence, despite our limited perception of an almost universal reaction of abhorrence to the details of the case, it would seem that most news coverage, directed at a potential jury pool, could seen as favoring the defense. They made it their business early on with the way they handled PR that they had every intention of trying to influence the public, even from courtroom sound and video bytes, for which they have been criticized by Judge S, btw.
Other than a small portion of the public's interpretation of document dumps, which are fair and legal under FL law, and some local reporters who disagree with a defense that has manipulated the media with smoke, mirrors, blatant lies in depositions or even slanderous or defamatory statements on camera (CA calling Morgan an ambulance chaser for one and accusing the SA of political gain by making this a Murder One charge), I really can't say that the defense has had any disadvantage at all in this case, in fact, they seem to have optimized the press in a way that is unavailable to the SA and LE who, not only bear the burden of proof in this case but, it would appear, all burden of conscience (since the victim's family is uninterested) as well as the cost of recovering this poor child's remains and thoroughly investigating each and every possible SOD within a fifty mile radius according to the ever changing whims of a defense that tilts at windmills.
