Search

WE OFTEN HEAR that democracy is hot a spectator sport. This is certainly true of trial by jury, a cornerstone of our democracy, which depends on the willingness of Americans [...]

This article examines the live broadcast of the reading of the verdict in Arieh Deri's trial. First, it is established that the reading of the verdict was a unique case of a radiophonic--not a televised--media event. The main implication of this is that the court, as the organizer of the event, enjoyed a privileged position vis-a-vis the media in determining the message to be transmitted. The article then explores the question of the event's script. Through an interpretative analysis of the event's text, it is established that the reading of the verdict is best categorized as a media event of degradation. Examining the social implications of the event for Israeli society, the article argues that in situations lacking a coherent and agreed-upon center of values and identity, media events of degradation, seen as one type of ritual, may catalyze social disintegration.

This article evaluates forensic linguistics by analyzing courtroom discourse for discriminatory language practices in the criminal justices system, using the O.J. Simpson trial as an example. The author examines words and phrases used to describe domestic violence at a trial, using data from the COBUILD Bank of English.

An analysis of the media's ethical responsibilities in trial coverage along with a proposal for a policy that ensures that the rights of all those concerned are upheld. Topics include professional and journalistic codes of ethics, lawyers' commentary on cases and the possible consequences of televised coverage.

Several 20th-century court cases have been called the 'trial of the century,' and media coverage was a crucial element in each one. The first concerned the kidnapping and murder of Charles A. Lindbergh's son in 1935. In each trial, media pressure created a 'carnival' atmosphere. Some critics maintain television cameras tend to sensationalize all they record, but most court proceedings are not newsworthy. Court TV has survived due largely to its balance between news, voyeurism, and entertainment.

Prompted by high-profile cases such as O.J. Simpson, legislatures and the judiciary rush to give broad privacy protection to jurors, but Press-Enterprise cases demand 'narrowly tailored' approach.

For all the media frenzy swirling around the trial of Scott Peterson for the murder of his wife, Laci--or, for that matter, all the coverage accorded the O.J. Simpson case [...]

The American public is largely ignorant of its justice system. This results from the media's sensationalism and a poor relationship between the criminal justice system and reporters. An adversarial relationship exists between court reporters, judges and trial lawyers. Judges believe the role of the press should be educational, while the press views itself as the public's representative. Trial lawyers see the media as another tool to manipulate juries. More cooperation between judges and reporters and more coverage of real trials should demystify the criminal justice system and help educate the public.

The 1986 murder of Jennifer Levin by Robert Chambers in New York was sensationalized by the press using parts of several different confessions offered by Chambers to suggest that Levin was at least partly at fault. The Levin family was harassed by the press, and the actions of the press made the experience more traumatic than it would otherwise have been. Though the media are mainly self-serving and often irresponsible, the use of cameras in the courtroom, for example, may have the beneficial effect of making the crime and trial proceedings real to the public.

Peter Leinn, a Philadelphia attorney, believes that visual transmissions of federal court proceedings enable a better understanding of legal cases, and also increases public interest in the media. The three year program that allows the invasion of courtrooms by television cameras does not include coverage of criminal cases. Although this program has been acclaimed in Philadelphia, television stations in other cities are not concerned about the transmission of courtroom proceedings. A decrease in visual media participation in the coverage of court cases will result in the ultimate removal of the program.

I teach at Harvard Law School and have been urging the school toward technology, both conceptually and practically. Last fall we brought our entire first-year class up electronically; 540 entering [...]

The California Supreme Court says most civil proceedings should be open. Not many state court decisions can be characterized as earthshaking. But a July 27 ruling of the California Supreme […]