I recently binge watched a series on Oxygen called Unspeakable Crime: The Killing of Jessica Chambers. This was a story of a young 19-year-old girl from Mississippi that was burned alive. This young girl was found on the side of a rural road near her burning car on December 6, 2014. Jessica Chambers was doused with an accelerant and set on fire and shortly died after her arrival to the hospital. The murder trial made headlines and divided this tiny town in Mississippi after a young black man was arrested an accused of murder. I then thought to myself, since this murder and arrest made headlines, how is this man ever supposed to receive a fair trial in his county?
The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees a criminal defendant the right to “an impartial jury.” This is a fundamental guarantee that is part of a criminal defendant’s basic right to a fair trial, which encompasses the right to be judged by a jury of his or her peers and on the basis of evidence presented at trial. I think the key to that statement is presented at trial. What happens when the jurors have been presented information prior to even being selected? Information obtained before or outside is not supposed to influence any decisions, but we are humans, and can we really make that guarantee? Let’s combine that with the “presumption of innocence” that should be considered in regard to defendants prior to trial. It’s unfortunate that in a media-saturated society, given a high-profile status, essentially defendants are found guilty in the media prior to trial. With these high-profile cases, jurors may be profoundly affected by any press reports (Bakhshay, S., & Haney, C., 2018), especially when the reports are inflammatory. Media news coverage of criminal cases may also contain prejudicial information that may be legally inadmissible at trial, but which is disseminated to the public nonetheless (Daftary-Kapur, Penrod, O’Connor, & Wallace, 2014; Imrich et al., 1995).
Local and national news outlets are significant since individuals rely heavily on these outlets for news and crime coverage. When these sources deliver biased coverage of a crime, this can have an adverse effect and influence on criminal cases, potentially prejudicing jurors. In this particular case, since this young man was arrested somewhere around 11 months after the crime was committed, there was already public outcry based on the information presented in the media. This added pressure to local law enforcement to arrest a suspect. Not only was this case affected by the news media, but there were also a lot of social media sites popping up with people playing detective and making racially charged assumptions (everyone is a couch detective). When this young man went to trial, the town was already racially divided with whites wanting him to be found guilty, and blacks wanting him to have a fair trial (as they believed he was not guilty but someone had to take the fall). They were aware of this, so in an effort to remedy this, they moved the trial 250 miles away, however it was already too late.
So, what is the solution, when the media and the prosecutor’s office use their platform to sensationalize a case and bias the public opinion, including information that would be legally excluded from trial? They can continue to move venue locations, which may help, but what happens after that? How is the defendant expected to receive a fair trial? This is part of the legal and criminal justice system that is broken and needs not reformation but a complete overhaul. The current justice system needs to be rebuilt, allowing defendants the opportunities that are afforded to them by the United States Constitution.
On another note, the outcome for the young man arrested in the Jessica Chambers case was a mistrial. The jury could not come to a unanimous decision, with a disproportionate number of whites voting guilty and other votes from blacks were not guilty. He was re-tried recently, and again the outcome was another mistrial.
https://i0.wp.com/timandersonlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Trenton-criminal-defense-attorney.jpg?fit=849%2C565&ssl=1
References:
Bakhshay, S., & Haney, C. (2018). The media’s impact on the right to a fair trial: A content analysis of pretrial publicity in capital cases. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 24(3), 326-340. doi:10.1037/law0000174
Daftary-Kapur, T., Penrod, S. D., O’Connor, M., & Wallace, B. (2014). Examining pretrial publicity in a shadow jury paradigm: Issues of slant, quantity, persistence and generalizability. Law and Human Behavior, 38, 462–477. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000081
Goldstein, E. B. (2015). Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research, and everyday experience. Stamford: Cengage Learning.
Unspeakable Crime: The Killing of Jessica Chambers [Television series]. (2018, September/October). Oxygen.
With the non-stop media news cycle that currently exists, I believe that it must be more difficult than ever to find a juror who is not somewhat biased based on what they have seen on television and online. This is a great forum to share your opinion on the matter, so I thank you for doing so.
Recently, I had a conversation with my spouse about how I have always wanted to be picked for a jury, but have never been chosen by an attorney. As I was explaining why I feel that I would be a fair and impartial person when listening to a criminal case, he laughed and said that would be “impossible.” According to him, I watch and read too much news to be unbiased in a case, especially if it was a high-profile story. I argued that my passion for knowledge made me the perfect candidate as I have an interest in being well-informed. I feel this drive would be cause for me to take in the facts of the case and to make a fair decision. To no avail, he claimed this form of prejudice would disqualify me for jury service.
The more I consider the dilemma you have presented, the more that I believe we need to find a solution. As we continue to be constantly informed, both correctly and incorrectly, it remains more difficult to hear a case without bias. Our judicial system depends on a fair jury, and we need to figure out how to produce that fundamental element in our sensationalized society.
Thanks again for sharing this topic,
Ben