That doesn’t make sense. If young Sunny opposed the Not Guilty verdict, why did she vote for it? (The chair?) If she wasn’t the hold-out juror, why would she horrify her colleagues now by saying she fought to save a cannibal from his just…desserts? Yet the evidence is mounting that Sunny was grandstanding and lying to boot.

According to the Associated Press, Newsday, that New York Daily News clip and other sources, multiple jurors from the 1991 trial have said the real holdout was an unemployed man who wanted to extend deliberations to keep receiving a $15 daily stipend and three free meals from the court. Hostin told Newsday in 1991, “We had to compromise. But it is obvious to me [Rakowitz ] butchered the body and he literally got away with murder. He attempted to commit the perfect crime.” She also told the New York Times the jury did not believe Rakowitz intended to kill the victim but dismembered the body to hide the crime.

So far, Hostin being Hostin and caught red-tongued (again) is adopting the Clinton strategy: “Deny, deny, deny.” “I was the holdout juror,” she still says. Perhaps she’s counting on the likelihood that if you are weak-minded enough to be a fan of her disgraceful show, then you might buy her fabrication. To the people demanding that she be fired for this lie: why is the latest nonsense any more upsetting than her saying, for example, that earthquakes and eclipses prove climate change? Yes, she has no business being on television. Neither do her cast-mates. Neither does the program.

I’ve also been asked whether such a flagrant whopper on national TV could justify bar punishment. I’d say it should, but it won’t. Usually lies, even blatant lies, by lawyers when they aren’t practicing law won’t rouse bar associations out of their typical torpor. And all Sunny has to say if she is cornered is “I guess I mis-remmembered! Oopsie!”