Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 << Back || Next >>
Q: On jury nullification, isn't it a little impractical? You would either get thrown off the jury for
admitting to your plan or held in contempt of court for lying to get on the jury, wouldn't you? They always ask if
you will decide based solely on the evidence presented. [Marlyn]
A: Well, I won't lie in voir dire. And obviously, The Wire writers are less likely to be picked by a prosecutor
for jury duty. But voir dire -- with less vocal jurors, anyway -- is an imprecise process. Sometimes, they do
not ask the key question. More important, though, if enough Americans resist, then it becomes harder to empanel a
jury on drug cases -- to the point where prosecutors are obliged to dismiss drug cases or offer the most modest of pleas
to defendants. This is not only not impractical, it is exactly what happened during Prohibition when authorities
endeavored to bring liquor violations against citizens under Volstead. Jury nullification was one of the contributing
factors to the failure of that policy.
Q: HBO owns the show and the characters, right? Have they approached you to write a Wire novel?
Would you do it or even want to do it? Are you planning to write a book about something else? [Linda, Dennis, Drew]
A: Got nothing on it. Some of the actors are intent on the idea, but story comes first and we have nada.
It ended where it ended and it began where it began and unless someone comes up with an original idea something so
brilliant that none of us can bear to say no, The Wire is done. Oh, wait, you said "novel."
My bad, well, maybe, I dunno. But again, story comes first.
I'm working on a non-fiction narrative with Bill Zorzi about the rise of the drug culture in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s in
West Baltimore. Still in the research stage at this point.
<< Back || Next>>