WODC Tournament: That media organizations should not report on ongoing court cases

The Constitution in the Sixth Amendment guarantees defendants to a fair and impartial trial by his or her peers. The courts have taken measures to protect this right by implementing acts such as peremptory strikes, for-cause challenges, etc. One thing in particular, though, which has played a large role in swaying not only the jurors minds, but also the judges and law enforcement officers is the media. I plan to show the judges in this debate round that the media should not report on ongoing cases. First off, we are going to see how the media sways the jurors minds before any evidence is presented.Media sways jurors mindsResearch has found that “exposure to the various media had a prejudicial impact on people, as they were unaware of their biases.” Media coverage sways the jurors minds in all cases especially since jurors usually have no knowledge of the case which they will be deciding. Let take this on a higher level though, capital cases. (http://www.capitalpunishmentincontext.org...)Media swaying of the jurors minds in capital crime casesDeath-qualified jurors are very easily swayed and much more swayed to media coverage during the trial. A 2007 study shows that jurors who passed the qualification process to be a juror on capital punishment case were more likely to think the defendant was guilty than the jurors who were excluded. The research found that one of the likely caused for this was, "Death-qualified participants were more likely to watch daily news programs, making them more aware of the facts in the case."(http://www.capitalpunishmentincontext.org...)Conclusions reached by researchers and psychologistsHere, I just plan to give the judges a bunch of facts which have been reached by social scientists and psychologists on the effects of media bias on the jurors. First, researchers have found that if the pretrial publicity is negative towards the defendant, the jurors will begin and end the trial with a negative mindset towards the defendant. Secondly, a juror's perception can be altered if inadmissible evidence is brought and talked about on television. These are just a couple of the many different facts that have come from research showing that the media affects the jury. (http://www.theadvocates.com...)Law enforcement compromise for media and fameMany police officers are promised fame if they sell their story to movie companies, write books, or receive television appearances. For example, Montgomery County, Maryland Police Chief Charles Moose sold his story of capturing the DC Snipers to a major motion picture in exchange for money. Finally, we are going to look at a specific example which includes everything I have talked about in this round. (http://www.capitalpunishmentincontext.org...)The Case of Aileen WuornosWhen her case came before the court, she was called the first woman serial murderer in history and this became the theme of the media's coverage. Prosecutors used this against her and the media portrayed her as a "man-hating murderer." Public opinion swayed against her and the prosecutor used this against her the entire and this helped the jury to decide in favor of the plaintiff. Three officers became part of major movie deals because they sold their stories to a major movie corporation.(http://www.capitalpunishmentincontext.org...)In conclusion, media can sway the jury whichever way we want and we even saw how it effects law enforcement in these cases, but not only did we see it in studies, but we saw it in a real life of example Aileen Wuornos.