Anytime you are in a courtroom or trial scenario, judges and high ranking officials must be unbiased in the opinions which decide the fate of the said offender. This is exceptionally necessary when it comes to violent crimes. When the media constantly does not stop shedding light on the same person, for the same violent crime, it gives judges and law officials a bad impression of the person, because all they have been hearing is how guilty they are. Not only does the media have no place is deciding who is guilty or not, but they also have no evidence to support their accusations. So, by constantly accusing someone of committing a crime on the media, the judges and officials of the law could also be infected by this conception, thus giving them an unbiased decision of the person’s fate. Take for example the OJ Simpson case – “after the OJ Simpson trial some jurors admitted that the pressure generated by the media added significantly to the difficulties of deliberation. The inescapable consequence of the media reporting on violent crimes is that people cannot help internalizing the public opinion when it stands against a person on trial.” (1.3.7-14) Some may argue that the law should always have an unbiased opinion no matter the scenario, but this still does not change the fact that the brain will automatically create a misguided conception on someone based on what we are told daily by the
Anytime you are in a courtroom or trial scenario, judges and high ranking officials must be unbiased in the opinions which decide the fate of the said offender. This is exceptionally necessary when it comes to violent crimes. When the media constantly does not stop shedding light on the same person, for the same violent crime, it gives judges and law officials a bad impression of the person, because all they have been hearing is how guilty they are. Not only does the media have no place is deciding who is guilty or not, but they also have no evidence to support their accusations. So, by constantly accusing someone of committing a crime on the media, the judges and officials of the law could also be infected by this conception, thus giving them an unbiased decision of the person’s fate. Take for example the OJ Simpson case – “after the OJ Simpson trial some jurors admitted that the pressure generated by the media added significantly to the difficulties of deliberation. The inescapable consequence of the media reporting on violent crimes is that people cannot help internalizing the public opinion when it stands against a person on trial.” (1.3.7-14) Some may argue that the law should always have an unbiased opinion no matter the scenario, but this still does not change the fact that the brain will automatically create a misguided conception on someone based on what we are told daily by the