Judges and the Media

Paper Summary:

In this article, the writer notes that the issue of judicial discretion in relation to the media has long been a source of debate. The writer points out that judges that have the power to allow media in the courtroom also have the power of impacting society, defendants' lives and the manner in which society views the judicial system. These factors are both positive and negative elements in regard to the issue; however, they also lead to one critical conclusion. The writer maintains that when one person has the ultimate authority to adversely impact anyone in society simply because he or she chooses to do so, that person has gained too much control over his or her community. This is because the determining factor in the decision is not weighed by law, nor is it guided by measured personal ethical standards - it is simply made based on an individual opinion. The writer argues that in the United States personal opinions may be allowed, but at no time should they be supported in arbitrarily harming others.

From the Paper:

"Pattenden suggests, however, the when judges have the discretion of allowing media into the courtroom for reporting or television coverage there is a risk that may be too significant to overlook. This risk is that through the media coverage the defendant may be condemned before the trial is ever concluded. This is because the media has the ability not only to broadcast images to the public of the trial, but to create commentary on the proceedings as well. That commentary may not ultimately have an affect on the verdict, but it may lead to the public's determination of guilt or innocence of a person. Regardless of the verdict, therefore, that person may be subject to public scrutiny long after the trial has ended, and despite the innocence that has been determined by the jury. When the judge has the sole power to determine whether or not the media should be allowed in a trial that judge is then creating a situation for a secondary trial to exist between the defendant and the public. And it is a trial that may never end."

Sample of Sources Used:

• Pattenden, R. (1990). Judicial discretion and criminal litigation. Oxford: Clarendon.
• Shepard, R. (2002). Telephone justice, pandering and judges who speak out of school. Fordham Urban Law Journal. 29(3): 811-823.
• Sowell, T. (1996). Knowledge and decisions. New York: Basic Books.

More papers on Judges and the Media:

• Argumentative Essay # 131355 : "Judges and the Media"
• Essay # 7239 : "Mass Media"
• Essay # 71472 : "Bias in Broadcast Journalism: CNN and Fox News "

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: