Free press and fair trial: The role of behavioral research
Tóm tắt
The growth of mass media has complicated the relatioship between the courts and the media. Free press and fair trial rights are kept in balance by the use of judicial restraints and remedies such asvoir dire, change of venue, and gag orders. This balance has shifted back and forth during the past two decades. Current case law and legal codes are inconsistent and provide insufficient guidance to judges in their use of restraints and remedies. Nor is there a body of empirical research on the impact of news coverage and juror behavior capable of informing the courts at this time. In this paper, we review and critically assess the empirical social science literature as it pertains to the legal issues involving free press and fair trial. We argue that carefully conducted empirical research could provide important information to the courts. We suggest research directions and methodological caveats to increase legal relevance and scientific validity.
Tài liệu tham khảo
American Bar Association. (1983).Model rules of professional conduct. Chicago: American Bar Association.
American Bar Association. (1978).Standards relating to the administration of criminal justice, fair trial and free press. Chicago: American Bar Association.
American Bar Association. (1974)Fair triallfree press voluntary agreements. ABA Legal Advisory Committee Handbook: Chicago.
American Bar Association. (1968).Project on standards for ciminal justice, standards relating to fair trial and free press. Chicago: American Bar Association.
Antunes, G. E., & Hurley, P. A. (1978). The representation of criminal events in Houston's two daily papers.Journalism Quarterly, 55, 756–760.
Bailey, F. L., & Rothblatt, H. B. (1971).Successful techniques for criminal trials. New York: New York Lawyer's Cooperative.
Barth, A. (1976).Rights in conflict. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Bray, R. M., & Kerr, N. L. (1982). Methodological considerations in the study of the psychology of the courtroom. In N. L. Kerr & R. M. Bray (Eds.),The psychology of the courtroom, New York: Academic Press.
Carroll, J. S. (1980). Judgments of recidivism risks: Can clinical strategies employ base-rate information? In P. D. Lipsett & B. D. Sales (Eds.),New directions in psycholegal research. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Chicago Council of Lawyers v. Bauer, 522 F.2d 242 (7th Cir. 1975)cert. denied, 427 U.S. 912 (1976).
Constanitini, E., & King, J. (1980/81). The partial juror: Correlates and causes of prejudgment.Law and Society Review, 15, 9–40.
Davis, R. W. (1979).The influence of pretrial publicity and trial timing on the deliberation process and verdicts of simulated jurors. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Temple University, Philadelphia. [Dissertation Abstracts International, 39 (11-B), 5641.]
De Luca, A. J. (1979)Tipping the scales of justice: The effects of pretrial publicity. Unpublished master's thesis, Iowa State University, Ames.
Drechsel, R., Netteburg, K., & Aborisade, B. (1980). Community size and newspaper reporting of local courts.Journalism Quarterly, 57, 71–78.
Eisenstein, J., & Jacob, H. (1977)Felony justice: An organizational analysis of criminal courts. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.
Fretz, D. R. (1977).Courts and the news media. Reno, Nevada: National College of the State Judiciary.
Friendly, A., & Goldfarb, R. L. (1967).Crime and publicity. New York: The Twentieth Century Fund.
Gannett Co. v. DePasquale, 443 U.S. 368 (1979).
Glein, P. J. (1980)Crime reporting and prejudicial publicity. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Washington, Seattle.
Grady, W. R. (1972).Prejudicial pretrial publicity: It's effects on juries and jurors. Unpublished master's thesis, Northwestern University, Evanston
Hoiberg, B. C., & Stires, L. K. (1973). The effect of several types of pretrial publicity on the guilt attributions of simulated juries.Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 3, 267–271.
Hough, G. (1970). Felonies, jury trials and news reports. In C. R. Bush (Ed.),Free press and fair trial: Some dimensions of the problem. Athens: University of Georgia Press.
Humphries, D. (1981). Serious crime news coverage and ideology: A content analysis of crime coverage in a metropolitan paper.Crime and Delinquency, 27, 191–205.
Hvistendahl, J. K. (1979). The effect of placement of biasing information.Journalism Quarterly, 56, 863–865.
Irvin v. Dowd, 366 U.S. 717 (1961).
Judicial Conference of the United States. (1980). Revised report of the judicial conference committee on the operation of the jury system on the “free press-fair trial” issue.Federal Rules Decisions, 87, 518.
Kanouse, D. E., & Hanson, L. R., Jr. (1972). Negativity in evaluations, In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.),Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior, Morristown, NJ: General Learning.
Keelin, J. P. (1979).An experimental study of the effect of prejudicial pretrial publicity on jury verdicts. Unpublished master's thesis, Bloomington: Indiana University, 1979.
Kerr, N. L. (1978). Severity of prescribed penalty and mock juror verdicts.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1431–1442.
Kerr, N. L. & MacCoun, R. L. (1983).Pretrial publicity and juror judgment: A review of empirical research. Unpublished manuscript, Michiga State University, East Lansing.
Kline, F. G., & Jess, P. H. (1966). Prejudicial publicity: Its effects on law school mock juries.Journalism Quarterly, 43, 113–116.
Lind, A. E. (1982). The psychology of courtroom procedure. In N. Kerr & R. Bray (Eds.),The psychology of the courtroom. New York: Academic Press.
McConahay, J., Mullin, C., & Frederick, J. (1977). The uses of social science in trials with political and racial overtones: The trial of Joan Little.Law and Contemporary Problems, 41, 205–229.
Millspaugh, M. (1949). Trial by mass media?Public Opinion Quarterly, 328–329.
Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart, 427 U.S. 539 (1976).
Nietzel, M., & Dillehay, R. (1982).Psychologists as consultants for changes of venue: The use of public opinion surveys. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, Louisville, KY.
Orne, M. (1962). On the social psychology of the psychological experiment: With particular reference to demand characteristics and their implications.American Psychologist, 17, 776–783.
Padawer-Singer, A., & Barton, A. H. (1975). Free press, fair trial. In R. J. Simon (Ed.),The jury system: A critical analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Padawer-Singer, A., Singer, A., & Singer, R. (1974). Voir Dire by two lawyers: A essential safeguard.Judicature, 57, 386–391.
Padawer-Singer, A., Singer, A., & Singer, R. (1977). Legal and Social-psychological research in the effects of pretrial publicity on juries, numerical makeup of juries, non-unanimous verdict requirements.Law and Psychology Review, 3, 71–79.
Penrod, S. (1979).Study of attorney and “scientific” jury selection models. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Pollock, A. (1977). The use of public opinion polls to obtain changes of venue and continuance in criminal trials.Criminal Justice Journal, 1, 269–288.
Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court of California, Riverside County, 52 U.S.L.W. 4113 (1984).
Reuben, D. (1974). Confidential study mentioned in “The men at the bar meeting debate Gannett v. DePasquale.”The Quill, 68, 8.
Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555 (1980).
Rideau v. Louisiana, 373 U.S. 723 (1963).
Riley, S. G. (1973). Pretrial publicity: A field study.Journalism Quarterly, 50, 17–23.
Rollings, H. E., & Blascovich, J. (1977). The case of Patricia Hearst: Pretrial publicity and opinion.Journal of Communication, 27, 58–65.
Sales, B. D., Elwork, A., & Alfini, J. J. (1977). Improving comprehension for jury instructions. In B. D. Sales (Ed.),Perspectives in law and psychology (Vol. 1): The criminal justice system. New York: Plenum.
Seibert, F. S. (1981). Trial judges' opinions on prejudicial publicity. In C. R. Bush (Ed.),Free press and fair trial: Some dimensions of the problem. Shadid v. Jackson, Federal Supplement (E. D. Texas),521, 85.
Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333 (1966).
Shields, M. J. (1981). The Atlanta story.Columbia Journalism Review, 20, 29–35.
Simon, R. J. (1966). Murder, juries and the press.Trans-Action, 64–65.
Simon, R. J., & Eimermonn, T. (1971). The jury finds not guilty: Another look at media influence on the jury.Journalism Quarterly 48, 343–344.
Stroble v. California 343 U.S. 181 (1952).
Sue, S., Smith, R. E., & Gilbert, R. (1974). Biasing effect of pretrial publicity on judicial decisions.Journal of Criminal Justice, 2, 163–171.
Sue, S., Smith, R. E., & Pedroza, G. (1975). Authoritarianism, pretrial publicity and awarencess of bias in simulated jurors.Psychological Reports, 37, 1299–1302.
Tankard, J. W., Jr., Middleton, K., & Ruminer, T. (1979). Compliance with American Bar Association fair trial-free press guidelines.Journalism Quarterly, 56, 464–468.
Tans, M. D., & Chaffee, S. H. (1966). Pretrial publicity and juror prejudice.Journalism Quarterly, 43, 647–654.
United States v. Burr, 25 F.Cus. 49 (C.C. Va. 1807).
Vidmar, N., & Judson, J. (1981). The use of social sciences in a change of venue application.Canadian Bar Review, 59, 76–102.
Weitan, W., & Diamond, S. S. (1979). A critical review of the jury simulation paradigm: The use of defendant characteristics.Law and Human Behavior, 3, 71–93.
Welcome, M. (1983). Private defense attorney, Atlanta (peroonal communication).
Wells, G. L. (1978). Applied eyewitness testimony research: System variables and estimator variables.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1546–1557.
Wilcox, W., & McCombs, M. (1967). Crime story elements and fair trial/free press. Unpublished paper Berkeley, University of California.
Zanzola, L. (1977). Effects of pretrial publicity on the verdicts of jurors and juries. Unpublished paper, Northern Illinois University, De Kalb.
Zeisel, H., & Diamond, S. S. (1978). The effect of peremptory challenges on jury and verdict: An experiment in a federal district court.Stanford Law Review, 30, 491–531.