I think so..... any high profile case that gets extensive media cover seems to case outrage OJ Simpson, Casey Anthony and George Zimmerman to name a few but one specific case comes to mind is the Jodi Arias trial ....
Jodi Arias her name was splashed over every new station at the beginning of the year when her trial started. Here is a brief overview of who Jodi Arias is and a brief overview of the trial facts.
Jodi Arias was dating a guy name Travis Alexander around February 2007 they had a fling for a couple months but broke up at the end of the year because Mr. Alexander was no longer interested. They rekindled a psychical relationship during the beginning of 2008. On June 4, 2008 Mr. Alexanders body was found with stab wounds, a gunshot wound to the head and defensive wounds ; his death was ruled a homicide.
Jodi Arias was charged with first degree murder after DNA resulted concluded Ms. Arias was at the crime scene. Ms. Arias told police three different accounts of what happened the night Mr. Alexander was murdered. First was the story that she was not with Mr. Alexander the day he was murdered. Next story was he was killed by two intruders and they killed him but not her. Lastly she admitted to killing him but claimed it was self defense because he was abusive. During the trial Ms. Arias was plastered as the crazy ex girlfriend that stabbed her then boyfriend 27 times and shot him in the face. Ms. Arias was convicted of first degree murder.
Nancy Grace covered this trial extensively throughout the proceedings. The trial became a media sensation with all the attention on Jodi Arias as the crazy stalker ex girlfriend that murdered her ex boyfriend. The jury failed to come to a decision on the sentencing phase of the trial whether Ms. Arias should spend life in jail or get the death penalty.
The media attention around Ms. Arias trial has caused her defense team to ask for a change in venue for the sentencing phase of the trial because they believe she wont get a fair chance at the current venue in Maricopa County, Arizona.
(Article about change of venue below)--->
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/27/jodia-arias-change-of-venue/2710813/
Can we say the widespread media attention has had a negative effect on the sentencing phase of the Jodi Arias trial as far as selecting another pool of jurors?
I would say yes, because all the media attention I feel like she would not get a fair chance at her life being spared because the public has already made up their mind that she should get the death penalty because she committed such a horrific crime against a human life. Its going to be hard to find jurors that have not already heard or watched the trial in Maricopa County. Her defense team is asking for a change of venue is a great move because at least she has a shot of only spending her life in prison.
Its nice to have media coverage for trial but it comes a point when its to much coverage and this case is a prime example of that. If Ms. Arias face was not over every major news station during her trial it would have been easier for her defense team during the penalty phase to get a somewhat non bias set of jurors. The sentencing phase is still ongoing so we will see what Ms. Arias punishment is
STAY TUNED !!!!!!
Janell Westmoreland
This is a good topic to blog about for sure. It is very controversial, and people are going to have many different viewpoints. High profile cases seem to get many people going, and most of these people want their voices heard. Although, when it comes down to it, it is not up to them to convict the person on trial. It is the jurors and the judge. I am going to draw on the part in your article where you stated that it would have been easier if it was low profile in the sense that she would have non-biased jurors. These people are usually selected at random and are there throughout the entire case. No matter the media attention or not, they are going to be biased. Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion. This is the case in this situation based on the trial and evidence against the person. These people decide the fate of the one on trial. If you take Casey Anthony's trial as an example, it was obvious that she seemed guilty. The majority of America thought so. The media made her out to be as well, but shockingly, her verdict came back as not guilty. As much as the media covered her story, it obviously did not sway the decision of the jurors. In my opinion, the media chooses to publicize these random, crazy cases when there are probably hundreds of others out there, just as crazy, which go unpublicized and have the same outcome. Besides the overdone publicity, I really do not believe it sways the outcome of a trial in the end. It maybe the person's life from there on out, but not the verdict, itself.
ReplyDelete