How Does Media Coverage Affect Sexual Assault Cases

I have a very trending topic for today. How does media coverage affect sexual assault cases. Over the years, I’ve done so many defences of sexual assault matters, and you know, a lot of these have been published in the papers and the media and the client say, how is this possible that my name is constantly in the paper, and I’ve explained the client, look, there’s freedom of the press and freedom of speech in Canada, so this is, unfortunately for you, at least allowed. Certainly, I value freedom of speech, but the client doesn’t understand, because their life’s being essentially ruined. They’re being tried in the media. And how does this affect this especially if it’s a high-profile person who’s very out in the media, it’s one. It’s one thing to have a couple articles. It’s one. Another thing to have it running in major news outlets every day of the week and on TV.  In public opinion, it’s essentially becomes a trial of public opinion, because a lot of people assume, once it’s in the media, that people are guilty. So that’s very bad for a client, of course, especially if it’s a truly innocent client. We’re all presumed innocent, but there are truly innocent people charged with sexual assault in the country too. We have to all concede, admit that this was actually miscarriages of justice, which has shown that, and I know as a defence lawyer that there are people who are falsely accused. There’s no question. There’s many, many people who are legitimately and truthfully accused. I’m sure the majority are sexual (*inaudible), but let’s not mince words. There are falsely accused people. That’s why we all have the right. Now, once it’s in the media, boy, there’s not much you can do about that, to control that, and the public’s going to think what they’re going to think, but they’re probably all going to think you’re guilty just because you’re published in the paper. Right? Some people have that thing, and others don’t. And people who know the criminal justice system know enough to keep an open mind that you can simply make it, like I could go down to the police station accuse my neighbour of an assault and be convincing and get them charged just like that based on my word. Similarly, a woman can go to the police and claimed she was raped when she wasn’t, and if she’s convinced and we’ll be charged. Now, you know, I’m sure the vast majority, high percentage, of sexual assault victims are truthful, but we’re, you know, we have our system of justice for the truly innocent, don’t we? Everyone’s presumed innocent.  Better to acquit 1000 people then then let one, you know innocent man get convicted. Let 1000 you know, guilty people, go free. That’s the nature of our justice system. So, getting back to the question at hand. You’ve got a situation now we’re, God, it’s in the media. It’s been all over the country. You’ve got a high-profile client, what do you do? Well, there’s a couple things you can do in our criminal justice system. First of all, a case like that, you can elect judge and jury or judge alone. You might want to consider a judge alone trial if that’s viable, because the jury could be tainted with bias, because they would constantly be reading about it. But certain situations cry out for a jury trial. You may want to have a jury trial anyway, but you know judges are supposed to be unbiased, and they are, for the large part. But let’s face it, we’re all human beings, and even a judge who’s been reading the media, there can be some subtle, subconscious bias. I’m sure, if I was a judge, for example, and I’ve been reading about a media about a case for a year. It has to affect you somehow psychologically deep down, although with the legal knowledge and skills that a judge has, you’re supposed to completely put that aside, and they do, by the way, but there’s always some psychological effect there, isn’t in there. There has to be. Now, with respect to the jury, what you can do on a high-profile case, if the media has been concentrated in particular city, for example, Toronto, you could apply for a change of venue on a high profile case, because you want to find a jury pool, if you’d like to judge and jury, of jurors, they’re going to be as unbiased as possible. So that’s we’ve seen cases like that recently in the paper, cases transferred from Toronto, particularly, lesser bias, less media representation. The other thing you can do, what’s done in jury trials is the judge will caution the jury about pretrial publicity, put it aside. Don’t be biased. You know, don’t believe you wouldn’t read the paper. You’ve got to put it down, your mind and be impartial. Myself, as a lawyer as well, we’ve brought applications for pretrial publicity, which is a challenge for cause, which means when you’re selecting the jury, there’s particular questions that are asked of each juror about media coverage and whether they still feel they can be impartial or unbiased. And you the judge is the trier of fact on this and will ask the questions, and depending on the juror’s reaction, they may be excused from the jury because they go, boy, I can’t put it aside, or I can put aside. But you know, let’s face it, not everyone tells the truth under oath. You can get a juror who says, oh, I can put it aside, and they’ve already maybe made a decision that your client’s guilty. That’s the big fear in these particular cases. But again, I have great faith in the jury system, and I think people ultimately, when they hear a charge from the jury, from the judge, I mean about what the law is, that most people are able to put it aside and realize, hey, the press is the press. They’re just they’re just outlining allegations; allegations have not been proven in a court and a jury system. I’m a great believer in electing judge and jury, despite pretrial publicity and despite the possibility of bias, but it’s unfortunate for a client who’s had very high publicity when you’ve got an arguably, possibly tainted jury pool, because you hope those jurors will answer truthfully when you challenge from the cause and ask, are you biased because of this prior incident? So, those are some of the things you can do. Unfortunately, it’s trial by public media. It kind of ruins your reputation, but you know, you still get a fair trial in Canada. I’m totally convinced of that, despite extensive publicity on high profile or even minor cases where the public, the media, just got a lot of attention on it. So, it’s an interesting topic. It’s a trending topic, and there’s no right or wrong answer, but we have freedom of press and public, but my God, you know, there’s people’s lives who are ruined, who the smaller percentage of men who are, say, or women who are say, truthfully, innocent. Can you imagine having your right life ruined by the media? There’s not there’s nothing they can do about it, essentially, is there.