Recently there has been much debate on whether defendants can receive a fair trial in high-profile cases. It is now a matter of course that trials involving celebrities or public figures such as Oscar Pistorius, or the infamous OJ Simpson prosecution will attract public interest. However other crimes and cases grip the public attention from time to time, perhaps the most famous in Australia being the Chamberlain case.
In an age of social media and 24 hour news cycles, the question of whether a defendant can have a fair trial is particularly relevant, however it is not a new one. The very first volume of The Australian Law Journal commented on a similar issue.
It is a serious matter when for the sake of increasing its sales and profits a newspaper will, by prejudicing the public mind, interfere with the trial of any person and perhaps secure the condemnation and, in the case of trials for murder, even the execution of an innocent man.
The Journal condemned the “the pernicious habit which has lately been in vogue in a section of the press of giving disgusting and gross publicity to matters relating to alleged crimes” and called for new legislation to regulate the problem.
This issue is likely to be in the courts and in the media again shortly, as Hey Dad! star Robert Hughes appeals his recent conviction on the grounds that he could not get a fair trial due to adverse media coverage.
