THE OPRI OPINION

In The Eyes Of The Media

February 1, 2005
by Debra Opri - Attorney and Legal Analyst

It seems the newspapers and media have discovered the new reality show, 'People on Trial." Not that there actually exists a new reality show by that title, but looking at what sells today, it's clear that people on trial, whether it's a fertilizer salesman named Scott Peterson, or a super celebrity, Michael Jackson, bring in those ratings. People keep watching. A real life 'whodunit.'

Trials have taken on a life of their own these days before they even start. In Santa Maria, Michael Jackson's trial is only in the jury selection stages; no opening statements yet, however, the media has already given it's opening statements, presented evidence and ruled upon Michael's guilt. Say what you will, but when I hear media 'attorneys' proclaim they will not 'presume Michael Jackson innocent,' we have a problem. I have heard these comments and it is disturbing.

We, as attorneys in the media, have an extra special dilemma. We must, as attorneys, and as officers of the Court, respect and advance the proclamations of the Constitution. In this instance, we are required under the Constitution to presume Michael Jackson innocent until he is proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of his peers. We must also do everything to ensure his right to a fair trial. As attorneys also acting as media 'analysts,' we are also expected to present 'great television' that is 'entertaining,' and that which 'keeps the audience watching.' There is, however, a conflict of interest.

While I appreciate hearing from fellow legal pundits that it's a mistake not to attack Michael Jackson, since everything being leaked is against him anyway, I am never forgetful of my duties as an attorney. I think it's important to carry these duties over to the media analysis we, as attorneys, offer on television. Most importantly, we, as attorneys, must constantly remind the viewing public that, irrespective of what is being discussed, and what the 'angle' is, the individual on trial is innocent until proven guilty and that he, or she, is entitled to a fair trial. We are required to do this.

Unfortunately, the media oftentimes does not advance these particular Constitutional rights. Ever protective of their First Amendment privileges, they often tread on the truth and ignore their responsibilities to check their sources [does Dan Rather and the CBS fiasco over President Bush's service record ring a bell?]. More interesting is the notion that a decision can be made as to the guilt or innocence of an individual based upon little more than one's reputation and the media 'information' gained under the First Amendment umbrella of protection and secrecy. Oftentimes, this information is slanted, unchallenged, and irresponsibly sought.

While I am supportive of those First Amendment rights of the media, I strongly urge those legal pundits in the media to voice their support of the Constitutional rights of the accused that they cover.

In this instance, while I do not know whether a jury will convict Michael Jackson, once the evidence is presented in a court of law, I do know that it is the jury in that courtroom and not a jury of the viewing public, that must decide this question. While many in the media call me naive, I feel that one's belief in the basic values of the Constitution is not naive but necessary. I also believe that a profound belief in these rights and a steadfast refusal to set them aside for the media's quest for good entertainment, is my responsibility as an attorney.

Debra Opri is an attorney and legal analyst. Ms. Opri can be seen on all the major broadcasting networks discussing a wide variety issues involving legal challenges facing the nation.

Click here to review
Archived Opinions.

Click here to view The
Opri Opinion promo reel.