Prof. Randolph McLaughlin publishes op-ed on the roles of the media and juries in two high-profile cases this summer

Prof. Randolph McLaughlin has published an op-ed in the Journal News about two high-profile criminal cases this summer. He contrasts the murder case of Casey Anthony–in which, despite round-the-clock media coverage, the jury “dispassionately rendered a verdict based on the law and the Constitution, not on their emotions or feelings about Anthony’s behavior”– with the sexual assault case against former IMF Chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn, which appears to be crumbling as questions have arisen about the accuser’s credibility.

In the Strauss-Kahn case, McLaughlin writes, “There is now talk that the prosecution will offer him a deal or outright dismissal of the charges. Where is the outrage? If the forensic and other evidence supported the prosecution of Strauss-Kahn, then should we not allow a jury to decide his fate — as we did in Casey Anthony’s case?”

He concludes: “These two cases stand in stark contrast. While in the case of Anthony the legal system worked as it was intended: A jury of her peers heard the evidence and decided the case based on the law and the constitution. In the case of Strauss-Kahn, it appears that the justice system will be high-jacked because a prosecutor is afraid to put his proof to the test of the jury and will allow an alleged victim’s complaint to go unanswered.”

Read the whole piece here.

You may also like...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Skip to toolbar