From the Paper
"Freedom of the Press is embodied in the First Amendment to the Constitution, and the courts give great importance to this doctrine when weighing competing rights. However, another vitally important right is the right to a fair trial, and more and more, courts are being asked to consider which of these rights takes precedence in different cases. The press frenzy around recent major cases such as that of O.J. Simpson, the Unabomber, and the Oklahoma City bombing raised questions in the public about the ethics of the press in covering these trials. This is not a new issue, and forty years ago the excessive coverage of the first Sam Sheppard murder trial led to a reversal of his conviction and public censure of the press. In determining when press freedoms might impinge on such other cherished freedoms as the right to a fair trial, courts examine press ..."

Abstract
The paper describes the judge in the trial for Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber, the defense and prosecuting lawyers for the trial, and the jury. The paper provides a detailed description of the prosecution's case against McVeigh, as well as that of the defense. The paper also discusses the jury's decision to sentence him to death and offers the writer's personal opinion why he agrees with the verdict of the trial. The writer does note, however, that the trial brings into focus the free press v. fair trial controversy, because in this trial the press went too far. The paper uses MLA style sources that are included as footnotes to the paper but does not include a works cited page.

From the Paper
"The second deadliest day on American soil came from the radical views of one man that were encouraged by his peers. At 9:02 a.m. on April 19th, 1995, a war-torn man named Timothy McVeigh bombed the Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and he claimed the lives of 168 individuals while injuring more than 500 others. This attack is commonly referred to as the Oklahoma City Bombing. Despite the horrific explosion, McVeigh remained unscathed. After he fled the scene, he was pulled over and arrested for not having vehicle registration, license plates, and carrying a concealed weapon without a permit. While enjoying brief stay in jail, McVeigh was identified as John Doe number one from police sketches by a former co- worker in New York He was then taken into custody by federal authorities. On April 21st Terry Nichols would turn himself in to authorities for his connection to the bombing. McVeigh had met his platoon leader, Terry Nichols, in basic training in May 1998. Nichols shared very similar anti-American views despite their service in the U.S. military. Ironically, both had aspired to formidable positions in the military, before their honorable discharges and attack on the land they protected."

Tags:Terry, Nichols, prosecution, defense, witnesses, trial, lawyers, jury, death, penalty

Abstract
This paper examines and reviews Judith Miller's article, "Journalism on Trial." It presents and discusses her thesis and then discusses the problems with Miller's argument. The paper focuses on the logical fallacy that appears to exist within the article. The paper also discusses Miller's sources, her style and the methods that she uses within her article.

From the Paper
"Finally, Martin's largest logical error is that she fails to consider the opposing point of view. The history of the freedom of the press clearly establishes that a free press is meant to ensure the freedom of the people. By using the concept of the free press without referring to the larger concept, Martin subverts the very ideals of freedom of the press. Furthermore, she appears to hope that her audience, a broad-spectrum group of Americans, does not understand that a free press is only important in that it has the power to keep the government in check, not as an independent ideal. In the Hatfill case, it appears that the press had a very real and negative impact on the actual personal liberties experienced by an American citizen. If this impact was the result of spurious reporting, then some may feel that providing Hatfill with some type of remedy against the reporters helps ensure the freedom of American citizens."

Tags:subjectivity reporters court, free press

Abstract
This paper discusses the famous Scopes Trial that took place almost 80 years ago, which debated whether the theory of evolution should be taught in the classroom. The paper discusses how the verdict of the trial was considered a big victory for science and reasoning and how it later got interpreted as the victory of free speech against oppression. The paper relates this trial to the current way of thinking called 'intelligent design'.

From the Paper
"The trial did create an impression for a while but disbelief in Darwinism did not disappear completely and time and again it started showing its face in public sphere in different modes. Let's not forget the Edward J. Larson's Pulitzer Prize-winning book 'Summer of Gods' in which he made his anti-Darwinism ideas loud and clear. Also Church kept on raising its voice in different ways against Darwin and his evolution theory. A large number of American people kept on subscribing to literal interpretation of Bible while being skeptical of the beliefs of Darwin. The movement that was curbed temporarily by the trial kept on gaining force with the passage of time and now the religious conservatism can be seen on the rise again. In the decade of 70s the emergence of Reagan in the presidential office got the agenda of religious beliefs and conservatism back on the forefront."

Tags:Darwinism, creationism, education

Abstract
The paper explores the conflict between the rights of the first amendment, freedom of the press, and the rights of the sixth amendment, the right to an impartial jury. The paper examines the Supreme Court's rulings on these issues, in the "Sheppard v. Maxwell", "Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart", "Richmond Newspapers Inc. v. Virginia", "Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court", "Estes v. Texas", "Chandler v. Florida", and "Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court" cases. The paper points out how in all cases, the first amendment was eventually deemed superior. The paper questions how this is fair, but asserts that if there was not freedom of the press, then a multitude of secret trials would ensue and true fairness would be placed in jeopardy.

From the Paper
"In early America, the framers of the United States Constitution documented intrinsic rights that are enumerated in the first ten amendments. These rights are better known as the Bill of Rights. However, the framers could not foresee conflicts that would arise between these rights, and so case after case has came before the U.S. Supreme Court for the clarification of how the rights are suppose to coexist. This conflict arises when the rights of the first amendment are weighed against the rights of the sixth amendment. The question is which right takes precedent when these two conflict? Does the freedom of the press or the right to an impartial jury deserve priority? An impartial jury is essential to a fair trial. This is true because it is a right guaranteed by the Constitution and it is required for justice that is supported by a majority."

Tags:first, sixth, amendment, media, journalists, prejudice

Abstract
This paper discusses how the courts have sent innocent people to prison as well as sentencing innocent people to death row. Most people would want the courts to use evidence that can correctly punish the guilty and set free those who are innocent. The paper further discusses how DNA evidence works to link the guilty with the crime they commit and it allows the innocent to go free. DNA as evidence is vital in making the right decisions about crime.

From the Paper
"Imagine sending an innocent person to prison on charges that he or she did not commit, yet the courts have convicted and sentenced innocent people to death row. "There is no way to tell how many of the over 1,000 people executed since 1976 may also have been innocent" (Additional Innocence Information). The courts have sent innocent people to prison as well as sentencing innocent people to death row. "What if there was a way of typing a person to the scene of a crime beyond the shadow of doubt. Or, more importantly, what if you could rule out suspects and prevent the wrong person from being locked up in jail" (Meeker-O-Connell). "

Tags:dna, evidence, court

Abstract
The paper reviews the perceived clash between the prerogative for a fair trial and the constitutional right for a free press and the rights of journalists to protect their sources as opposed to the need for the legal system to have full access to relevant information. The paper postulates a hypothetical case in order to demonstrate the conflicts involved and the legal and constitutional ramifications. The writer them examines a number of areas where the demand for full access and preservation of sources are especially acute, before drawing final conclusions.

Outline:
Introduction
Access to Electronic Records
Access to Electronic Statutes
Access to War and the Military
Confidentiality Promises
Conclusion
Bibliography

From the Paper
"Journalists and lawyers are often portrayed as natural adversaries, and it is sometimes even suggested that each side possesses a set of "rights" that are supposedly at war with the "rights" of the other (Rothenberg, 1999). These legal journalistic clashes include the alleged "conflicts" between the rights of fair trial and free press and between the need for confidential sources in reporting and the demands of the legal system for every person's evidence. Another legal-journalistic "battleground" might involve court secrecy orders (American Bar Association, 2009). Lawyers, after all, generally desire to protect their clients' secrets by keeping confidential documents and materials out of public view. Journalists, by contrast, view skeptically court orders that shield activities of public interest from full public scrutiny."

Tags:free, speech, constitution, trial, law, sources, journalist, court, newspaper, computer

Abstract
The paper details the lawsuit that accused Berkeley Nutraceuticals of numerous accounts of fraud, including luring customers in with a free trial offer and then billing them without their knowledge, false and unsubstantiated claims about their products' effectiveness, money laundering, mail fraud and bank fraud. The paper describes how the company was defiantly defrauding its customers and operating under unethical principles. The paper learns from here that an ethical company will tell the truth about the products that it sells, it will never cheat customers out of money and it will not let greed determine its business practices.

From the Paper
"There are three main things that a business needs to remember in order to stay out of trouble. First, always tell the truth about the products that you are selling, never cheat your customers out of money and don't be greedy. Engaging in these practices can do nothing but lead to trouble and nobody knows that better now than Steve Warshak and Berkley Premium Nutraceuticals. In the beginning Steve Warshak could not seem to understand that what he was doing was wrong, but hopefully after spending the next 25 years reflecting about his actions, he will finally get it.
"In the beginning Berkeley Premium Nutraceuticals goal was to provide their customers with only the best natural supplements available to help improve their health and the health of their loved ones. They believed that many health concerns could be addressed without resorting to pharmaceutical options or cheap herbal cure-alls. Since opening their doors in 2001, Berkeley Premium Nutraceuticals has focused on providing quality natural supplements, with superior formulas that use only premium ingredients, manufactured according to exacting standards (Berkeley Premium Nutraceuticals, Inc., 2009). This philosophy is what Berkley made available on their web site for everyone to read, if only they had practiced what they preached."

Tags:conspiracy, money, laundering, deception, billing, refunds, greed

Abstract
This paper examines the way in which Stone in his essay appears to be acting as a kind of prosecuting attorney across the ages, asking Socrates why and how the philosopher behaved in ancient Athens the way he did. By doing so, by using the format developed by Socrates himself, Stone hopes to shift the emphasis from the image of the hemlock-drinking, condemned philosopher to Socrates as he was in life.

From the Paper
"First of all, Stone challenges the simple association of Socrates with free speech. In fact, Socrates periodically challenged the democratic, free speech ideals of the Athens he lived in. Socrates hoped to create an ideal philosophical kingdom, ruled by a philosopher king. Although Socrates was condemned to death in Athens for what he said and advocated, this did not mean therefore that that Socrates had advocated free speech during his life, in his philosophy. Socrates was only able to flourish as long as he did in Athens because of the free debate and discussion encouraged in his resident city. Even though he condemned such free and democratic Athenian debate, Socrates benefited as a result of the city's tolerance."

Tags:plato, philosopher, atheism, ancient, athens, gods

From the Paper
" In recent years, the overlap between the concerns of mental health and those of law has been increasingly brought to public attention. When we read newspaper accounts of bizarre crimes . such as John Hinkley, Jr.'s attempted assassination of President Reagan . we take it for granted that a psychiatrist or psychologist will be called on to make judgments about the defendant's sanity and possibly to give "expert testimony" at the trial. In other widely publicized court cases, such as that of Kenneth Donaldson, who sued officials of the state of Florida for wrongfully keeping him in a mental institution for fourteen years, the mental health system itself has been on trial (Acocella & Bootzin, 1984, p. 545). These well.known court cases are only the most obvious illustrations of the fact that the (...)"