Here’s what Fox local news in Chicago reports:
Jurors who have been interviewed so far will not identify the juror, other than to say the juror was a female.
FOX Chicago News reported that speculation is centering on juror Jo Ann Chiakulas of Willowbrook, after a second-hand acquaintance said that she has been saying for weeks that she would find Blagojevich not guilty.
Chiakulas is a retired director from the Illinois Department of Public Health.
Contacted Tuesday night, she told FOX Chicago News she would call on Wednesday if she wished to talk about the case.
On one count at least, Chiakulas voted with her fellow jurors, agreeing to convict Blagojevich of lying to federal agents.
This was since confirmed by CBS local news Chicago.
They actually could have reported more — because pre-trial, they had this to say about a female “retired public health director” on the jury panel:
Juror # 106, a black female believed to be in her 60s, is a retired state public health director who has ties to the Chicago Urban League. She has handed out campaign literature for a relative who ran for public office. She listens to National Public Radio and liberal talk radio shows.
Media accounts mention the campaign literature, but they don’t mention NPR and liberal talk radio. Why?
We know they read this description — why do they end their repetition of it at that point?
The media is quick to stereotype conservative-tilting Americans and attribute to them bad motives.
Think they’ll do the same here?
What were her motives for so egregiously ignoring the law to set a guilty man free that her fellow jurors had to confront her with her own oath to render a true verdict?
I am pretty accustomed by now to having my motivations questioned by the media, and having unethical or vile motives assigned to me.
How about this Chicago politics fan?
You know, to date, the Tea Party has done zero damage to anyone, and yet it is castigated daily by our hectoring press.
This woman just sprung a guilty man free and cost the taxpayers millions. And she bragged for weeks before deliberations she was set on doing just that.
Where did she get her ideas from?
I know FoxNews gets blamed a lot for all the “poison” it’s putting into the body politic — what poison did she ingest from NPR and liberal talk radio?
From where did she get the idea that it was right to spring a guilty man in the interest of some political gamesmanship?
Think it’s just an oversight that they left this out there for a blogger to find?
I know this is already known to reporters from my source.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.