Sheppard v. Maxwell
Summary of the case
This is a case involving Samuel Sheppard, who was accused of murdering his pregnant wife. Sheppard’s wife was bludgeoned to death, and he became the main suspect and accused of committing second-degree murder. He maintained his innocence all through the trial. However, he was found guilty and convicted. Sheppard challenged the judgment as the product of an unfair trial. According to him, the judge did not shield him from the immense, extensive, and damaging publicity that attended his prosecution. For instance, within a few weeks into the trial, the local newspapers were editorially demanding that Sam be convicted for the murder. After appealing on an Ohio district court supporting his assertion, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari when Sheppard appealed again.
Values that emanate from the decision of the case
Several values stem from the decision in the case. One such value pertains to fairness. The judges in the case put emphasis on the need to exercise fairness during trial so that the judgment does not appear prejudicial. In this case, the Supreme Court noted that much prejudicial publicity surrounded the case, and discovered that chaos had dominated the court house during the trial, and reporters took over basically the whole courtroom (Acker & Brody, 2014). There was also an instance where the telephone numbers of jurors were published in a gesture aimed at creating pressure on them to find Sheppard guilty. Other values pertain to truth and respect. According to the court, the press failed to respect Sheppard, and as such, tarnished his name through inflammatory publicity. Furthermore, the reporters advanced claims about Sheppard that were untrue, and not supported by facts or evidence.
Personal judgment of the case
I concur with the court that Sheppard did not receive a fair trial. From the beginning, he was considered guilty until proven innocent. It appears that the press was hell bent on convincing the public that Sheppard was guilty of killing his wife even if the facts proved the contrary. For instance, 3 months before the trial began, reporters examined Sheppard for over 5 hours without counsel in a televised 3-day inquiry, conducted before an audience of more than a hundred spectators at a gym. This somewhat served to influence the public to view him as a guilty person even before the trial started. Moreover, most of the press coverage entailed incriminating information that was not presented at trial. In my opinion, in as much as the constitution grants the freedom of expression, the press went too far, and as such, violated this freedom by trying to influence the public to conform to its perceptions regarding the case.
Effect of this case on current practices in mass communication
The case serves as a reminder of the need of the mass media to practice caution when exercising freedom of speech as provided by the 1st amendment of the US. Notably, the press has been given the right to publish and distribute information, opinions and thoughts without censorship and limitations. Therefore, unlike the press in Sheppard’s case that violated this freedom, current practices on mass communication can focus on publishing truthful, non-bias information that is backed by evidence.
Clause of the first amendment relevant to this case
The freedom of speech (expression) is relevant to this case. This is because the court in this case, whereas attempting to honor the press’1st amendment rights, noted the threshold point when the freedom of the press violates on the fairness o due process. The chaos-like environment at Sheppard’s trial went too far for purposes of due process.
Reference
Acker, J. R., & Brody, D. C. (2014). Criminal Procedure: A Contemporary Perspective.
Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
