https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8wwd5cgeRo
The jury selection process in the trial of Terry Bollea (professionally known as Hulk Hogan) v. Gawker Media et al is finally complete after four strange days. Wednesday was completely bananas and Tuesday somewhat less so before things finally wound down today and the jury was picked. The demographic makeup of the jury, as reported by the Tampa Bay Times among others, is four women and two men, with another two women and one man as alternates. All said they had little to no knowledge of the case, and they had a wide range of views on the role of the press. One of the women who was picked said that “If I find something of interest or concern to me, I tend to look it up. I tend to do a lot of investigating,” seemingly indicating a willingness to hear out both sides.
It’s interesting that the jury’s ratio of women to men is two to one. Comparisons of what happened to Hogan (sex tape made without his consent and eventually sent to a gossip website that published a small portion of it) to “revenge porn” have been fairly common with in legal arguments themselves as well as the media. You’d think that women (or at least younger women), might be more inclined to be more put off by Gawker as a result, though there could also be a distaste for Hogan for his infidelities. It all comes down to how well the lawyers questioned the jurors and if the jurors answered honestly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AtbuCwl3nA
Meanwhile, Wild About Trial has a piece focusing on Hogan’s potential “hometown advantage,” since the trial takes place at home in Pinellas County, Florida. “Almost all of the people” that they spoke to mentioned things like Hogan’s charity/fundraising work, that he’s always friendly and amenable to fans who want his autograph and/or a photo, and so on. One reporter told them that “everyone around here either went to high school with Terry, will lie and tell you they did, or knows someone who did.”
Also, the New York Times and HLN have good articles about why exactly this case is important. Both are well worth reading, and we’ll also have our own case primer up shortly to explain why the case is important and what you need to know to follow along.
As far as the jury selection process itself, here are today’s highlights:
- When Michael Sullivan, one of Gawker’s lawyers, was asking the prospective jurors what they thought about First Amendment rights, one member of the panel, a pastor’s wife, said they were “abused” too much. “Accuracy on the Internet is not guaranteed. That is something that has to be addressed.” She had concerns about the video being posted without Hogan’s consent, especially since a less than flattering photo of her had been posted on Facebook. ”I like the idea of ‘do no harm.'”
- Male potential juror on if he would be able to “follow the law” if he didn’t agree with the content that was published: “Probably not.”
- One woman who was dismissed: “I have an issue with ‘public concern.’ I’m not sure how a sex tape is any of my concern. I just don’t understand how that’s freedom of speech.”
- Gawker lawyer citing the rape allegations against Bill Cosby: “Should the celebrities have the power in our society to decide what is and is not publishable?” None of the potential jurors said yes. Later: “There’s no place in the jury box for sympathy.”
The trial proper should last about three weeks and begins with opening arguments this Monday, March 7th. There will be a “pool” camera feed for media use and it’s expected to be streamed online in some form. We will have full coverage throughout.
