Can jurors stay impartial in true crime trials after podcasts and social media?
Research shows media exposure influences how people perceive defendants, raising questions about jury impartiality in high-profile cases.
Australians follow true crime through podcasts, documentaries, social media and news articles before trial and form views before the case reaches court. The Teacher's Pet podcast about Lynette Dawson's 1982 disappearance surfaced new evidence and led to an arrest.
Public interest creates problems once cases go to trial. Jurors are told to ignore outside information and judge only trial evidence.
Research by Professor Blake McKimmie from the University of Queensland shows negative media coverage leads to more negative defendant views. The strength of trial evidence remains the biggest influence on jurors.
Research shows media exposure influences people, but less evidence exists about whether those effects survive jury deliberation.
Why it mattersIf you serve on a jury in a high-profile case, understanding how media exposure affects thinking helps you meet the impartiality requirement the law demands.
AustraliaAustralian courts rely on jury impartiality in major trials, but true crime's popularity here means jurors increasingly arrive in court having followed cases online.
✓ Claims checked against the source and corrected before publish. checked 45 min ago
Open this story in InSnip →
