Murray Trial -- Jury Shouldn't Watch Nancy Grace

[thepeacock2012]

hey guys, I don't watch her much anymore....I didn't watch quite a bit when the Casey Anthony story broke...it just pulled at my heart stings a mother that seemed to love her child...having seemed murdered her out of the blue for no reason....the whole thing just felt wierd to me still  does...any how...I'm wondering of Nancy is reporting anything on Michael's case with conrad Murray...??

[use_your_illusion]

But what side is she on...when MJ 'was' alive she was against him, and now she will be against CM...so is she just against anyone who is presumed innocent...there is NO LOGIC IN THAT, it's insane.

Anyway I though Jurors are banned from watching the media when any of it has to do with the case that they are deliberating for.

[everlastinglove_MJ]

[highlight=#80ff40:3rm4wqjd]Casey Anthony trial: Media frenzy at new heights[/highlight:3rm4wqjd]
July 6, 2011 8:20 AM

(CBS News)  Immediately after Casey Anthony was acquitted on charges she killed her two-year-old daughter, Caylee Anthony, Casey's defense attorney chided the media for presuming guilt long before the case ever went to trial.


And CBS News legal consultant Jack Ford says this was hardly the first time media coverage of a trial reached a fever pitch -- and only the latest example of justice as entertainment.


He notes that, as they had every day for the past six weeks, anxious crowds gathered outside the Orlando courthouse Tuesday morning, hoping to get in to catch a glimpse of one of the most captivating trials in recent memory.


"Once again, it was relentless media coverage that in large part fed the fascination with the case," Ford observed.


And just minutes after the not guilty verdict, defense attorney Jose Baez took a swing at the media, saying, "We have the greatest Constitution in the world, and if the media and other members of the public do not respect it, it will become meaningless."


It is, says Ford, a familiar charge, and one with a long history.


In 1935, the nation followed newsreel coverage of the first so-called "trial of the century," when a German immigrant was accused of kidnapping and murdering aviation hero Charles Lindbergh's infant son.


Media coverage was so excessive that cameras were subsequently banned from most U.S. courtrooms for decades after.


Sixty years later, it was newly-created cable news networks, hungry for compelling content, that drove coverage of the murder trial of O.J. Simpson to unprecedented levels and created a new market for celebrity courtroom drama..


In 2005, Michael Jackson was charged with child molestation. Although eventually found not guilty, the high-profile trial derailed his career for years.


And experts say the presumption of guilt is a hallmark of these media trials.


"They thought," says Jackson defense lawyer Tom Mesereau, "Simpson would be convicted. They thought Michael Jackson would be convicted, and they thought Casey Anthony would be convicted. And, in all of those cases, despite a very oppressive media, the juries, you know, followed the law, looked to the evidence and decide that the cases were not proven."


But, CBS News legal analyst Lisa Bloom says, the Anthony case had one critical difference from earlier media-heavy trials: "no celebrities. There's just an ordinary little girl who was found dead, and mother who is accused of her killing."


Still, says Ford, whatever the circumstances, the public's appetite for these types of cases, fed by ever-expanding media coverage, should only continue to grow.


Ford and criminologist Casey Jordan discussed the verdict, the hoopla surrounding the case, and the media members who covered it with "Early Show" co-anchors Chris Wragge and Erica Hill:

<!-- m -->You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login<!-- m -->

Sixty years later, it was newly-created cable news networks, hungry for compelling content, that drove coverage of the murder trial of O.J. Simpson to unprecedented levels and created a new market for celebrity courtroom drama..

And experts say the presumption of guilt is a hallmark of these media trials.
 

 <!-- s:!: -->:!:<!-- s:!: -->

[everlastinglove_MJ]

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

[liegi]

I see Michael's hand here.  We are really hearing what he has to say.

[bec]

Did you guys read the latest in regards to Casey Anthony trial? I don't know if this is necessarily posted in the right spot but... check it out... sounds SUPER familiar to what the DA did to Michael:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

According to a software designer who created the computer program used by police and prosecutors to allege that Casey Anthony had conducted a Google search of the word “chloroform” 84 times, the prosecution erred in their assertion regarding the computer search and knew they might be doing so prior to the conclusion of the Anthony trial.

The computer search was a key piece of evidence in the murder trial as the prosecution sought to prove that Anthony had carefully studied the use of chloroform to render her daughter unconscious as part of a plan to murder 2 year old Caylee Anthony.

The designer, John Bradley, is the chief software developer for Cacheback, the owner of the software program used by the Orange County Sheriff’s department to determine how many times Ms. Anthony had searched for information on the use of chloroform. Bradley also gave expert testimony with respect to the same at the trial.

Subsequent to Bradley’s testimony, during a redesign of the software program, he discovered that the program used in the investigation had erred and that, in fact, the computer had only conducted a Google search for the word 1 time leading to a website that was also visited just one time - a considerable distinction from the 84 times the prosecution alleged.

Bradley decided to commence the redesign after learning, following his testimony at trial, that police had used a different software program prior to his own and had come up with a different result – something they had failed to tell Bradley prior to his testimony and a fact that worried Mr. Bradley who realized the importance of getting it right as Ms. Anthony’s life might very well be at stake.

Bradley says that upon discovering the mistake, he immediately emailed and phoned prosecutor, Linda Drane Burdick, and Sgt. Kevin Stenger of the sheriff’s office to disclose his findings, expecting that this new piece of information would be provided to the defense.

It was not.

    “I gave the police everything they needed to present a new report,” Mr. Bradley said. “I did the work myself and copied out the entire database in a spreadsheet to make sure there was no issue of accessibility to the data.”

    Via New York Times

Under the law, prosecutors are obligated to reveal any and all information that could be relevant to the guilt of the defendant, particularly information that would be exculpatory. Failing to do so is a serious offense and, had Ms. Anthony not been found not guilty, would have likely presented grounds for a new trial.

This is deep shit... why does everything point to Michael? I'm losing my mind.

[jacilovesmichael]

Anyone else find it intersting that there are so many "Michael's" involved in this trial? The judge...the attorney... what a coincidence

And yes, Nancy Grace was one of the WORST reporters during Michael's case. No doubt she's on his shit list.

[MissG]

People search on the internet the same thing over and over to study, for example, instead of making a paper print.

From wikipedia:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

"in the United States, the case was called "one of the biggest ratings draws in recent memory" and "the social media trial of the century".[6][7] Defense counsel charged that Anthony was being tried in the media to her great detriment while she was facing the death penalty.[8] The case has been cited as an example of the unfairness of prejudicial pretrial publicity with the potential for impacting the rights of defendants in the United States"

To be honest, I had no idea about this case and imo, it can´t be compared with Michael´s case at all. Michael was known by the media and the whole world to start with. Also, when Michael´s case, they put more police to work than they do with serial killers.

As far as I understood, this woman did not report that her child was gone after one month. She may be did not kill her child, but surely neglegted the child.

[Andrea]

Anyone else find it intersting that there are so many "Michael's" involved in this trial? The judge...the attorney... what a coincidence

I noticed that too.  Michaels everywhere!...especially behind the scenes I'm sure

[fordtocarr]

I don't like the type of journalist Nancy Grace is, she could use her show for good instead of just ranting!  BUT, lately she's been doing her shows on my bosses grand baby missing, baby Kate.  This how she can do good..but, she continues to RANT!!  I'm glad the message is getting out about the baby, but I think theatrics are NOT necessary to reporting.