Freedom of Speech or Right to a Fair Trial?

Question

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/special_packages/supreme_court/15738978.htm?source=rss

First, the victim's family wearing the buttons I think would be considered free speech. But, it could have an influence on the jury, which would violate the defendents right to a fair trial.

Which is more important? Which should override the other? If they both are equally important, how do you deal with this in the future?

Answer 1

There are no limits to free speech. The government can limit the location and time of speech. For example, you can't hold a loud rally at night in a residential area. There are no limitations on the right to a fair trial. Every defendant is owed one. Wearing the buttons can prejudice the jury thereby depriving the defendant of a fair trial. It is actually better for the family of the victims if there is a fair trial because if the defendant is found guilty, there is real closure and the likelihood of success on appeal diminishes.

Answer 2

I struggle with my own opinion on this question in large part due to the point made by the prosecutor in the case that had the victim not been murdered, but only wounded he would have been allowed to attend the trial himself. Would that not be more prejudical than a button with his picture? I guess I also struggle with the notion that the picture of a dead person on a button influences the jury more than the pictures of the dead body they surely got to see. Whether he is dead and who shot him is not in question. The button doesn't change that.

Mostly, I am struck by the ultimate stupidity of the prosecutor to have not even considered it as a point of contention until after the fact. If I'm that lawyer, NO WAY do I take the chance of letting my client risk the outcome of the case on so trivial a point! There are so many "legitimate" techincalities to navigate thru as it is. Why introduce more?

Answer 3

In the case sited: Inside the court room the defendant's right to a fair trial should take precedence. Therefore, the button with the victim's picture should not have been allowed. I see it as no different than allowing heckling in the court room. Outside the court room free speech should prevail and the victim's family should be able to carry signs, give speeches—in other words exercise their right to free speech.

Answer 4

The two aren't in conflict at all.

You can express yourself however you feel like in general public, BUT NOT IN A COURT OF LAW. Period.

Tara — You are absolutely wrong about the right to a fair trial. It is absolutely important that the defendant receive a fair trial, because if he/she is innocent and wrongfully convicted, then the real criminal gets off scott free.

Answer 5

Huh? What are you conversing approximately? reaction to questioner: You did no longer point out something some intense profile case. you in basic terms asked some imprecise question some truthful trial & freedom of speech. on the grounds which you're worried approximately my training i will permit you recognize that i've got been a Deputy for 7 years & I also have a BS in Criminology. I have been given that once spending 11 years in the Marines & going to 13 distinctive international places to shield your ideal to be a juvenile little, clever mouth b*tch. i think of it may well be risk-free to declare that i became getting an training in how the international works on the grounds that in the previous you began putting out of your mothers boobs. Have a effective day & rigidity wisely!!

Answer 6

The right to Free Speech is suspended in a court of law. There is no provision for 'free speech' being allowed to supercede the adjudication of the law when lawyers, court reporters and a Judge are present.

Answer 7

Jurors are required to make a verdict based on the evidence presented. Buttons in the courtroom would not violate the defendents right to a fair trial, as they are not "evidence". Free speech wins again...

Answer 8

I think that there is enough previous case studies (like say, wearing election buttons inside a polling place) to show that outlawing buttons like this inside a courtroom is legal.

While I think that it is dumb to consider that a jury can be swayed by something like that, juries have a hard enough job already without outside propaganda.

Answer 9

If it doesn't disrupt the trial or cast guilt on the defendant then i believe it should be allowed.