NCJ Number
211811
Journal
Judicial Review Volume: 7 Issue: 3 Dated: September 2005 Pages: 311-328
Date Published
September 2005
Length
18 pages
Annotation
This paper reviews studies from New South Wales and New Zealand on ways to ensure that prejudicial publicity does not influence jury decisionmaking.
Abstract
Studies in Australia and New Zealand have indicated that publicity concerning the accused or the offense may prejudice a fair trial. The law of sub judice contempt seeks to protect the fair trial when criminal proceedings are pending. In recent years, research studies have been carried out in New Zealand and New South Wales (NSW) on aspects of the way in which juries in criminal trials carry out their duties. In 1997, the Law Commission of New Zealand collaborated with the Victoria University of Wellington in undertaking a research project or study on jury decisionmaking, with results published in 1999. In New South Wales, the University of NSW and the Law and Justice Foundation undertook an empirical study of the effect of prejudicial publicity on juries in criminal trials. This paper presents the results of both studies; in so far as they deal with the influence of prejudicial publicity on jurors, the results are consistent and support the assumption that jurors are unlikely to recall, and thus be prejudiced by, the detail of pretrial publicity. The public becomes sensitized to publicity about a case when they are empanelled to try it. Appendix 1-2