Casey Anthony: Diana Tennis says viewers ‘looked for more than hang-her-high mentality’

Did Diana Tennis hit it big during the Casey Anthony coverage?

The Orlando attorney says that perception is not in tune with reality. She was a down-to-earth but effervescent analyst on Fox-owned WOFL-Channel 35, and she has been commenting on national programs. But she adds, “I’m not going to quit my day job. I really love my job.”

Even so, she continues to pop up on television. She explains with a laugh: “If Casey Anthony’s name gets mentioned in any way, we have to talk. It was fun, and now it’s back to work.”

She agreed to look back at the case and what the experience meant to her.

Q. Why did you want to do the analysis?

A. “Fox’s plan was to do Casey lite. They weren’t going to be up into it. I didn’t want to get invested in it. I wasn’t that interested. They did the opening statements live. Then day two, three. I found myself sucked in. I loved watching it and being in the studio.”

Q. What did you get from the experience?

A. “It was exciting being a part of the biggest trial that we’re likely to see in this town in my career. It was exciting being part of something educating the public. I felt great there were so many people interested in the process. People at the grocery store would ask insightful questions. There were some people who looked for more than the hang-her-high mentality.



“I loved they had closing arguments on July 4. I totally believe in the trial system. A lot of people were educated and changed by the experience. It was great to be part of that. I’m not your traditional kind of Fox watcher. I’m a through-and-through liberal. It was great they let me be who I am. I tried to give what I thought were fair and honest critiques of what I was seeing.”

Q. What was the most memorable moment for you?

A. “Nobody will ever forget the verdict. I raved about the defense opening statement. It felt like a game-changer. The verdict was wild. There was no way I saw that happening. The reason the trial was interesting to watch was the science was so interesting: the bug stuff, the smell stuff. The opening statements and the verdict were the most dramatic moments for me.”

Q. Anything you would have done differently?

A. “Hindsight is so easy. I got a lot stuff wrong. What I got most wrong: underestimating the defense’s job at having picked that jury. I give the defense props. They had to do it in that sterile, one-at-a-time way. I can’t imagine how effective you’d be. They found people who were going in without any bias whatsoever against the client. I didn’t get how well the defense did that. I think defense lawyers assumed the defense would get punished for having an opening statement that didn’t match what the evidence was. He [Jose Baez] never proved the more dramatic points of his opening.

“I never would have thought the jury would not have held that against the defense. I was so convinced they were going to West Palm Beach [for jury selection]. There were times I thought deficiencies in the defense case would be more problematic than they were. I didn’t think they were getting the job done. Listening to the jurors afterward, I thought they had bigger problems than they did. I wasn’t alone.

“I think, day to day, I tried to be fair about things and keep it on a non-personal level. I thought there was a tenor I was proud of at Fox. It wasn’t about personal attacks.”

Q. What do you think the analysis did for the law?

A. “There are lawyers, Cheney Mason being among them, who said any of us who stooped to criticizing fellow lawyers are part of the problem. I’m a little torn about that. Being a defense lawyer is a hard enough job. I wouldn’t be part of the pile-on on defense lawyers.

“I think there are lot of people curious about how our system worked and were educated in some ways. I think there were a lot of people who got something edifying out of it beyond the circus side of it. There was a layer of people in it for voyeuristic purposes. But people were watching and saying it was a trial and it was fascinating. They got to see legal arguments being made. They saw one of our best jurists. Judge [Belvin] Perry gets to have the kudos of the public. He didn’t play favorites and he was on the ball.

“It has to be about the system. This system is sacred. I know people who have been wrongfully accused who could have been easily convicted.”

Q. Did you have a memorable reaction from the public?

A. “I still have people come up to me, which blows me away. I’ve had no less than five people who have connections to nursing homes. That is my demographic. Old people love me. The other thing that has happened: People call my name as if they know me.”

Q. What did the exposure do for your practice?

A. “I would say I got one relatively big case since the trial that is pretty directly related to that exposure. The rest of it is hard to track. I think it does something for name recognition. I think it’s helpful.”

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2011/10/casey-anthony-diana-tennis-says-viewers-looked-for-more-than-hang-her-high-mentality.html