I started to read an article detailing the interview that Juror B37 gave Anderson Cooper as reported in the Bradenton (FL) Herald this morning, wanting to understand how the jury reached its verdict. Then I came across what I consider an "aha" moment reading the following paragraph - "Despite keeping her identity secret, Juror B37 has already secured an agent to peddle an as-yet unwritten book." (Emphasis added). I can't help but wonder how any civic-minded person could so readily look to profit by doing her duty as a juror in a criminal case centered around the death of a 17 year old teenager. The verdict was rendered on Saturday. By Monday (maybe earlier, who knows) she is chasing a book deal. Was she thinking about a book deal when she reported for jury duty? As she listened to the presentation of the case? As she deliberated with her co-jurors? It just seems wrong. Is justice for sale?