10/29/2016

TrialByMedia:ALegalDilemmaResolvedWithReferenceToJessicaLal
LegalServiceIndiaTrialByMedia:ALegalDilemmaResolvedWithReferenceToJessicaLal
TrialByMedia:ALegalDilemmaResolvedWithReferenceToJessicaLal
Writtenby:HimanshuRamanSinghIVthYearStudentofNALSAR,Hyderabad.Havingabrilliantacademic
record

Chatwithus(2PM9PMIST)

LegalAdvice|Findalawyer|Constitutionallaw|Judgments|forms|PIL|familylaw|CyberLaw|LawForum|IncomeTax|Consumerlaws|Companylaws
SearchOn:

lawsinIndia

CopyrightOnlineinIndia
Search

RightfromyourDesktopPhno:9891244487
Home\FamousTrials

Articles|Articles2014|Articles2013|Articles2012|Articles2011|Articles2010|Articles2009|Articles2008|Articles2007|Articles2006|200005

Mediaisregardedasoneofthepillarsofdemocracy.Mediahaswiderangingrolesinthesociety.Mediaplaysavitalroleinmouldingtheopinionofthesociety
anditiscapableofchangingthewholeviewpointthroughwhichpeopleperceivevariousevents.Themediacanbecommendedforstartingatrendwherethe
mediaplaysanactiveroleinbringingtheaccusedtohook.

Freedomofmediaisthefreedomofpeopleastheyshouldbeinformedofpublicmatters.[1]Itisthusneedlesstoemphasisthatafreeandahealthypressis
indispensabletothefunctioningofdemocracy.Inademocraticsetuptherehastobeactiveparticipationofpeopleinallaffairsoftheircommunityandthe
state.Itistheirrighttobekeptinformedaboutthecurrentpoliticalsocial,economicandculturallifeaswellastheburningtopicsandimportantissuesofthe
dayinordertoenablethemtoconsidertoformbroadopinioninwhichtheyarebeingmanaged,tackledandadministeredbythegovernmentandtheir
functionaries.Toachievethisobjectivepeopleneedaclearandtruthfulaccountofevents,sothattheymayformtheirownopinionandoffertheirown
commentsandviewpointsonsuchmattersandissuesandselecttheirfuturecourseofaction.Therighttofreedomofspeechandexpressionincontainedin
article19oftheconstitution.Howeverthefreedomisnotabsoluteasitisboundbythesubclause(2)ofthesamearticle.Howevertherightitfreedomand
speechandexpressiondoesnotembracethefreedomtocommitcontemptofcourt.[2]

ThemediahasagaincomeinfocusinitsroleinthetrialofJessicalalmurdercase.Theconceptofmediatrialisnotanewconcept.Theroleofmediawas
debatedinthePriyadarshiniMattoocaseandlikewisemanyotherhighprofilecases.Therehavebeennumerousinstancesinwhichmediahasbeenaccused
ofconductingthetrialoftheaccusedandpassingtheverdictevenbeforethecourtpassesitsjudgment.Trialisessentiallyaprocesstobecarriedoutbythe
courts.Thetrialbymediaisdefinitelyanundueinterferenceintheprocessofjusticedelivery.Beforedelvingintotheissueofjustifiabilityofmediatrialitwould
bepertinenttofirsttrytodefinewhatactuallythetrialbymediameans.Trialisawordwhichisassociatedwiththeprocessofjustice.Itistheessential
componentonanyjudicialsystemthattheaccusedshouldreceiveafairtrial.

TrialByMediaInTheJessicaLalCase:AnAnalysis
ThenewspapersandtheothermediachannelshavequitebeenrejoicingovertheirsuccessinbringingJessicalaltojustice.Thetrialcourthadacquitted
ManuSharmaofallthechargesdependingupontheobviouslacunaeintheprosecutioncase.TheHighCourthoweverreversedthetrialcourtjudgment.

TheHighCourthasinterpretedtheevidencegivenbythewitnessesdifferentlyasclearfromthefollowingsentence:
Thetrialcourtgrosslyerredinthemannerofappreciationoftestimoniesofthesaidwitnessesbyreadingintothesaidtestimonywhatwasnotthere.Thekey
witnessesevidencewhichdidnotexist,forinstance,whiledealingwithPW20,thetrialcourtarrivedatafactuallywrongfinding,notborneoutfromthe
evidenceonrecord,totheeffectthatshethoughtthathehadfiredashotatJessicaLalandthatshewasnotaneyewitness.

Basicallywhatthehighcourtdidwasdosojustundowhatthetrialcourthaddone.

ThetestimonyofPW6,MaliniRamani,hasbeendiscardedbythetrialcourtbeingoflittleimportance.sinceshewasnotaneyewitness.However,sheis
certainlyawitnesstoidentifyingSidharthaVashisht@ManuSharmaalongwithfourorfivepersonspresentattheTamarindCourtasalsohavingaskedherfor
whiskyandlatermisbehavingwithher.Wefinditquitestrangethatatonestagethetrialcourthasreturnedacategoricalfindingthatfouraccusedwerepresent
insideTamarindCafeandthatfindinghasbeengivenonlyontheevidenceofPWs1,6,20and24,yettheirevidencehasbeendoubtedandthattoowithout
evenmakingrealanalysisoftheirevidence.

TheHighCourtheldBeenaRamanistestimonytobeclinchingevidenceagainsttheaccused.Thenthecourtproceededtoviewthetestimonygivenbythe
otherwitnessesinthelightofinitsowninterpretationplaceduponthestatementofBeenaRamani.

ThiswitnesswascrossexaminedbycounselforSidharthaVashishta@ManuSharma,buttonomeaningfulend.Inotherwords,hertestimonyremained
unchallenged.ThetrialcourtwhiledealingwiththiswitnesshasheldthatthiswitnessdoesnotfurtherthecaseoftheProsecutionasthewitnesswasnotan
eyewitnesstotheoccurrencebutawitnesstothepresenceofSidharthaVashishta@ManuSharma,AmardeepSinghGill,AlokKhannaandVikasYadavat
theQutubColonnade.ThetrialcourtalsoheldthatthedepositionofthiswitnesswasvaguesinceshethoughtthatManuSharmawascarryingagunandalso
feltthathemayhaveshotJessicaLal.TheCourtalsoheldthatmerefeelingswerenotenoughanddidnotmeanthatSidharthaVashisht@ManuSharmahad
actuallyfiredashotatJessicaLal.ThetrialcourtfurtherwenttotallywronginholdingthatPW20hadadmittednotseeingSidharthaVashishtfiringashotat
JessicaLal,butitwasonlyherfeeling.WithgreatrespecttothelearnedJudge,wefindthisis'acompletemisreadingofevidence'.Thereisnosuggestionlet
aloneanadmissiononthepartofPW20,BeenaRamani,thatshehadnotseentheaccusedSidharthaVashishtfiringashotatJessicaLal.

ThecourtfoundthetestimonyofBeenaRamanialoneenoughforconvictingManuSharmaforthemurderofJessicaLal.Ifwetrytoseethroughthejudgment
oftheHighCourtwecanseethatthehighcourtisproceedingwiththeassumptionthatManuSharmanisguilty.Thehighcourtlinksalltheevidencetogether
anddoesnottakeintoaccountthevariouslacunaeintheprosecutioncase.Thecourthasclearlybeeninfluencedbythepopularopinionandthemedia
publicityofthecase.

Ifwelookatthevariouscommentsinthenewspapersafterthetrialofthejudgmentthewholethingbecomescrystalclear.Evenbeforethetrialstartedthe

http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l237TrialByMedia.html

1/6

10/29/2016

TrialByMedia:ALegalDilemmaResolvedWithReferenceToJessicaLal
mediastartednamingManuSharmaasanaccusedintheJessicalalmurdercase.Hisphotographswereflashedacrossthemediaandcreatedpractical
difficultiesinthetestidentificationparadeoftheaccusedpersons.Thispointhasalsobeenponderedoverbythehighcourtinitsjudgment.

ThequestionthatarisesatthismomentisthatwhywasManuSharmaacquittedbythecourtandthenagainconvictedbytheHighCourtonthebasisofsame
facts.FirstweshalldealwithastowhythetrialcourthadtoacquitManuSharma.Ifwelookattheevidencethewholethingbecomesclear.Thecarhecame
intoreachtherestaurantwasnotrecoveredonthespot:thecourtdoesnotknowhowhegotthere.Theweaponheusedwasneverrecovered:thecourt
cannotequatethefatalbulletswiththegunheowns.Actually,thecourtdoesnotevenknowifonegunortwogunswereusedintheshooting.Thecourthas
nositeplantohelpitunderstandwheretheshooterstood,wheretheemptycartridgeswerefoundorwhereJessicafell.Therestaurantfloorwaswashedclean:
thecourtdoesnotknowifthereeverwasapoolofblood.Indeed,therewasnohardevidenceofanycelebrationorpartyattheplace:theboozebottleswere
gone,sowhywouldManuSharmakillanotherguest?

Thepostmortemreportiswayshortoncauseofdeathdetails.Therearenoeyewitnesses:noonesawtheshooter.Themanrecordingthefirstinformation
reportsayshedoesnotunderstandhisownreportbecauseheisnotparticularlygoodwithwrittenHindi(thoughweknowhecanspeakwellenough).Evidence
collectioninthecasehasbeenseriouslybotchedtheholeswouldtakesomefilling.Wedon'thaveachainofcircumstancestoconnectManuSharmatothe
killing.Arewegoingtosendamantothegallowsjustbecausethepolicearrestedtheman?Evidencecollectioninthecasehasbeenseriouslybotchedthe
holeswouldtakesomefilling.Theevidenceisn'tgoingtonowappearjustbecausetheHighCourthasthepowertointroduceadditionalevidence.

TheJudgepossiblybelievedthatifsaidfactswereinconsistentanddidnotofferconclusiveproofoftheguiltoftheaccused,hewasboundtogivethebenefit
ofthedoubttotheaccused.Primafacie,suchastrictlyjudicialperceptionseemsunexceptionable.

However,personswellversedwiththeCr.P.C.wouldknowthatSection311investsintheJudgetheprerogativetosummonsuomotomorematerialwitnesses
inadditiontothoseproducedbytheprosecution.Thiscanbedoneatanystageofthetrial.TheJudgehasalsotheauthoritytorecallandreexamineany
personalreadyexamined.

Section311isapotentweaponinthehandsofaJudgewhoisconfrontedwithanumberofwitnessesrenegingontheirpreviousstatementstothepolice.
PublicinterestdemandedthatthetrialJudgestraineverynerveofthelawtoarriveatthetruth.AllreportsindicatethatJudgeBhayanadidnotappreciatethe
significanceofthegravecrimethathadtakenplaceandhisownmoralresponsibilitytoarriveatthetruth.Viewedinthislight,thefailureisnotonlythatofthe
policebutofthetrialJudgeaswell.[3]

Thereasonscitedbythejudgebehinddecision[4]are:
ThreekeywitnessesmodelturnedactorShayanMunshi,oneKaranRajputandelectricianShivDasshadturnedhostile.Theyretractedtheirinitial
statementgiventotheDelhiPolice.Theweaponofmurderwasneverrecoveredfromtheplaceofthecrime.TheCFSL[5],whichexaminedthebulletsone
recoveredfromthespotandtheotherlodgedinJessicasbodyfoundtheywerenotfiredfromthesameweapon.

Theabovereasonsbasicallycompelledthejudgetoletgooftheaccusedandonceagainputforththeloopholesinourlegaljusticesystem.Itshowedthe
inefficiencyandlackpfcredibilityinourPoliceforceandalsohoweasyitisforthehighclasspeopletobuytheirfreedom.

ItisnowquiteclearthattherewasnotadequateevidencetonailManuSharmainthiscase.EveninthelackofevidenceinthiscaseManuSharmawasheld
guiltybytheDelhiHighCourt.ThereisaclearinfluenceofmediaaswillbecomeclearfromsomeexamplesofMediaCoveragegivenbelow.Thecoverageof
themediaisnoteworthyinthiscase.SifyreportedtheincidentasJessicaLall:MurderinjungleofIndianjustice.[6]Tehelka[7]:reportedthat:Thetrialcourt
gaveManuthebenefitofdoubtonhisversionthattheTataSafariwasrecoveredfromKarnal.

ThepolicesaysthecourtgrosslyerredbecausetheseizurememorecordsaNoidarecoveryIsthereanyhopeJessicawillgetjustice?Manydohopeand
groupsarepromisingtokeepthecampaignforjusticealivethatboththepoliceandthecourtswillensurewhateveryoutragedvoiceisdemanding:justice
forJessica,andtherebyachangeinthecriminaljusticesystem.TheDelhiPolicehasfinallygoneinappealagainstatrialcourtjudgementthatoutragedthe
nation.Butwillthelawcontinuepushingforjusticeoncepublicfocusshiftsfromthecase?JusticeforJessica[8]Isitrealistictoexpectconvictionsinthis
highprofilemurdercase?JessicaLalCase:Justicenotserved.[9]

TrialByMediaIsContemptofCourtAndNeedsToBePunished
TheContemptofCourtActdefinescontemptbyidentifyingitascivil[10]andcriminal[11].Criminalcontempthasfurtherbeendividedintothreetypes:
#Scandalizing
#Prejudicingtrial,and
#Hinderingtheadministrationofjustice.

Prejudiceorinterferencewiththejudicialprocess:
ThisprovisionowesitsorigintotheprincipleofnaturaljusticeeveryaccusedhasarighttoafairtrialclubbedwiththeprinciplethatJusticemaynotonlybe
doneitmustalsoseemtobedone.Therearemultiplewaysinwhichattemptsaremadetoprejudicetrial.Ifsuchcasesareallowedtobesuccessfulwillbe
thatthepersonswillbeconvictedofoffenceswhichtheyhavenotcommitted.Contemptofcourthasbeenintroducedinordertopreventsuchunjustandunfair
trials.Nopublication,whichiscalculatedtopoisonthemindsofjurors,intimidatewitnessesorpartiesortocreateanatmosphereinwhichtheadministrationof
justicewouldbedifficultorimpossible,amountstocontempt.[12]Commentingonthependingcasesorabuseofpartymayamounttocontemptonlywhena
caseistriablebyajudge.[13]Noeditorhastherighttoassumetheroleofaninvestigatortotrytoprejudicethecourtagainstanyperson.[14]

ThelawastointerferencewiththeduecourseofjusticehasbeenwellstatedbythechiefjusticeGopalRaoEkkboteofAndhraPradeshHighCourtinthecase
ofY.V.HanumanthaRaov.K.R.PattabhiramandAnr.[15],whereinitwasobservedbythelearnedjudgethat:
WhenlitigationispendingbeforeaCourt,nooneshallcommentonitinsuchawaythereisarealandsubstantialdangerofprejudicetothetrialofthe
action,asforinstancebyinfluenceontheJudge,thewitnessesorbyprejudicingmankindingeneralagainstapartytothecause.Evenifthepersonmaking
thecommenthonestlybelievesittobetrue,stillitisacontemptofCourtifheprejudicesthetruthbeforeitisascertainedintheproceedings.Tothisgeneral
ruleoffairtrialonemayaddafurtherruleandthatisthatnoneshall,bymisrepresentationorotherwise,bringunfairpressuretobearononeofthepartiestoa
causesoastoforcehimtodrophiscomplaintordefence.Itisalwaysregardedasofthefirstimportancethatthelawwhichwehavejuststatedshouldbe
maintainedinitsfullintegrity.Butinsostatingthelawwemustbearinmindthattheremustappeartobe'arealandsubstantialdangerofprejudice'.

http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l237TrialByMedia.html

2/6

10/29/2016

TrialByMedia:ALegalDilemmaResolvedWithReferenceToJessicaLal
Fairtrial
Partieshaveaconstitutionalrighttohaveafaittrialinthecourtoflaw,byanimpartialtribunal,uninfluencedbynewspaperdictationorpopularclamour.[16]
Whatwouldhappentothisrightifthepressmayusesuchalanguageastoinfluenceandcontrolthejudicialprocess?Itistobeborneinmindthatthe
democracydemandsfairplayandtransparency,ifthesearecurtailedonflimsiestofgroundsthentheveryconceptofdemocracyisatstake.
Theconceptofdenialofafairtrialhasbeencoinedbyauthoritativejudicialpronouncementsasasafeguardinacriminaltrial.

Butwhatdoestheconceptdenialoffairtrialactuallymean:
Theconclusionsofthejudicialdecisionscanbesummedasfollows:
TheobstructionorinterferenceintheadministrationofjusticeVisaVisapersonfacingtrial.
Theprejudicialpublicationaffectingpublicwhichintermaffecttheaccusedamounttodenialoffairtrial.
Prejudicialpublicationaffectingthemindofthejudgeand
Suggestingthecourtastoinwhatmannerthecaseshouldbepreceded.

Thepublisherofanoffendingarticlecannottakeshelterbehindthepleathatthetrialtowhichthearticlerelatestoisnttheninprogressnorimmediatelytobe
begunbutithastooccuratafuturetime.[17]Ourlawofcontempthoweverdoesnotpreventcommentsbeforethelitigationisstartednorafterithasended.In
reP.C.Sen[18]Justiceshahwhospokeforthecourtsuccinctlyputthelawasfollows:

ThelawrelatingtocontemptofCourtiswellsettled.AnyactdoneorwritingpublishedwhichiscalculatedtobringaCourtoraJudgeintocontempt,ortolower
hisauthority,ortointerferewiththeduecourseofjusticeorthelawfulprocessoftheCourt,isacontemptofCourt:R.v.Gray,[1900]2Q.B.D.36atp.40.
ContemptbyspeechorwritingmaybebyscandalisingtheCourtitself,orbyabusingpartiestoactions,orbyprejudicingmankindinfavouroforagainsta
partybeforethecauseisheard.

ItisincumbentuponCourtsofjusticetopreservetheirproceedingsfrombeingmisrepresented,forprejudicingthemindsofthepublicagainstpersons
concernedaspartiesincausesbeforethecauseisfinallyheardhasperniciousconsequences.Speechesorwritingsmisrepresentingtheproceedingsofthe
Courtorprejudicingthepublicfororagainstapartyorinvolvingreflectionsonpartiestoaproceedingamounttocontempt.Tomakeaspeechtendingto
influencetheresultofapendingtrial,whethercivilorcriminalisagravecontempt.Commentsonpendingproceedings,ifemanatingfromthepartiesortheir
lawyers,aregenerallyamoreseriouscontemptthanthosecomingfromindependentsources.Thequestioninallcasesofcommentonpendingproceedingsis
notwhetherthepublicationdoesinterfere,butwhetherittendstointerfere,withtheduecourseofjustice.Thequestionisnotsomuchoftheintentionofthe
contemneraswhetheritiscalculatedtointerferewiththeadministrationofjustice.[19]

InSushilSharmav.TheState(DelhiAdministration)andOrs[20]itwasheldbytheDelhiHighCourtthat:
Conviction,ifany,wouldbebasednotonmedia'sreportbutwhatfactsareplacedonrecord.Judgedealing.withthecaseissupposedtobeneutral.Nowif
whatpetitionercontendsregardingdenialoffairtrialbecauseofthesenewsitemsisaccepteditwouldcauseaspirationontheJudgebeingnotneutral.Press
reportornoreports,thechargetobeframedhastobebasedonthebasisofthematerialavailableonrecord.

Thechargecannotbeframedonextraneouscircumstancesorfactsdehorsthematerialavailableonrecord.WhileframingthechargetheCourtwillfromprima
facieviewonthebasisofthematerialavailableonrecord.Tomymind,theapprehensionofthepetitionerthathewouldnotgetfairtrialisperfunctoryand
withoutfoundation.Noneofthenewsitems,ifreadintheproperprospectiveasawhole,leadtotheconclusionthatthereisanyinterferenceinthe
administrationofjusticeorinanywayhasloweredtheauthorityoftheCourt.TheTrialCourthasrightlyobservedthatafterthechargesheethasbeenfiled,if
thePress,revealedthecontentsofthechargesheetitbyitselfbynostretchofimaginationamountstointerferenceintheadministrationofjustice.

Eveninhighlysensitivecases,thesessiontrialhasbeenconductedbythecourtsofSessionswithoutfearorfavourforexampletocountfewcaseswhich
arecommonlyknownasBillaRangacase,BabaNirankar,SudhaGuptaandofShaliniMalhotra.Onecannotgagthepress.

TheIndiancourtshaveemergedasthemostpowerfulcourtsintheworldwithvirtuallynoaccountability.Buteveryinstitutioneventhecourtscangowrong.
Everyinstitutionincludingthejudiciaryhasitsshareofblacksheepandcorruptjudges.Thejudiciaryarepeopledbyjudgeswhoarehuman,andbeinghuman
theyareoccasionallymotivatedbyconsiderationsotherthananobjectiveviewoflawandjustice.Itwouldbefoolhardytocontendthatnoneofthem,atleast
someofthem,atleastsometimesaremotivatedbyconsiderationsoftheirownpersonalideology,affiliations,predilections,biasesandindeedevenby
nepotisticandcorruptconsiderations.

Instiflingallcriticismbythethreatenedexerciseofthepowerofcontempt,theissueinademocraticsocietyisultimatelyoneoftheaccountabilityofthe
judiciaryitself.Inordertostiflefreespeechandcommentsonthecourt,evenanoccasionalexerciseofthispowerisenoughtodetermostpersonsform
sayinganythingthatmightannoytheirLordships.PerhapsthemostimportantreasonforthelackofreformsinthejudiciaryisthereluctanceofthePressto
writeaboutanddiscussthestateofaffairswithinitforfearofcontempt.

InSaibalKumarGuptaandOrs.v.B.K.SenandAnr[21].ItwasheldbytheSupremeCourtthat:
Nodoubtitwouldbemischievousforanewspapertosystematicallyconductanindependentinvestigationintoacrimeforwhichamanhasbeenarrestedand
topublishtheresultsofthatinvestigation.Thisisbecausetrialbynewspapers,whenatrialbyoneoftheregulartribunalsofthecountryisgoingon,mustbe
prevented.Thebasisforthisviewisthatsuchactiononthepartofanewspapertendstointerferewiththecourseofjusticewhethertheinvestigationtendsto
prejudicetheaccusedortheprosecution.Thereisnocomparisonbetweenatrialbyanewspaperandwhathashappenedinthiscase.

TheInsAndOutsofMediaTrialEnglishView
Highprofilecivillitigationisnotjustdecidedinthecourtsitalsoisdecidedinthecourtofpublicopinion.Courtsandlegalcommentatorsareincreasingly
recognizingthatthemedia,throughthewayitcoverslitigation,hasaveryrealimpactontheresolutionofindividuallawsuits.Commonsensedictatesthatitis
withinalawyer'srole,therefore,toworkwithreportersontheirstoriestoensureaccuratereporting.Manydefenceattorneysinhighprofilecases,though,flinch
attheideaofsayinganythingtoreportersoutofconcernthatsuchconversationscouldbemisconstruedasanattempttoaffectthejurypoolorpersuadea
judgeorjury.Forthisreason,rulesandbeliefshavedevelopedastohowlawyersmayappropriatelyengagethemediatomitigateitsimpactontheirclients.
[22]

ProPlaintiffMediaBias

http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l237TrialByMedia.html

3/6

10/29/2016

TrialByMedia:ALegalDilemmaResolvedWithReferenceToJessicaLal
Litigationinvolvingwellknowncompaniesorindividualsalwayshasgrabbedtheattentionofthenewsmedia,especiallywhenitinvolvessensationalcharges.
Themagnitudeofthecoverageandthefilterthroughwhichthemediareportsonlitigationcancreateaclearplaintiffbiasincivilcases.Whilesmall
companiescanfindthemselvesunderthemediaspotlightinaparticularlynovelorbetthecompanysuit,themediatendstofocusonallegationsagainst
establishedandrespectedcorporatedefendants.Theselargercompaniestendtohavehouseholdnames,andallegationsagainstthemcanmakegoodcopy
eveniftheallegationsareseeminglyspurious,commonplaceorunproven.Thesameistrueforlitigationinvolvingcelebritydefendants.[23]

Incoveringlitigation,particularlycorporatelitigation,themediahasaninherentbiasthatfavoursplaintiffs.Whenchargesaremadepublic,themedia
automaticallyrevertstothebasicelementsofstorytellingandcaststhelawsuitintraditionalprotagonistantagonistterms.Thedefendant,simplybybeingon
thewrongsideofthev,becomesthe"villain"totheplaintiff'svictim,whetherornottheactualchargeshaveanyfactualbasisorlegalmerit.Reports
frequentlyleadwiththeplaintiff'sinjuryorallegationsandonlyincludethecorporatepositionasaresponse.Thesestoriesrarelyarecounterbalancedby
positivestoriesaboutthedefendingcompany.Becausecompanieswouldrathernotdrawattentiontoanylitigation,theyusuallydonotseekpublicityfortheir
victories.Eveniftheydid,reportersoftendonotseecorporatelitigationvictoriesasparticularlynewsworthy.GoliathissupposedtobeatDavidthatisnot
news.[24]

TheNatureofBiasinHighPublicityCases
Alargerissueisthecomplexnatureofjurorbiasandhowthatbiaspredisposesajurortowardonesideinacase.Itisnosecretthatweallhavebiases.The
difficultycomesfromunderstandinghowthosebiasesmayultimatelyaffecttheviewingofevidenceandthedeliberationsinacase.Becausetheramifications
andremediesofthisissuearefarreaching,thecourtshaveelectedtotaketheIinstructyounottobebiasedapproach.Asaresult,thecourtcanattemptto
rehabilitateanyjurorwhoexpressesbiasbyappealingtohisorherfearorbyappealingtothejuror'sinherentsenseoffairness(Don'tyouthinkyoucouldset
asidethoseinitialimpressionsandonlyconsiderevidencefromthewitnessstand?).Rareisthejurorwhowouldnotbeintimidatedbyanadmonishmentfrom
thecourtorwhodoesnotthinkofhimselforherselfasafairandunbiasedperson.Infact,mostjurorsstrugglemightilyagainsttheirinitialimpressions.

Severalissuesmakeitmoredifficultforjurorsinhighpublicitycases:
Jurorswanttoappearfairandunbiasedinfrontofthecourtandthepress.
Jurorswanttositonsensationaltrials.
Jurorshaveahardtimedistinguishingbetweenimpressionsformedbypretrialpublicityandimpressionsformedincourt.
Jurorsmostlydonotunderstandoracknowledgetheirownbiases.
Jurorsthemselvessometimesdonotknowthestrengthoftheirimpressionsandopinions.
Wheninahighconflictsituation,suchasjurordeliberations,jurorsreverttotheirinitialimpressions,experiences,andopinions.
Thecourtsmakeitrelativelyeasytoconcealornotrevealaconsciousorunconsciousbias.

TheseissueswerehighlightedinMr.Simpson'sciviltrial.Despitehavingstatednumeroustimesintheirquestionnairesthattheybelievedhimtohavebeen
guiltyatvarioustimesduringthepresentationofthecriminaltrial,morethan30%ofthesejurorswerenotexcusedforcausebecausetheystatedthatthey
werewillingtoputtheiropinionsandimpressionsasideinthecivilcase.

TheAdditionalPressureonJudgesinHighPublicityTrials
Themediacreateaseriesofunconsciouspressuresonajurorinahighprofiletrial.Jurorsknowthattheyarebeingwatchedbytheworld.Theyarenotonly
makingadecisionforthemselves,buttheyaremakingastatementfortheirfamily,coworkers,community,andsocietyasawhole.Thiselevatestheirverdict
toalevelbeyondtheevidence.IninterviewingjurorsafterthetrialofHollywoodmadamHeidiFleiss,manyjurorsexpressedhowtheyhopedthatthepolice
wouldusetheirresourcesmorewiselythantoprosecutevictimlesscrimes.WhentalkingaboutthetestimonyofDr.IrwinGolden,whowasthecoronerinthe
Simpsoncase,jurorMarshaRubinJacksonsaid:
ButitcomestothepointinthisparticularcasewhereDr.Goldenhasmadethirtyerrors.Now,youcan'ttellmethismanhasnotmadeerrorsonprevious
autopsies...Butthisjusthappenedtobeacasethatcametothecourtasa'highprofile'caseandtheproblemswerebroughttoeveryone'sattention.[25]

Conclusion
Fromtheaboveaccountitbecomesclearthatthemediahadamorenegativeinfluenceratherthanapositiveeffect(exceptforafewexceptionshereand
there).Themediahastobeproperlyregulatedbythecourts.Themediacannotbegrantedafreehandinthecourtproceedingsastheyarenotsomesporting
event.ThelawcommissionalsohascomeupwithareportonTrialbyMedia:FreeSpeechvs.FairTrialunderCriminalProcedure(Amendmentstothe
ContemptofCourtAct,1971)[Reportnumber200preparedin2006].ThereportisstillpendingintheParliamentassuchtheresearchercouldnotgetacopy
ofthereport.ItwillbeavailabletothepubliconceitispresentedintheParliament.

Themostsuitablewaytoregulatethemediawillbetoexercisethecontemptjurisdictionofthecourttopunishthosewhoviolatethebasiccodeofconduct.
TheuseofcontemptpowersagainstthemediachannelsandnewspapersbycourtshavebeenapprovedbytheSupremeCourtinanumberofcasesashas
beenpointedoutearlier.Themediacannotbeallowedfreedomofspeechandexpressiontoanextentastoprejudicethetrialitself.

WhatlessonsdoestheJessicaLalfiascoteachus?Thereisdefinitelyacaseforintensifyingeffortstoupgradethequalityofpolicing.Thereisatthesame
timeaneedtoimprovejudicialperformance.Forinstance,theJessicatrialtooknearlysevenyearstogetcompleted.Hardlyanyonehascommentedonthis.
WillitbeunreasonabletodemandthatthisshouldbetakenupbytheDelhiHighCourtasakindofcasestudytofindoutwhytherewassuchdelay?The
publicwouldliketosatisfythemselvesthatthefailurewasnotbecauseofjudiciallethargy,butratherbecauseofseveralextraneousfactorssuchaspolice
indifferenceandwantondelayingtacticsonthepartofthedefence.Thecurrentpopularperceptionisthatjudicialaccountabilityisanunrealisabledream.Itis
forthejudiciarytoprovethisperceptionwrong.

TheaboveanalysisrevealsusthegravityofthesituationasitpersistsinIndia.AnidealproposalwillbethattheIndianpressandtheIndianpeoplearenotat
presentdemocraticenoughtoallowthepresstointrudeinthejudicialprocess.Whatwillanidealpropositionistonotallowingthemediatrialatthismoment.
Itsdefinitelyanidealpropositiontoallowcontrolledmediareportingofthecasesoncethemediaissupposedtocomeoutoftheprofitandsensational
considerations.Themediahastoplaytheroleofafacilitatorratherthantiltingthescalesinfavourofoneortheotherparty.

Endnotes

http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l237TrialByMedia.html

4/6

10/29/2016

TrialByMedia:ALegalDilemmaResolvedWithReferenceToJessicaLal
[1]KapilSibal,TheHindustanTimes,NewDelhi,May42001.
[2]TheStateofBombayv.:P.,AIR1959Bom182.
[3]FRONTLINE.Volume23Issue05::Mar.1124,2006.
[4]Thetrialcourtjudgmentwaspassedon21stFebruary2006(S.L.BHAYANA)Addl.SessionsJudge,NewDelhi.
[5]CentralForensicScienceLaboratory.
[6]Sifynewswebsite.
[7]Mar25,2006,http://www.tehelka.com/story_main17.asp?filename=Ne032506_Is_there_CS.asp
[8]http://www.businessworld.in/APR1706/web_exclusive05.asp
[9]AnilDharker,Anabortionofjustice,Sunday,March05,2006,http://sakshijuneja.com/blog/2006/02/22/jessicalalcasejusticenotserved/
[10]Section2(b)
[11]Section2(a)
[12]AIR1943lah329(FB).
[13]SubhashChandrav.S.M.Agarwal,1984CriLJ481(Del).
[14]Dmv.MAHamidAliGardish,AIR1940Oudh137.
[15]AIR1975AP30.
[16]Cooperv.People(1889)6LawyersReportAnnotated430(B).
[17]LeoRoyFreyVs.R.PrasadandOrs,AIR1958P&H377.
[18]AIR1970SC1821.
[19]Para8.
[20]1996CriLJ3944.
[21]AIR1961SC633.
[22]StevenB.Hantler,etal.,ExtendingThePrivilegeToLitigationCommunicationsSpecialistsInTheAgeOfTrialByMedia,13CommLawConspectus7
CommLawConspectus2004.
[23]See,e.g.,PaulPringle,HushHushHighProfileCases:DomeofSilenceCapsCelebrityCasesAuthorities:It'sinDefendants'BestInterests,L.A.TIMES,
Mar.22,2004,atA1(citingalawyerassaying,Thereseemstobeaninsatiableappetiteforthesetrials.).
[24]Asjustoneexample,aWestlawsearchshowsthatwhenajuryreturnedaverdictfor$58.5milliondollarsagainstChryslerinDebbsv.ChryslerCorp.in
1999,manyofthenation'sdailynewspaperscoveredtheverdictandtheallegations.WhenaPennsylvaniaappellatecourtoverturnedthatverdictinOctober
2002,thedecisionreceivedscantcoverage,whichwasmostlycontainedtolegaltradepublications.810A.2d137(Pa.Super.Ct.2002).
[25]ArmandaCooleyetal.,MadamForeman:ARushtoJudgment?162(DoveBooks1995).
Theauthorcanbereachedat:nalsar_himanshu@legalserviceindia.com/PrintThisArticle
LawyersSearch
Findalawyer

FileMutualConsentDivorce

CopyrightRegistrationOnline

Knowyourlegaloptions

RightAway

RightfromyourDesktop...

Informationaboutyourlegalissues CallusatPhno:9650499965

*CallusatPhno:9891244487

26Comments

Sortby Oldest

Addacomment...

MouGanguliJesusAndMaryCollege
Veryinformative
LikeReply

5Apr7,201312:47am

ToyoJimmyUniversityofUyo
Elucidatingmaxims...
LikeReply

1Apr25,20138:04am

Load10morecomments

FacebookCommentsPlugin

LegalAdvice

YourNameYourEmail

GetlegaladvicefromHighlyqualifiedlawyerswithin48hrs.

GetmoreInfo

withcompletesolution.
lawyersinDelhi

lawyersinMumbai

lawyersinKolkata

lawyersinChandigarh

lawyersinPune

lawyersinJanjgir

LawyersinIndiaSearchbyCity

lawyersinAllahabad

lawyersinNagpur

lawyersinRajkot

lawyersinChennai

lawyersinDhaka
lawyersinDubai

lawyersinLucknow

lawyersinAhmedabad

lawyersinIndore

lawyersinBangalore

lawyersinJodhpur

lawyersinSurat

Gurgaonlawyers

lawyersinHyderabad

lawyersinLondon

lawyersinJaipur

Faridabadlawyers

Ghaziabadlawyers

lawyersinCochin

lawyersinNewYork

lawyersinGuwahati

lawyersinAgra

lawyersinToronto
lawyersinSydney

lawyersinNewDelhi

Noidalawyers

lawyersinNashik

lawyersinDimapur

Protectyourwebsite

lawyersinSiliguri

Contractlaws

TrademarkRegistrationinIndia

LawColleges

LawyersinAuckland

lawyersinLosAngeles

CauseLists

Wills

http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l237TrialByMedia.html

5/6

10/29/2016

TrialByMedia:ALegalDilemmaResolvedWithReferenceToJessicaLal

Protectyourwebsite

Womanissues

LegalProfession

ImmigrationLaw

Chequebouncelaws

Armylaw

FamousTrials

TransferofPetition

MedicoLegal

LokAdalat,legalAidandPIL

AboutUs|Privacy|Termsofuse|JuvenileLaws|Divorcebymutualconsent|Lawyers|Submitarticle|LawyersRegistration|Sitemap|ContactUs

legalServiceIndia.comisCopyrightedundertheRegistrarofCopyrightAct(GovtofIndia)20002015
ISBNNo:9788192851006

http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l237TrialByMedia.html

6/6