You know I really think the big issue there was they just wanted to go home. Seven weeks sequestered like prisoners. A finding of guilt would have led to a sentencing phase and who knows how many more weeks. So they didn't find her guilty of anything that would require a sentencing phase. Not even child neglect.
I remember one juror talking about how she just stood in the window resentfully looking down at the hotel pool they could not use. (Maybe because it would bring them into contact with other people).
They were treated like they were being punished. The only relief from the absolute monotony they had was half days on Saturdays when their families could come and spend time with them at a secure location.
Wth? 7 weeks of that.
Since that case judges are far less likely to sequester juries and when they do it is not with as onerous circumstances. For example, they can go home on the weekends.
And we have to also remember that in the thousands of cases we have watched on here since the OJ trial, how many murderers have been found not guilty when it seems clear they were?
Out of thousands of cases, we keep repeating two.
Nevertheless, I am worried for this case. I'm worried that the path to justice may be super horrific -as in maybe a hung jury at first. Maybe two.
And frankly, after thinking and talking with my family about the case, I think there are two big reasons for that possibility.
1. The more attractive a person is the harder it is to find them guilty.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.st...a2f47009-d1af-5ddc-9231-f9a33c21e1a3.amp.html
As much as many of us here find the man repellent, he is conventionally attractive and has a look that many straight women would like.
Coupled with videos and photos showing the gleaming facade he maintained of a loving father, a facade so good people have been shocked at what happened, and who he turned out to be, that may make certain jurors more inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt as to the more serious charges.
2. There is a ton of hateful criticism of SW. I have seen it in MSM articles posts. I have seen hints of it here.
She was involved in a type of business that many abhor.
She was an attractive woman who seemed to have it all and even in death there are those who feel less than her and jealous.
She was a type- A, overachiever which again, bothers people who feel insecure. They may have an inherent dislike for her.
She posted incessantly positive and cheerful social media posts about her kids, her husband and her life. There have been studies as to how social media causes depression as people tend to post only the good stuff and others feel inadequate in the face of that and don't measure up. As a result, there has emerged a deep resentment of people who portray a "perfect" life on social media by people who know their's aren't. They feel anger toward those for making them feel bad about their lives and circumstances.
I have seen a lot of that in comments when it comes to SW. "She needed to work on her marriage and get off social media!"
"She spent too much time making sure everyone saw how great her life was instead of caring for her family!"
That kind of stuff.
In fact, one of her very own friends was commenting to the media that he "had to block her" because he was "jealous" of her life! What? You block someone for doing something wrong. Not for portraying a life that you covet. Just get off social media and put things in perspective - few post the struggles they deal with. They don't want to make anyone feel down.
In any event there seems to be simmering anger out there against people who portray a wonderful life.
I worry that the defense could capitalize on those two things in this case. All we need is one person on the jury with feelings of inadequacy and the inability to use basic logic.
This is not a complex case. But I fear that we are in for a horror show. And I don't think Shanann's poor family are going to be able to withstand it.
