Florian Schneider/ABCThey deliberated and deliberated, had some "difficulty," deliberated more and now the jury in the titillating Desperate Housewives trial is officially deadlocked!
Jeez, when Judge Elizabeth Allen White says she knows how frustrating this is, we're pretty sure she's talking about Team Truth in par-tick—'cause we've been biting our nails in anticipation the whole time!
So while we all continue waiting for a verdict (if the case isn't settled before then), it's time for you play the jury, Awful readers, and tell us whether you'd side with Nicollette Sheridan or not…
All we'll say is: Some head honcho over at Lifetime better be prepping this for a made-for-TV movie stat. Because these legal proceedings are simply too juicy to be passed up. And Nicollette can probably still play herself, right?!
But it's up to you to settle the jury biz:
The case arguing for or against Nicollette's claims of wrongful termination (the assault charges against Marc Cherry were thrown out earlier this week) has been hard fought by both sides. And here's the Cliff Notes version of each argument:
Team ABC says that the decision to kill off Nicollette's Edie Britt (and thus give Ms. Sheridan the heave-ho from Wisteria Lane) was made in May of 2008, just under a year before she was axed. ABC higher-ups and some writers signed off on this. Others added that Nicollette was hard to work with, being rude on set and frequently late.
On the other hand, Team Nicollette had a writer (Lori Kirkland Baker) who went on the stand saying that the decision to kill off Edie was not made until much later, after the on-set incident went down and was reported by National Enquirer. Then there's the voicemail that alleges an ABC cover-up of the whole thing.
So those are the facts…or at least what has been said under oath in the courthouse. It's your call: Do you think Nicollette was unfairly fired? Or do you think that ABC sufficiently proved it was all premeditated?