Peter Gelzinis and Casey Anthony

By | July 6, 2011
Mr. Gelzinis, 

Jury nullification” doesn’t mean what you seem to think it does. Please look it up before you make a fool of yourself again misusing the term in another column.

I wonder if you were present for Casey Anthony’s entire trial, or watched the whole thing on video, or read the transcript. If not, I’m not sure why you think you are in a position to second-guess the decision of the jury.

Your claim that the jury’s verdict is a lie and makes no sense is bunk and is incredibly disrespectful to the jurors who did their civil duty, put their lives on hold, experienced the trauma of sitting on this jury through this trial, and did their best to render a just verdict.

I often agree with your columns and usually find them to be leaps and bounds better than those of some of your clearly mentally disadvantaged colleagues, but I despise when pundits and talking heads use sensationalistic, inflammatory language to question the verdict of a properly empaneled jury based only on a tiny, biased subset of the trial testimony, i.e., the skewed mishmash reported in the media.

Please stick to the well-reasoned, well-supported, well-articulated columns you are so good at, and leave the lurid, yellow journalism to your colleagues who can’t write anything else.


Jonathan Kamens

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

One thought on “Peter Gelzinis and Casey Anthony

  1. Rob

    amen — this is the same crap I’ve been railing against since yesterday. The system is not broken — it worked the way it was supposed to.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *