Instructions: Read through the following examples and determine whetherthe requirementsof a speedy and public trial have been met, whether the right to a jury may have been violated,whether the right to confront your accuser may have been violated and whether the right tocounsel has been appropriately honored. Be sure to cite evidence to support your answer, e.g.,specific court cases.
Note:Each scenario has a required word count of at least 60 words.
1)The trial of the famous former child actor Jeremy Janson has begun for alleged criminaltax evasion. The media is intensely interested in the case, and local television stationshave requested the presiding judge to permit television cameras into the courtroom.
Mr. Jason’s attorney, Ms. Kenderson, notes that while she understands that her client has a rightto a public trial; that right should not be so expansive as to include televised proceedings of thetrial. Ms. Kenderson objects to the inclusion of television cameras in the courtroom, providing itwill unnecessarily distract from due process and a fair trial for her client. The judge denies Ms.Kenderson’s motion and allows the television cameras in the courtroom.
Does the inclusion of the television cameras violate Mr. Janson’s right to a fair trial and gobeyond the intent of a “public trial”? Why or why not?
The presence of television cameras in the courtroom does not violate Mr. Janson’s right to a fairtrial. The Supreme Court has endeavored to reach a balance between the 6thAmendment rights ofdefendants and the 1stAmendment rights of the public (Harr, Hess, Orthmann & Kingbury,2018). The caseGannett Co. v. DePasquale(1979) held that the public, which includes the press,is not guaranteed to attend every trial; however, the caseRichmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia(1980) held that unless it is a matter of national security or some other compelling reason, thepublic does have the right to attend trials (Harr et al., 2018). To that end, if a trial becomes adistraction in the courtroom, the defendant can claim infringement of their due process rights,which is allowable because of the caseEstes v. Texasand the public can be banned from the trial(Harr et al., 2018). Therefore, since Ms. Kenderson objected to the inclusion of televisioncameras in the courtroom on the grounds that the cameras unnecessarily distracted from the dueprocess and a fair trial for her client, the judge should not have denied the motion.
2)Susan Johnson has been arrested for shoplifting. Ms. Johnson attempted to shoplift acollectible music record from a music store that retailed for $75.
Ms. Johnson finds out that she is not going to be allowed a jury trial for her shoplifting charge.