Last week, I stumbled into a journal article from the mid 1990s that felt timely considering the 24/7 media circus around the alleged United Healthcare CEO shooter, Luigi Mangione.
“Can There Be a Fair Trial When the Press and the Prosecutor Join Hands?”
It was written during the OJ Simpson trial, and explores the constitutional implications of a jury trial in the middle of a media frenzy. Many cases have fallen victim to media interference and torn entire lives apart: JonBenet Ramsey, Scott Peterson, Amanda Knox.
Though the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution secures the right to a fair trial, there’s a twenty-first century hitch that has never been addressed. The Framers of the Constitution intended for the Constitution to be a living document; one that could be updated in the event that something came up that they hadn’t thought of.
A twenty-four hour news-cycle and non-stop social media posts are most definitely things they had no way of foreseeing, let alone prepare for in advance.
Having said all of that, I will now answer your burning question.
Will Luigi Mangione Receive a Fair Trial?
Absolutely not.
Innocent until proven guilty is a myth. The court of public opinion doesn’t wait for all of the facts; it sops up what it’s been told.
Admittedly, I was once part of the problem, too. I used to LOVE true crime; I still thank Ann Rule for making me part of who I am today, in fact.
But considering the media circus around trials in our current landscape? When press releases are waved around like badges of honor before someone is even given their day in court? Absolutely not. It’s unacceptable.
Nope, true crime as it is today, is no longer for me. But I will happily revisit Ann’s work any day.
Why Does it Matter?
For the record, I do NOT condone what happened to the United Healthcare CEO whatsoever.
Nor do I condone the horrific behavior of United Healthcare for denying autism care to qualified subscribers or any of the other awful games insurance companies play.
Neither of those things are on the table. This post is about the state of our criminal justice system.
Access to fair trials matter because the way the government treats one citizen means that they can get away with doing it to another citizen, until more and more rights and protections slip away. The more court cases swing in a particular way means they help set precedence and case law.
Qualified Immunity protects elected officials, meaning if they are wrong, and they know they’re wrong but do it anyway, there are ZERO consequences for their behavior.
It’s up to the public to recognize this and question the information put before them for consumption; especially who is gaining what in the exchange.
In Closing
There’s a lot of reform that needs to happen. This is sadly just one more thing; more fuel to the dumpster fire.
But then again I suppose it’s a lot like the rest of the criminal justice system today: it doesn’t work at all the way the public thinks it does.
To me, there are ethical boundaries being crossed.
Crime is not entertaining and neither is what the criminal justice system does to people who go through it.
