Huh? The jury isn't sequestered but was given a directive to avoid media regarding this case. The defendant intentionally put out "evidence" that was thrown out of the case. That would be considered attempted jury tampering and possible contempt of court. That has nada to do with the jury already being "corrupt."
You all keep repeating this. It makes no sense to me though and I would like a clear explanation. Let me give you an analogy. I say don't go into the room 212 with information X in it. Then someone, perhaps me, puts some information in room 212 for others to see. How can anyone who put information in to room 212 be responsible if you happen to find yourself in room 212? We told you not to go in there, so if you are in there, you did something wrong and no one else did.