Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for...
-
Upload
jemimah-melissa-morgan -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for...
![Page 1: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Media and the Justice System
![Page 2: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Media and the Justice System
Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6th Amendment protections for
criminal defendants and The 1st Amendment rights of free speech
(reporting trials and other court proceedings)
![Page 3: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
The Sixth Amendment the right to a speedy and public trial, by an
impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed
to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation
To be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor
To have the assistance of counsel for his defence
![Page 4: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Prejudicial Crime Reporting Stories That Can Endanger Defendants’ Rights
Confessions or stories about confessions the defendant is said to have made
Stories about he defendant’s performance on a test, such as a polygraph
Stories about the defendant’s past criminal record
Stories that question the credibility of witnesses
![Page 5: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Prejudicial Crime ReportingStories That Can Endanger Defendants’ Rights
Stories about the defendant’s character, associates or personality
Stories that tend to inflame the public mood against the defendant
Stories that are published or broadcast before a trial and suggest, imply or declare the defendant is guilty
![Page 6: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Prejudicial Crime Reporting Impact on Jurors
Research has not yet proven that publicity creates prejudice against a defendant
Research has not yet proven that jurors cannot set aside their beliefs about a case and render a verdict based solely on facts presented in court
![Page 7: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Prejudicial Crime Reporting An Impartial Juror
Is not required to be free from all knowledge or impressions about a case
But, must be free of deep impressions and beliefs that will not yield to the evidence that is presented during the trial
![Page 8: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Dr. Sheppard’s case.
![Page 9: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Dr. Sheppard’s case On July 4, 1954, Marilyn Sheppard, the wife of a
handsome thirty-year-old doctor Sam Sheppard, was brutally murdered in the bedroom of their home in Bay Village, Ohio, on the shore of Lake Erie.
Sam Sheppard denied any involvement in the murder and described his own battle with the killer he described as “bushy-haired.”
![Page 10: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Dr. Sheppard’s case From the beginning the case brought a great
interest from the media. Generally, the media were hostile toward Sam Sheppard
Sam Sheppard was found guilty of murder in the second degree by Cleveland, Ohio, jury in 1954
Second-degree murder is ordinarily defined as an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable "heat of passion"
![Page 11: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Dr. Sheppard’s case In 1963 F. Lee Bailey, Sheppard’s
attorney, filed a petition for habeas corpus in federal court (a petition demanding an explanation of the basis upon which the prisoner has been detained. This type of writ is generally considered to be an "extraordinary remedy", meaning that the prisoner has exhausted all other avenues of relief or appeal, and no other adequate remedy remains).
![Page 12: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Dr. Sheppard’s case F. Lee Bailey contended, among other
things, that prejudicial publicity before and during the 1954 trial violated Sheppard’s right to the due process of law
An Interview with F Lee Bailey http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srp0XnqWzy0
FLB crossexamination
![Page 13: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Dr. Sheppard’s case In July 1964 Federal District Judge
overturned Sheppard’s conviction calling the 1954 trial “a mockery of justice.”
However, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on a 2 to 1 vote, reinstated Sheppard’s conviction.
Sheppard appealed to the Supreme Court
![Page 14: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Dr. Sheppard’s Case The Supreme Court on the grounds that
the publicity surrounding the trial prejudiced Sheppard’s right to a trial by an impartial jury. (Sheppard v. Maxwell 1966)
The state of Ohio decided to retry Sheppard.
He was acquitted on November 16, 1966.
![Page 15: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Dr. Sheppard’s Case: Epilogue
Sheppard returned to his surgical practice, but with deteriorated skills and drinking problems botched two operations, killing both patients
In 1969 made his debut as a professional wrestler using the name… “Killer Sheppard”
Sheppard died in 1970, at the age of 46.
![Page 16: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Rideau v. State of Louisiana 1963
Rideau convicted for murder and sentenced to death in 1961.
The U.S. Supreme Court overturned Rideau’s conviction on the basis that a secretly taped interrogation session was aired repeatedly on the local television station KPLC-TV's evening news, resulting in a biased jury pool and a "kangaroo court."
![Page 17: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Traditional Judicial RemediesVoir Dire (“to speak the truth”) - each perspective juror is questioned prior to being impaneled in an effort to discover bias
Challenges for cause – when an attorney convinces the court that there is a good reason a potential jury member should not hear the case
Preemptory challenges – a limited number of challenges granted without need to prove cause for removal of a jury member
![Page 18: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Traditional Judicial Remedies Change of Venue – when a judge orders a trial
moved to a distant county to find a jury that has not been exposed to publicity about a case
Change of Veniremen – when the court imports a jury panel from a distant community
![Page 19: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Mad Dog Irvin case (1961) Where an attempt has
been made to secure an impartial jury by a change in venue, but it appears that such a jury could not be obtained in the county to which the venue was changed, it is the duty of the court to grant a second change of venue.
.
![Page 20: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Traditional Judicial Remedies Continuance – when a judge postpones a
trial for weeks or months
A continuance may be granted when a judge expects people in the community will forget at least some of the publicity surrounding the case
![Page 21: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Traditional Judicial Remedies Admonition to the Jury – when judges tell
impaneled juries they must render their verdict solely on the basis of the evidence presented in the courtroom
Sequestration of the Jury – when judges seclude jury members from all publicity Jury members live in a hotel and eat all meals together All media accounts and personal communication are
screened for information about the trial before jury members can see or hear it
![Page 22: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Restrictive Orders: “gag orders” Judges issue restrictive orders, also known as “gag
orders” to stop those involved in a case from making public comments
Can be issued to: Plaintiff and defendant Attorneys Press
![Page 23: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Restrictive Orders on Press Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart (1976)
The judge in a sensational murder trial issued a restrictive order barring the printing or broadcasting of material about the victims
U.S. Supreme Court ruled this order was an unconstitutional prior restraint on the press; there must be a clear and present danger to the defendant’s rights to issue such an order
![Page 24: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Restrictive Orders on Press Nebraska Press Association Test for Restrictive
Orders Aimed at the Press: There must be intense and pervasive publicity
about the case No other alternative measure might mitigate the
effects of the pretrial publicity The restrictive order will in fact effectively
prevent prejudicial publicity form reaching potential jurors
![Page 25: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
From the majority opinion in Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart (1976):
“We reaffirm that the guarantees of freedom of expression are not absolute prohibition under all circumstances, but the barriers to prior restraint remain high and the presumption against its use continues intact.”
![Page 26: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Restrictive Orders on Press: Business Week magazine case
In 1994 Procter & Gamble sued the Bankers Trust for Fraud
Business Week magazine intended to publish litigation documents
The judge in the case issued a gag order against the magazine
HOWEVER: U.S. Supreme Court ruled that confidential information about a trial that was legally obtained by the press may be published
![Page 27: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Restrictive Orders on Participants
Gag orders aimed at participants are not uncommon in high profile cases
The law regarding restrictive orders barring participants from speaking or publishing about a case, however, is still developing
![Page 28: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Access to Proceedings: Richmond Newspapers v. Virginia (1980)
After a series of mistrials in a murder case in the state of Virginia, a trial judge closed the trial to the public and the media. Defense counsel brought the closure motion; the prosecution did not object. Two reporters of Richmond Newspapers, Inc. challenged the judge's action.
Question: Did the closure of the trial to the press and public violate the First Amendment or the Sixth Amendment?
![Page 29: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Access to Proceedings: Richmond Newspapers v. Virginia (1980)
The Court held that the right to attend criminal trials was "implicit in the guarantees of the First Amendment."
The First Amendment encompassed not only the right to speak but also the freedom to listen and to receive information and ideas.
Also, the First Amendment guaranteed the right of assembly in public places such as courthouses.
![Page 30: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Access to jury selection process: Press Enterprise v. Superior Court (1984)
The petitioner moved that the voir dire at a trial for the rape and murder of a teenage girl be open to the public and the press.
The State opposed, arguing that if the press were present, juror responses would lack the candor necessary to assure a fair trial.
The trial judge agreed and permitted petitioner to attend the "general" but not the "individual" voir dire proceedings.
![Page 31: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Access to jury selection process: Press Enterprise v. Superior Court (1984)
After the jury was empaneled, petitioner moved for release of the complete transcript of the voir dire proceedings
Both defense counsel and the prosecutor argued that release of the transcript would violate the jurors' right to privacy.
The court denied the motion.
![Page 32: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Access to jury selection process: Press Enterprise v. Superior Court (1984)
Petitioner then sought in the California Court of Appeal a writ of mandate to compel the trial court to release the transcript and vacate the order closing the voir dire proceedings.
The petition was denied, and the California Supreme Court denied petitioner's request for a hearing.
![Page 33: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Access to jury selection process: Press Enterprise v. Superior Court (1984)
The Supreme Court Held: The guarantees of open public proceedings in
criminal trials cover proceedings for the voir dire examination of potential jurors.
![Page 34: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Access to preliminary hearing: Press Enterprise v. Superior Court (1986)
Does a qualified First Amendment right of public access attach to a preliminary hearing, and under what conditions may the hearing be closed to the public while ensuring a fair balancing of First Amendment and Sixth Amendment guarantees?
![Page 35: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Access to preliminary hearing: Press Enterprise v. Superior Court (1984)
"Plainly the defendant has a right to a fair trial but, one of the important means of assuring a fair trial is
that the process be open to neutral observers. Therefore, the preliminary hearing shall be closed only if
specific findings are made demonstrating a substantial probability that fair trial will be put at risk by publicity and that no reasonable alternatives to closure exist.”
![Page 36: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Press-Enterprise Test The party seeking closure must advance an overriding
interest that is likely to be harmed if the proceeding or document is open
Whoever seeks the closure must demonstrate that there is a “substantial probability” that this interest will be harmed if the proceeding or document remains open
![Page 37: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Press-Enterprise Test The trial court must consider reasonable alternatives to
closure If the judge decides that closure is the only reasonable
solution, the closure must be narrowly tailored so there is an absolute minimum of interference with the rights of the press and public to attend the hearing or see the document
![Page 38: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Closed Proceedings and Sealed Documents Tips For Reporters When a Judicial Hearing is Closed
Call the editor immediately to get a lawyer on the job Make a formal objection to the closure Ask the judge to delay the closure until the lawyer
arrives
![Page 39: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Access and Broadcast Journalists
Access to audio- or videotaped evidence is still developing in the courts
Courts have granted journalists increasing rights to make copies of evidence for later broadcast
![Page 40: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Recording and Televising Judicial Proceedings Cameras and recording devices are now permitted
in all but two states and the District of Columbia
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Chandler v. Florida (1981) that the mere presence of cameras in the courtroom does not prejudice a defendant’s right to a fair trial
![Page 41: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Recording and Televising Judicial Proceedings Federal courts refuse to permit cameras in the
courtroom
Cameras are also barred from executions and jury deliberations in most states
![Page 42: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Bench-Bar-Press Guidelines Guidelines:
Tell law enforcement officers what kind of information about a criminal suspect and a crime can be released and published with little danger of harm to the trial process
Inform journalists that publication of certain kinds of information about a case can be harmful to the trial process
![Page 43: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Protect Your Sources and Notes Promises: Some sources won’t talk unless you
promise them confidentiality. To renege on a promise is to risk a lawsuit filed by the source.
Watchdogs, Not Lapdogs: The government should do its own investigation, not rely on your information. Journalists are watchdogs on the government, not lapdogs.
![Page 44: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
The High Costs of Protection Journalists who refuse to comply with subpoenas
requesting notes and/or the names of confidential sources risk contempt and jail.
Vanessa Leggett: Spent more than five months in jail in 2001 for refusing to turn over notes from an interview regarding a murder investigation.
Josh Wolf (free-lance / blogger): spent 226 days (7.5 months) in jail in 2007
![Page 45: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Branzburg v Hayes (1972). Four separate cases, collective name Reporters are not constitutionally excepted from the
duty to comply with grand jury subpoenas But the subpoena must be issued in ‘good faith.’ Journalists have a qualified constitutional right to withhold
unpublished information and sources identity 1. What is the importance and relevance of information? 2. Can the information be obtained through different means? 3. What is the type of controversy? 4. How the information was gathered? Confidential?
![Page 46: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Shield Laws More than half the states have
laws protecting journalists
![Page 47: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
The California Shield Law
Provides legal protections to journalists seeking to maintain the confidentiality of an unnamed source or unpublished information obtained during newsgathering
WHO IT PROTECTS? a "publisher, editor, reporter, or other person
connected with or employed by the media. The Shield Law also likely applies to stringers, freelancers, and perhaps authors.
![Page 48: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
WHAT INFORMATION IS PROTECTED?
The source of any information. Unpublished information
Specific information obtained during newsgathering but not disclosed to the public
Includes "all notes, outlines, photographs, tapes or other data of whatever sort"
Includes newsgatherer's eyewitness observations in a public place
Protects only information obtained during newsgathering
![Page 49: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Failing to Keep A Promise: Civil Liability Cohen v. Cowles Media: The First Amendment
does not shield journalists from lawsuits or civil liability when they breach promises of confidentiality to their sources.
“Enforcing the promises of confidentiality would not violate the newspapers’ constitutional rights.”
![Page 50: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Failing to Keep A Promise: Civil Liability
• The legal theory on which the plaintiff in Cohen v. Cowles Media prevails after journalists breached promises of confidentiality to him.
• The theory allows courts to enforce promises, even though there is no legally binding contract, in order to avoid injustice.
![Page 51: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Legal obligation to keep promises: Four Key Elements
A plaintiff must prove four basic elements in order to prevail in an action for promissory estoppel:
1. The defendant made a clear and definite promise to the plaintiff;
2. The defendant intended to induce the plaintiff’s reliance on that promise;
3. The plaintiff reasonably relied on the promise to his or her detriment; and
4. The promise must be enforced in the interests of justice to the plaintiff.
![Page 52: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Newsroom Searches Seminal Case Supreme Court case: Zurcher v. Stanford Daily
Critical Federal Law:
Privacy Protection Act of 1980
![Page 53: Media and the Justice System. Problem No. 1: The conflict between The 6 th Amendment protections for criminal defendants and The 1 st Amendment rights.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/56649f0d5503460f94c21949/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
The Contempt Power
1. Contempt
2. First Amendment Limitations
3. Collateral Bar Rule