1. Prejudicial Crime Reporting Crime Stories That Can Endanger Defendants ’ Rights: –Confessions or stories about confessions the defendant is staid to have made –Stories about he defendant ’ s performance on a test, such as a polygraph

2. Prejudicial Crime Reporting Crime Stories That Can Endanger Defendants ’ Rights: –Stories about the defendant ’ s past criminal record –Stories that question the credibility of witnesses

3. Prejudicial Crime Reporting Crime Stories 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. Traditional Judicial Remedies Voir Dire - 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

7. 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

8. Traditional Judicial Remedies Change of Veniremen – when the court imports a jury panel from a distant community

9. 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

10. 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

11. Traditional Judicial Remedies 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

12. Restrictive 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. Restrictive Orders on Press U.S. Supreme Court ruled that confidential information about a trial that was legally obtained by the press may be published

16. 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