The Effects of Pretrial Publicity on Juror Verdicts: A Meta-Analytic Review

This article is an ideal read for anyone who only has time to read one article that gives the big picture related to pre-trial publicity (PTP). Steblay et al.’s meta-analysis examines the variety of studies which have looked at PTP and related variables and factors. It seems that there is a variety of issues related to PTP that essentially can be likened to the concept of estimator variables espoused by Wells (1978). Many of the PTP effects seem out of the control of the CJS, primarily because they are controlled by the media and what the media at large decides to make available to the public via various modalities. Furthermore, it seems very unlikely, especially given our current society’s seemingly out of control addiction to television, that the effects of PTP will be mitigated to a level necessary so as to not affect certain decision processes of the would-be jury members of particular cases. I do not mean to cast a shroud of negativity on the issue, but if we look at the problem realistically, the current system of electing a jury of one’s peers from the cities and counties in the country is not likely to change. Thus, potential jurors are we all. Unless the media decided to not broadcast certain types of information about upcoming trials and court cases then the PTP effects will remain firmly in place. I’m not saying don’t share the news and what is going on with members of society, but perhaps there should be some restrictions on how much detail the media goes into, regulated by themselves, regarding upcoming trials and court cases. To show a character witness or family member of the victim on a television program being interviewed prior to the trial increases the probability of a guilty verdict, via influence on decision processes of the would-be juror, from the moment a potential lay juror encodes that information.
DJP