Suscribe to Weekly RiverCitiesReader.com Updates
* indicates required

View previous campaigns.

Latest Comments

  • GET A GRIP
    Get a grip, I bet the other little girl who...
  • ...
    Love the show - Daniel Mansfield
  • On target
    Everyone I have shared your editorial finds it really close...
  • Retired teacher
    Loved reading how such an outstanding citizen was able to...
  • Re: name correction
    Thank you for bringing the error to our attention, Lorianne,...
Outcome of Blagojevich’s Trial Not a Foregone Conclusion PDF Print E-mail
Commentary/Politics - Illinois Politics
Written by Rich Miller   
Sunday, 13 June 2010 09:15

Keep in mind while watching coverage of the Rod Blagojevich trial that reporters in the courtroom have a far keener understanding of what is going on than do the jurors. Their perceptions are not necessarily the same as the jurors' views. So their coverage may not match up to how the case will turn out.

For most of the jurors, this is their first time in a real courtroom. Unlike most of the reporters at the trial, this experience is all quite new to all but two of them who have served on juries before. And, unlike most of the reporters, they have limited knowledge of what the trial is all about and the context of the charges.

Most of the jurors know little of Rod Blagojevich and his administration except for their skimming of the local news and maybe seeing him a time or two on TV entertainment programs. One juror admitted that she checks the news "only for the weather."

If you're reading this column, then you most likely have more interest in politics than average citizens. So, for people like us, some of those jurors may seem ignorant and even clueless. But people like us aren't "normal" citizens.

Most people, like many of those jurors, live lives almost totally divorced from day-to-day political machinations.

I've often tried to explain this political disconnect with my "hockey theory." And it probably applies to the Blagojevich trial as well.

I never played hockey as a kid. I can barely ice-skate. I have a vague memory of us owning a couple of hockey sticks back in the day, but my brothers and I probably just used them to terrorize each other.

I've seen seen two hockey games in person. One of my earliest memories of television is of a Blackhawks game, but other than that I've only watched parts of a few games on TV. I've never watched a complete game.

I almost never read about hockey in the papers and don't know the players, although I am familiar with some historical names.

I'm well aware that the Blackhawks won the Stanley Cup finals, and I know they have some great players, but I'm almost ashamed to say that I didn't watch more than a few minutes of any of the playoff games and couldn't tell you who the Blackhawks' big names are if you put a gun to my head.

Two million people showed up to celebrate the Blackhawks win in Chicago last Friday, but I wasn't one of them, and I am more amazed by the turnout than what was said and who was there.

Plain and simple, I'm just not a hockey fan. I suppose I have too many other things to occupy my time.

That's pretty much the way most people (half of whom don't even vote) view politics in this country. And it's probably somewhere around the same level of knowledge that many, if not most, of Blagojevich's jurors have about his alleged crimes and misgovernance.

So while many of us can list many of the reasons why Rod Blagojevich is guilty as sin (just as Blackhawks fans can tell you in detail how their team won the big trophy), many of his jurors are pretty much in the dark at the moment.

And it's not just ignorance that makes them different. If they didn't know that Blagojevich friend Chris Kelly committed suicide rather than testify against his buddy, they won't learn it at the trial, either. The same sort of thing goes for convicted felon Stu Levine. There will be no mention at trial of Levine's drug use and partying ways.

Combine all that with the decree that jurors must always keep an open mind, and the result is that they will almost undoubtedly see things differently than will the reporters who are covering the trial and the people who are following that coverage.

Jurors often see things in a way that "insiders" don't, and they make judgments on things that get past some of the rest of us. George Ryan's corruption trial produced countless banner headlines, but some of Ryan's jurors said there was no single "smoking gun" that did Ryan in. Rather it was the overwhelming amount of evidence produced by the prosecution that sealed the former governor's fate.

Rich Miller also publishes Capitol Fax (a daily political newsletter, and TheCapitolFaxBlog.com.

Trackback(0)
Comments (2)Add Comment
0
Very insightful, Rich
written by Kindly Old Uncle Lar, June 17, 2010
I love the Hockey metaphor. And thank you for preparing me for the possibility that a guy that we all know is guilty, guilty, guilty, might just walk.
0
...
written by Jimmy Plowman, July 29, 2010
You'll pardon my bluntness, Mr. Miller, but i have no idea what you're talking about. I will admit i'm not a regular reader of your website, but I came upon your article looking for information on how the trial's going, and all i'm getting from your article are opinionated statements, especially concerning the news consciousness of the jurors. Now, i dont know about you, but i got my college pieces marked for not providing factual references for my statements, and personal experience doesnt count. So where do you get off calling these people on the jury ignorant; im surprised that this website's operators let you get away with it. For all we know, they might've done their homework on Blagojevich soon as they found out who the trial was for, or had been following his exploits beforehand. You outta be ashamed for assuming they don't know anything; after all, we live in an age where information can be provided with the click of a button. Now if i were you, i'd write a personal apology to those jurors... and make it a good one.

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy