NCJ Number
17828
Journal
American University Law Review Volume: 23 Issue: 4 Dated: (SUMMER 1974) Pages: 923-957
Date Published
1974
Length
33 pages
Annotation
THIS COMMENT CONCENTRATES ON THE ISOLATION OF THE JURY DURING THE TRIAL AND/OR DURING ITS DELIBERATIONS AS A MEANS OF RESOLVING THE CONFLICT BETWEEN A FREE PRESS AND THE DEFENDANT'S RIGHT TO AN UNBIASED VERDICT.
Abstract
AFTER A DISCUSSION OF THE PSYCHOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF PREJUDICIAL PUBLICITY ON JURORS, THE AUTHOR BRIEFLY REVIEWS THE VARIOUS PROCEDURAL DEVICES, INCLUDING SEQUESTRATION, WHICH ARE AVAILABLE TO COUNTER THE MEDIA'S PUBLICATION OF PREJUDICIAL MATERIAL AND TO ENSURE AN IMPARITAL JURY FOR A DEFENDANT IN A CRIMINAL TRIAL. CONSIDERED ARE CHANGE OF VENUE, CONTINUANCE, VOIR DIRE, CAUTIONING OF JURORS, AND USE OF THE CONTEMPT POWER AGAINST MEDIA ABUSES. THE PROCEDURAL ASPECTS OF SEQUESTRATION ARE THEN DESCRIBED. THE AUTHOR SUGGESTS THAT DUE TO PROCEDURAL WEAKNESSES (THE EXPENSE, THE INCONVENIENCE TO JURORS POSSIBLE LEADING TO RESENTMENT, THE POSSIBILITY OF UNFAIRNESS IN APPLICATION, THE INFREQUENT USE OF THE PROCEDURE, AND THE PROBLEM OF PRETRIAL PUBLICITY), SEQUESTRATION IS NOT THE ULTIMATE ANSWER TO RESOLVING THE FREE PRESS FAIR TRIAL CONTROVERSY. SHE RECOMMENDS INSTEAD THE COMBINING OF SEQUESTRATION WITH ANOTHER REMEDY. SUCH AS CHANGE OF VENUE OR THE GRANTING OF A CONTINUANCE. ALSO MENTIONED IS THE DEVELOPMENT OF UNIFORM STANDARDS (BASED ON THE 'ATMOSPHERE' OR 'TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES' TEST) TO DETERMINE WHEN PUBLICITY IS SO PREJUDICIAL AS TO JUSTIFY THE SEQUESTRATION OF THE JURY. THE APPENDIX TO HTIS ARTICLE LISTS THE STATE STATUTES ON SEQUESTRATION OF THE JURY.