There are so many possible stories for the front page of a national business newspaper this morning. The new Democratic primary votes, for example, or the UBS banker detained amid a tax evasion investigation, or the multi-billion-dollar loss at home loan giant Fannie Mae. And The Wall Street Journal made room for some of that today, but it also decided its cover wouldn't be complete without a first-person account of the trial of Uma Thurman's stalker. Reporter Emily Steel was lucky enough to be allowed on the jury in the movie star's case, and as you read her story, you can just see Rupert Murdoch, head of Journal owner News Corp. and frequent presence at the newspaper, rubbing his hands together in glee, his taste for the sensational and drive to broaden the WSJ beyond business both satisfied.

Journal reporter Steel's fellow jurors included two lawyers, a "rock-show caterer" and "a former editor for the TV show Wife Swap." Still, they were 12 people sitting in a room talking about the law, so Steel did not have much to work with.

She made the best of it, delivering an account that is brisk and well-edited if not exactly riveting.

Steel had a dream about the trial, but it's sort of boring too:

I was talking with Ms. Thurman, although — as is the case with dreams — I can't recall precisely what we were discussing. Walking down the street, in my dream, I saw [the accused stalker] stroll by.

Better was the jury debate about whether the stalker intended to scare or harass Thurman with a creepy package containing, among other things, his expired driver's license, a picture of a bride with her head cut off and a love letter with many words crossed out, leaving "mouth," "kissing" and "my hands should be on your body at all times," among other phrases.

The woman who worked as a rock-show caterer said the card was disturbing, and that Mr. Jordan was a smart, manipulative man who knew what he was doing. He had graduated with a degree in English literature from the University of Chicago. By marking out some words, she said, he indicated that he knew what he was sending was inappropriate.



A juror who works as a statistician compared the situation to writing emails to a woman at work: If I did that, he said — even if I hoped it would make her like me — it would be inappropriate and get me fired.



I didn't agree... Sitting a few seats away from Mr. Jordan as he testified in his own defense, I saw him as a lovesick individual who was trying to prove himself to her with these cards and objects, which he described as artworks...



One juror, who works at an art school in Brooklyn, brought up an example of a little boy pulling the ponytail of a little girl to get her attention. Even though the boy likes the girl, he's still trying to annoy her.

Wow: Even on a well-educated jury, people form opinions based on behavioral expectations at private corporations and grade-school playgrounds. Some big, ambitious newspaper should totally do an in-depth story on that, assuming it continues to involve Uma Thurman!

[WSJ]