Being from Atlanta, it's hard to start anything without an opinion on the Jennifer Wilbanks situation, so I won't even resist. I've really tried to give this girl-in-a-woman's body the benefit of the doubt -- after all, who wouldn't freak at the thought of a $100,000+ wedding, complete with 600 guests and a wedding party bigger than some local high school football squads?
Still, it's hard to get past the detailed planning she put into her escape from the altar. At any point during her trek across the country she could have called and told her fiance and family what was really going on. Instead, she chose deceit and fabrication, and that has earned her borderline hatred and loathing from the same minions who were mounting a frantic search for her just a week ago.
Even so, I could successfully defend her in court against the potential charges facing her -- and I'm not even an attorney. Imagine what a skilled lawyer will be able to do on her behalf. (Hint: Personality disorders and/or multiple personalities are the key. I had that thought yesterday, and I've now seen it in at least one news article today...)
Meanwhile, here in town the year's other big story -- the Brian Nichols case -- is entering another big phase. A grand jury is expected to start receiving the case today for consideration of possible charges. Defense attorneys are asking permission to speak to the grand jurors about potential media exposure to the case, but legal experts say this request is ludicrous.
Grand juries give prosecutors a chance to present their case to see if there's enough evidence to warrant formal charges against a potential defendant. This is not where the case is tried -- it's to decide if the case should ever be tried. The fact that Nichols' attorney's are employing novice and foolish legal tactics this early in the game only underscores how badly this guy has screwed himself. Think about it -- cold-blooded murders of a judge, a court officer, a sheriff's deputy and a federal drug agent. How many times can we stick the needle in his arm?
Finally, last night's ABC report about former pop diva and current American Idol judge Paula Abdul will likely add up to a whole lot of nothing. So she had sex with a contestant, and she may or may not have bankrolled and coached him. Bad decisions, yes. But did it alter the outcome of the show? Would some of the cast-offs who might have taken Corey Clark's place in the final 12 have contended for the top spot? If they couldn't even crack the top 12, what are the chances they could have dethroned Ruben Studdard and/or Clay Aiken?
It all amounts to a lot of sour grapes by Clark (who was essentially blackballed by Idol for failing to disclose his arrest record) and a total lust for ratings by ABC. Honestly -- would ABC have devoted an entire hour to this story if American Idol was one if its shows and not on a rival network?
Perhaps Ms. Abdul should be dismissed from the show. I'd certainly be in favor of that, but not because of these allegations. Rather, I would like to see one show where she actually admits that an out-of-tune kid missed some notes and botched a performance. All of these statements "You did a great job..." and "I'm proud of you..." get old when the rest of the known world realizes that the song actually sucked...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment