This study examines the question of whether juvenile court judges are seeing evidence of long-term exposure to media violence affecting the behavior of juvenile offenders. The attitudes and opinions of 87 juvenile court judges in Virginia regarding the use of heavy viewing of violence as a defense in juvenile litigation or as a mitigating circumstance in sentencing were surveyed. Several examples of litigation involving allegations that situations depicted on the media were imitated by juvenile members of the audience are presented. Results of the study indicate that, in a court of law, juveniles would be expected to take responsibility for their actions regardless of the amount of media violence to which they had been exposed. While the judges realized that the media influence juvenile behavior, they felt that such effects do not justify criminal behavior. Rural judges seemed more open to the use of the media violence intoxication argument as a valid defense than were urban judges. The judges believed that something should be done about the level of media violence, but stopped short of supporting government-imposed regulations. Appendix, 7 references