I guess “anonymity” is all relative..

I’ve been given the all clear to confirm that I was, until yesterday, Blago Juror #171.

chicago tribune

Imagine my surprise when I was randomly selected to serve as a juror on the Blagojevich trial. Imagine anyone’s surprise to get picked for this one!

Imagine my surprise when I made it thru the first round of cuts, even after I had indicated on my questionnaire that I had publicly talked about the case on Chicago’s radiowaves. I thought, for sure, that’d be an automatic DQ.

juror questionnaire

Imagine my surprise when I sat in the front of the courtroom, 10 feet from our ex-Governor and told Judge Zagel that I had often poked fun at Blago on the radio.. all while making direct eye contact with Blago for 8 minutes. Awwwkward.

And imagine my surprise when I got in my car… and heard WBBM-AM reporting on the fact that I had just left the courtroom.

from chicagobreakingnews.com

Of course, WBBM didn’t give my name. Nor did the Chicago Tribune, Sun-Times, CBS, NBC, NPR, FOX, ABC, WGN, WTTW or the dozens of others outlets who ran with the story. I am surprised, after reading and watching some of the stories, that they didn’t at least try to give it in Pig Latin!?

A friend texted me yesterday afternoon and said, “I think they’re talking about you on NBC. At least it sounds like you. And they showed a courtroom sketch of the side of your head. At least it looked like your head.” Anyone know where I can buy courtroom sketches?

chicago sun-times

I do find it interesting that such an epic legal case, with so much emphasis on the anonymity of jurors (it’s all we were told for more than a week), would allow the media to thoroughly detail a jurors well-publicized and easily searcheable professional history.

Don’t get me wrong, I understand that it’s fair game to disclose identity after a juror has been dismissed. At that point, you’re 100% irrelevant. But I was still very much in the prospective pool until late yesterday afternoon; long after the local news had all played connect the dots.

I don’t mind so much for me, primarily because I was excused from serving (plus a little media massage is good for business). But having just experienced, first-hand, the implications of being flooded with random people asking “You’re on the Blago jury?,” I feel that it’s a rather sloppy precedent to set and allow going forward. What if it had been a trial for a famous mob boss who had henchmen with a penchant for making house calls? I wouldn’t have gone home.

Maybe this helps to better illustrate my point.. How did I find out I was dismissed as a juror? By watching the 5 o’clock news. That seems broken to me.

chicago tribune

Again, I don’t mean to get too far away from the lighthearted nature of my personal experience. I’m talking more about the principle.

I know, on a journalistic level, having a member of the media on Blago’s jury makes for a snazzy feature piece du jour. But the civil fundamentals of guarding anonymity, while someone is still up for high-profile (or low-profile) jury selection, should be considered on an integral level by a media granted access to report. At least in my naive little world, constitutional protection trumps a headline grab.

I’ve been contacted by some outlets asking to do interviews about the entire experience. And I’m happy to oblige now that it’s over. I’ll post the links to anything, if you’re curious in hearing more about the wild process.

** While I was typing this, one of my Mom’s co-workers emailed me this clip from last night’s episode of “Chicago Tonight,” where Phil Ponce asks the reporter to give my identity on live TV.

Oh, and Rod’s hair looks even more ridiculous when he’s sitting next to you.

All rise,

.:: #171