Distracting America? Why are court cases publicized before the verdict anyway?

In a world in which information is obtained in a blink of an eye, you have to wonder to yourself, why would every minute of coverage be on major news networks? Are we trying to take the court proceeding from a circus atmosphere to a major televised gameshow atmosphere?

How can justice truly be obtained when the players in this judicial game know their every word and opinion will be told to the masses, people change what they say when in front of others, they do not react the same as they would have when in private, sometimes this even sways the legal and illegal actions of one.

So please explain to me, why we have such important moments in people's lives, as public as judge Judy, Jerry Springer and really seems to only help out CNN and the players of the court game when they are interviewed afterwards.

Not to mention, the court players if their opinion isn't liked will have to hide the rest of her life. What is wrong with this mentality?

Does the public goto law school? Does the public get a jury slip? Does the public get to sway a court case?
Then why is something that is so important to two families on display for the world to see and talk about, we don't know everything so why do we get the right to an opinion, when you cannot obtain all the facts, to come to an opinion on a matter is to be IGNORANT.

I could care less how this current talked about court case went, you know? It's not for me to be concerned about, unless I was a Juror, a judge, a lawyer, or a friend / family member of persons involved.

I want to know why one man can be labeled to the Whole Country as he pretty much was just tossed to public as a piece of meat, as if the court case meant nothing at all.

If a issue happened between two people which was mostly in private, how can making that public, be any amount of good? Since the public is naturally going to be torn? It's almost as if whomever made this public knew it was going to cause a distraction. So we wouldn't talk about Egypt? Syria? Our own Government?

To me, This is gross Injustice.

Because it moves papers and boosts ratings so advertising spots can be sold.

So and so was arrested for blah blah! OMG front page news!!!

Six months later in a size 10 font blurb in the bottom corner of page 9 we read So and so was acquitted.

There's a reason most people asked still believe Richard Jewell was the Olympic bomber.

Shifting our focus. Steering societies consciousness. It is not a conspiracy, it is just a natural part of controlling society today. It's implied in most textbooks and taught in school if you paid attention in Government/Econ. At least our teacher in high school addressed this issue. A necessary part of deception used by all governments around the world as far as I can tell. No Conspiracy, just reality.

Media is part of this whole society government connection. It is more like a triad, where each part steers consciousness of the citizens.

I feel sorry for celebs and such who get accused of rape or something that will damage their career and the media instantly plaster it all over the news and 9/10 blow things way out of proportion just to get a high view rating they should keep these things quite until they have actually been found guilty.

Many people want to be entertained and told what to think nowadays it seems. They don’t want to think for themselves as that is stressful. They may see their own lives as pitiful and not measuring up to their own subconscious standards. People have committed suicide after doing this.

It’s hard to look at their life and honestly see how messed up it is and how they made it that way. So they find a scapegoat most times. Someone else to blame. And they often like to watch others who they think are more messed up then they are so they vindicate their existence.

They succumb to their base emotions rather than face facts.

Originally posted by rickymouse
Shifting our focus. Steering societies consciousness. It is not a conspiracy, it is just a natural part of controlling society today. It's implied in most textbooks and taught in school if you paid attention in Government/Econ. At least our teacher in high school addressed this issue. A necessary part of deception used by all governments around the world as far as I can tell. No Conspiracy, just reality.

Media is part of this whole society government connection. It is more like a triad, where each part steers consciousness of the citizens.

edit on 16-7-2013 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)

I cannot, and will not live in society that works this way, that is underminded, it's snide, it's a dictatorship.
What you mention here is a conspiracy and the aspect that you don't view it as a conspiracy is yet another conspiracy in itself.

The moment the government tries to sway it's people to think a certain way is the day we have went from being America " land of the free " to being a prison. Who get's to tell the public what to think anyways? I forgot to read that memo where a group of people felt they were better than everyone else to tell us all how to think and who to hate and who to be in love with, and what to name my kids.

Oh we haven't gotten that far yet? Might as well if you need to be told what to think, just go dig a hole and live in it, you'll be as much a valued contributor to this great place of residence.


We are a people who create this government, this government works for US, we are supposed to vote them in, not money and favors votes them in, and will be changed as long as people like myself ( there are thousands if not millions ) keep pushing, keep talking, keep walking, keep being true to our ideals and morals.

We will let freedom ring.

I have been trying for over ten years to get my "representatives" to author a bill that makes it illegal to report anything about criminal cases, including arrests, until it is decided in court. It's insane that the media is allowed to use the court system as their own sick form of entertainment. No luck so far, but I keep on trying.

Originally posted by TKDRL
I have been trying for over ten years to get my "representatives" to author a bill that makes it illegal to report anything about criminal cases, including arrests, until it is decided in court. It's insane that the media is allowed to use the court system as their own sick form of entertainment. No luck so far, but I keep on trying.

And some day, when people wake up from this intellectual nightmare, we'll do just that.

This is what im wondering.

In UK there are extremly strict media rules reguarding Crown Court cases. They are open to the public but you cant have recodring devices in and the media cant make biased comments....well in theroy they cant but sometimes they do

It not about restricting freedom of speach but protecting the right to a fair trial.


I know in the USA you have the 1st Amendment which is great but when it starts to infringe on the 6th amendment you may need to hold the media back. A good fair balance needs to be set.

reply to post by crazyewok


From what I'm seeing in general and the lack of responses here, people have just grown dumb, or complacent. I really could care less if they come on here and post how dare you call me dumb for not posting on your lil thread. And it's that principal of thought is why we are a horrid society, a " gimmie, gimmie, mine, mine, where is my part society.

People just seem to not care, freedom of speech isn't part of telling others about a private matter yet to be resolved that's trying to sway a vote based on public pressure.

Why does PUBLIC PRESSURE get to sway the COURT CASES?

On the one hand I am completely aware of the social engineering and media manipulation inherent in these high profile news stories - high profile trials included. However when it all is said and done? This is a culture whose God is supply and demand. Media follows this dictum very religiously... they give us what we want. They watch ratings like a hawk and will adjust what isn't working on a moments notice ( Get attached to any new shows lately that just *disappeared* without fanfare or warning? It is because of the ratings. If it's not a smash hit on night one it is likely to fall by the wayside ). They feed us exactly what we wish to be fed... they just work their own agendas ( and the agendas of Governments, advertisers, etc ) into the mix.

Therefore the direct answer to your OP question is: Because it's what we want. Because these stories sell.

While I am utterly disgusted by the sideshow nature that has so permeated the judicial system in this country, I do find one thought much more disturbing than fearing that one day a nation might be voyeurs to a trial I might be part of...

The idea that one day I might end up in a trial that nobody knows about at all.

As ugly as it is... some things are much better left out in the open.

Originally posted by Tranceopticalinclined
Why doesn't PUBLIC PRESSURE get to sway the COURT CASES?

Because the public doesn't receive the details of the case that the courtroom receives. As such, the courts shuold be independant of what public pressure says, because the facts of the case are what matters, not what people think the facts of the case are.

Are we to go back to the mob mentality that caused women to be burned at the stake for witchcraft?

We are better than that.

Originally posted by TLomon

Originally posted by Tranceopticalinclined
Why doesn't PUBLIC PRESSURE get to sway the COURT CASES?

Because the public doesn't receive the details of the case that the courtroom receives. As such, the courts shuold be independant of what public pressure says, because the facts of the case are what matters, not what people think the facts of the case are.

Are we to go back to the mob mentality that caused women to be burned at the stake for witchcraft?

We are better than that.

It was a typo on my part, I am asking why does public pressure get to sway opinion of court cases, it sways it in the after math, can almost turn what should be into what won't ever happen again.

Many court cases of the Little man against the big company are private, but the one's that are between two private citizens seems to go on air like a gladiator tournament. It's sick, and going to lead groups of people to take matters into their own hands.

We are creating the new terrorists, ( if you think the American created Middle eastern groups were bad ) we are forming the people's mindsets now, through the injustice of government now.

you now they used to behead and lynch people in the public square and put them in stocks, now they lynch them in the court of public opinion

The ultimate Reality TV Baby...next thing will be voting to decide the fate of the accused!!!

reply to post by whatnext21


With that same aspect, we'll of voted for the future of bloodshed and terrorism, since these ideals and morals cannot keep guiding civilized actions.

Our failure to organize and breed equality will just give rise to civil disobedience, haven't any of you paid any attention elsewhere?

You can call the American people dumb all we want, but not everyone is, and sooner or later boiling points will take place, is this the country we want?

reply to post by Tranceopticalinclined


Oh, we can think whatever you want here in America. It is only when you say what you think, if it does not fit into the desired way it is, that they come down on you. The old saying that you cannot fight city hall applies, a saying I was told when I was young. It hasn't changed at all over the last say seventy years, it just has a different twist to it than it had before. The problem now is that there is again a renewed player in town trying to seize power, it is called Wall Street. We are in a time of risk again, something that we experienced before and the same outcome is bound to happen, but this time worldwide. Maybe the banks will be our new government Who knows what will happen, my name is Rickymouse, not who.

Why are court cases publicized before the verdict anyway?

Well... it does help to have transparency. An informed public can prevent some of the things being leveled at this trial. Unfortunately, we haven't changed a lot from the days of white mob scenes and lynchings except in complexion.

People need to know about what's going on. This assures honesty but it also depends on the press... today's mainscream media, to approach it honestly... which they still don't.

The result is the same; a mob is still there.

Originally posted by redoubt


Well... it does help to have transparency. An informed public can prevent some of the things being leveled at this trial. Unfortunately, we haven't changed a lot from the days of white mob scenes and lynchings except in complexion.

People need to know about what's going on. This assures honesty but it also depends on the press... today's mainscream media, to approach it honestly... which they still don't.

The result is the same; a mob is still there.

But surely the UK take is better. Allow the public into courts allow the media in to take notes but ban any video recordings and forbid the media for makeing biased comments until after a verdict is in.

Its all transparent as notes are taken and avalible and the public are allowed in to watch. But its more balanced and does not allow the freedom of press to infringe on the right to a fair trial.

I think in the USA the 1st Amendment is conflicting badly with you 6th and a balance needs to be struck.

The problem is we don't allow transparency.
I'd of believed that to be what is happening now, if we televised ALL COURT CASES!.

But we do not, did we televised the Boston Bomber Court case as much as this one or the ones before? Did we see the Fracking issues in the news, on CNN everyday? That would of gotten a lot of ratings too since people's water from their taps could be set on fire with a lighter. I'll speak for those who cannot still this day because of a NDA.

FRACKING, EGYPT, SYRIA, AFRICA, SNOWDEN, BP CORRUPTION of the GULF, Media dictatorship, these issues along with others are just talked about until they cannot be anymore for fear they will harm capital supporters.

We seem to only see certain court cases televised, like someone get's to choose what cases get transparency, which spells to me someone even more sinister is going on.

I don't think you can properly be a jury if you are so for a public trial that is ongoingly public while you are judging the fate of a case. How is that any different than having to decide a president of the USA while having to also disclose who everyone voted for? Minds are changed based solely on the fact others will know who made what decision eventually and even a perceived thought of that will have the same effect.