Kemo
03-03-2016, 05:09 PM
8VegtxEp2rU
After the potential juror pool was narrowed down yesterday with the initial questionnaire, people getting hardship exemptions, and so on, things got a lot more interesting today when it comes to jury selection the Hulk Hogan vs. Gawker (officially Bollea vs. Gawker) civil trial. Today was the first day of voir dire, the session where lawyers from both sides question jurors to look for potential biases that could help or hurt their cases. There were 106 potential jurors yesterday when the dust cleared, and today, the attorneys for both sides started to question them. The result was an utterly bizarre spectacle that unfortunately wasn’t broadcast due to restrictions by the judges (the trial will be streamed online starting Monday/March 7th) and resulted in some amazing Twitter content.
The following is sourced from the Twitter feed of Anna Phillips of the Tampa Bay Times, the Twitter feed of Tom Kludt from CNN, a syndicated CNN Money story about the proceedings (via WPTZ.com), Phillips’ story for the Tampa Bay Times website.
Probably the most worrisome panelist was Potential Juror #13, a woman who said that she didn’t hold any bias against Hogan for his use of the N-word. “I don’t know how it made me feel. I may have thought, ‘Oh how sad.'” That isn’t inherently a problem. This quote, however, is: “Frankly, if I could talk about that word for a minute, it’s a double edge sword. A certain race can say it, but a certain race cannot. It’s just not right that that happens.” Somehow, she wasn’t excused, and will return tomorrow for further questioning. The other potential jurors mentioned were, while clearly less potentially malevolent, as entertaining if not much more.
On top of that, Judge Pamela Campbell, after imploring the jury pool to avoid news coverage of the case, went off on a tangent about the quality of online journalism…well, or her perceived lack thereof. “There used to be investigative journalists,” she said. To some, it sounded like a “dog whistle” rant about Gawker and it came off as wildly inappropriate.
Media is watching #hulkvsgawk jury selection from a conference room. That's Nicknotned and @AJDAULERIOIII pic.twitter.com/bC0VkBu6Pn
— Tom Kludt (@TomKludt) March 2, 2016
Here are some of the highlights from 35 potential jurors being questioned:
Way less people than you’d expect had heard of Gawker.
Potential Juror #5 had information about her posted online without her consent: Her weight. Potential Juror #6 also had an ex-girlfriend smear her in some way on MySpace. Yes, MySpace.
Potential Juror #8 was the first male questioned. “I don’t follow a lot of mainstream media. I’m not a mainstream media kind of person. […] I’ve heard the word Gawker..But I don’t really know anything about Gawker.” He had, however, heard of Gizmodo, Gawker’s gadget site, as well as Jalopnik, their car site, but didn’t appear to know it was part of Gawker Media.
Potential Juror #10, a local bar employee who said that “[Hogan] seems to enjoy the circus atmosphere that follows him. Sex with a friend’s wife, although consensual, seems a bit slimy,” before adding that “I’m very opinionated.” She was excused, of course
Potential Juror #11 saw parts of the Hulk Hogan/Heather Cole sex video at the center of the case…on Gakwer…right? “No, on porn sites.” He’s a “former wrestling fan” (to quote Kludt, not the juror) who listens to Bubba the Love Sponge sometimes and said that what he’s learned about Hogan’s private life “lessen[ed]” his opinion of the Hulkster. “Seems to me like a rather inappropriate arrangement. One man’s wife is one man’s wife and…should remain that way.” He also had negative feelings about Gawker, though: “The idea that [the video] was received in good faith does not seem possible to me.” He was the second to be dismissed/excused.
More jurors than you’d expect only knew Hogan from local news stories about his divorce and his son’s car wreck.
A female potential juror had “party” photos posted of her on Facebook without her consent and the offending party refused to take them down. “That makes me feel kind of victimized.”
Potential Juror #19, a self-identified “devout Christian,” singled Hogan out as a “sinner” for his infidelities.
A male who saw the edited sex tape (presumably the Gawker post) on where he found it: “I couldn’t tell you the website. Someone was like check this out.”
Potential Juror #22 was dismissed for sharing mutual friends with Bubba Clem and Heather Cole. On serving on this case’s jury: ”Probably not a good idea.”
This happened:
Attorney: Do you follow wrestling?
Juror: “Yeah, when it was real back in the day." #hulkvsgawk
— Anna Phillips (@annamphillips) March 2, 2016
The day started at 9:00 a.m. local time. They didn’t find anyone who was offended by Hogan’s racist comments until Potential Juror #46 at around 3:38 p.m. “I know the plaintiff has used a word that I find abhorrent.” Also: ”I find the amount [$100 million] that’s been requested in this case to be…very excessive.” Guess what happened.
On Gawker: “It’s a fairly well known phenomenon.” On the nature of the affair, paraphrased by Anna Phillips:
Juror says the fact that the sex was extramarital bothers her.
What if the husband approved?
That's even worse, she says. #hulkvsgawk
— Anna Phillips (@annamphillips) March 2, 2016
One man wrote “I’m on Terry Bollea’s side” and “I like Hulk Hogan” on his questionnaire.
As paraphrased by Tom Kludt: Potential Juror #80 said that Pat Robertson’s 700 Club evangelical Christian television show was “one of his primary news sources.” A few minutes later, presumably from the same man: “I don’t know anything about Gawker. Never seen it. The name to me would imply a site that shows pornographic material.”
The day ended with a guy wearing sandals who wasn’t sure if he could be impartial because “I have a very pleasant memory of Hulk Hogan.”
After the potential juror pool was narrowed down yesterday with the initial questionnaire, people getting hardship exemptions, and so on, things got a lot more interesting today when it comes to jury selection the Hulk Hogan vs. Gawker (officially Bollea vs. Gawker) civil trial. Today was the first day of voir dire, the session where lawyers from both sides question jurors to look for potential biases that could help or hurt their cases. There were 106 potential jurors yesterday when the dust cleared, and today, the attorneys for both sides started to question them. The result was an utterly bizarre spectacle that unfortunately wasn’t broadcast due to restrictions by the judges (the trial will be streamed online starting Monday/March 7th) and resulted in some amazing Twitter content.
The following is sourced from the Twitter feed of Anna Phillips of the Tampa Bay Times, the Twitter feed of Tom Kludt from CNN, a syndicated CNN Money story about the proceedings (via WPTZ.com), Phillips’ story for the Tampa Bay Times website.
Probably the most worrisome panelist was Potential Juror #13, a woman who said that she didn’t hold any bias against Hogan for his use of the N-word. “I don’t know how it made me feel. I may have thought, ‘Oh how sad.'” That isn’t inherently a problem. This quote, however, is: “Frankly, if I could talk about that word for a minute, it’s a double edge sword. A certain race can say it, but a certain race cannot. It’s just not right that that happens.” Somehow, she wasn’t excused, and will return tomorrow for further questioning. The other potential jurors mentioned were, while clearly less potentially malevolent, as entertaining if not much more.
On top of that, Judge Pamela Campbell, after imploring the jury pool to avoid news coverage of the case, went off on a tangent about the quality of online journalism…well, or her perceived lack thereof. “There used to be investigative journalists,” she said. To some, it sounded like a “dog whistle” rant about Gawker and it came off as wildly inappropriate.
Media is watching #hulkvsgawk jury selection from a conference room. That's Nicknotned and @AJDAULERIOIII pic.twitter.com/bC0VkBu6Pn
— Tom Kludt (@TomKludt) March 2, 2016
Here are some of the highlights from 35 potential jurors being questioned:
Way less people than you’d expect had heard of Gawker.
Potential Juror #5 had information about her posted online without her consent: Her weight. Potential Juror #6 also had an ex-girlfriend smear her in some way on MySpace. Yes, MySpace.
Potential Juror #8 was the first male questioned. “I don’t follow a lot of mainstream media. I’m not a mainstream media kind of person. […] I’ve heard the word Gawker..But I don’t really know anything about Gawker.” He had, however, heard of Gizmodo, Gawker’s gadget site, as well as Jalopnik, their car site, but didn’t appear to know it was part of Gawker Media.
Potential Juror #10, a local bar employee who said that “[Hogan] seems to enjoy the circus atmosphere that follows him. Sex with a friend’s wife, although consensual, seems a bit slimy,” before adding that “I’m very opinionated.” She was excused, of course
Potential Juror #11 saw parts of the Hulk Hogan/Heather Cole sex video at the center of the case…on Gakwer…right? “No, on porn sites.” He’s a “former wrestling fan” (to quote Kludt, not the juror) who listens to Bubba the Love Sponge sometimes and said that what he’s learned about Hogan’s private life “lessen[ed]” his opinion of the Hulkster. “Seems to me like a rather inappropriate arrangement. One man’s wife is one man’s wife and…should remain that way.” He also had negative feelings about Gawker, though: “The idea that [the video] was received in good faith does not seem possible to me.” He was the second to be dismissed/excused.
More jurors than you’d expect only knew Hogan from local news stories about his divorce and his son’s car wreck.
A female potential juror had “party” photos posted of her on Facebook without her consent and the offending party refused to take them down. “That makes me feel kind of victimized.”
Potential Juror #19, a self-identified “devout Christian,” singled Hogan out as a “sinner” for his infidelities.
A male who saw the edited sex tape (presumably the Gawker post) on where he found it: “I couldn’t tell you the website. Someone was like check this out.”
Potential Juror #22 was dismissed for sharing mutual friends with Bubba Clem and Heather Cole. On serving on this case’s jury: ”Probably not a good idea.”
This happened:
Attorney: Do you follow wrestling?
Juror: “Yeah, when it was real back in the day." #hulkvsgawk
— Anna Phillips (@annamphillips) March 2, 2016
The day started at 9:00 a.m. local time. They didn’t find anyone who was offended by Hogan’s racist comments until Potential Juror #46 at around 3:38 p.m. “I know the plaintiff has used a word that I find abhorrent.” Also: ”I find the amount [$100 million] that’s been requested in this case to be…very excessive.” Guess what happened.
On Gawker: “It’s a fairly well known phenomenon.” On the nature of the affair, paraphrased by Anna Phillips:
Juror says the fact that the sex was extramarital bothers her.
What if the husband approved?
That's even worse, she says. #hulkvsgawk
— Anna Phillips (@annamphillips) March 2, 2016
One man wrote “I’m on Terry Bollea’s side” and “I like Hulk Hogan” on his questionnaire.
As paraphrased by Tom Kludt: Potential Juror #80 said that Pat Robertson’s 700 Club evangelical Christian television show was “one of his primary news sources.” A few minutes later, presumably from the same man: “I don’t know anything about Gawker. Never seen it. The name to me would imply a site that shows pornographic material.”
The day ended with a guy wearing sandals who wasn’t sure if he could be impartial because “I have a very pleasant memory of Hulk Hogan.”