Presumption of Innocence is a well known cornerstone of the criminal justice system, a legal concept meant to ensure individuals accused of a crime are considered innocent until proven guilty. The intent is to protect the rights of the accused, promote fairness, and prevent actors from swaying jurors before a trial can even begin.
Sadly, in our modern age of 24/7 media and instant news cycles, the press releases issued by law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, state attorney generals, and other public officials erode this core constitutional guarantee. As I’ve mentioned before, press coverage can quickly be weaponized, intentionally used as a means to destroy a defendant’s presumption of innocence.
Here’s how.
1. Public Opinion Is Shaped Before the Trial
Press releases are crafted to garner public attention, especially when it comes to high-profile criminal cases. Law enforcement agencies and prosecutors release this information to allegedly inform the public and provide transparency of governments’ actions. However, the language used in these press releases can unintentionally (or intentionally) frame the defendant in a bad light.
Consider a press release announcing an arrest in a high-profile case, especially if the wording implies guilt before a trial even takes place.
By using heated language like “suspect,” “caught,” “the accused is believed to have committed the crime.” Using strong suggestive comments in general shapes public perception of a defendant’s culpability.
Yes, the accused may be legally presumed innocent, but they’re likely already damned in the court of public opinion. Why? These kinds of statements influence jurors, witnesses, and the general public, way before the evidence is presented.
Unfortunately, studies have already determined that the more a juror knows about a case through the press, the more likely they are to find someone guilty.
2. The Power of the Media’s Amplification
Press releases are quickly picked up by news outlets because police, prosecutors, and attorney generals maintain media lists because it’s easy, bite-sized, and ready to go. Call it lazy news coverage. The media isn’t looking into anything after it’s handed to them or are afraid of not getting access if they fail to do the bidding of a public official.
With the push of a button, one press release or email becomes media fodder. News organizations, eager to break big stories and provide the latest updates, never present the full context of a press release nor do they seek the other side’s story.
How do I know? I’ve personally reached out to multiple local news outlets here in West Michigan with documents and evidence. It fell on deaf ears.
Instead, the media will take press releases and either sensationalize or water down the information by merely regurgitating the press release’s narrative. As a result, a press release in a high-profile case can quickly spiral into widespread media coverage, affecting how the public perceives the defendant long before the trial begins. Even if the defendant is ultimately found not guilty, the damage is done. In a world where information spreads at light speed, a negative press release can stay alive and well in public consciousness and overshadow the outcome of a case.
3. The Timing and Tone of Press Releases
The timing and tone of a press release are also key factors in influencing the presumption of innocence. Press releases issued immediately after an arrest, especially when they include damning details or charges, create the immediate assumption of guilt. Even if the defendant is not yet formally charged, releasing details such as the alleged victim’s testimony, supposed evidence, or statements from law enforcement create the illusion of guilt.
There is also no possible way for press releases to reflect the true complexity of a case. More often than not, the press release will omit critical information and present a one-sided version of events that slants the public’s view of the defendant’s character or motives. This is particularly damaging if the defendant is eventually acquitted, if the case is dismissed due to lack of evidence, or if the defendant takes a plea deal just to be “done.”
The public will still view the defendant as guilty, despite the legal outcome.
4. Ethical Concerns and Fair Trial Rights
In the US, the Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to a fair trial, which includes the right to an impartial jury. However, a press release outlining evidence or details of a crime can be prejudicial, and purposely make it difficult for jurors to remain unbiased.
While the First Amendment protects the right to free speech and press, balance is key. Prosecutors, law enforcement, and even judges, have an ethical obligation to avoid making statements that could unduly influence the outcome of a trial. Press releases that violate this ethical boundary can potentially lead to a violation of the defendant’s right to a fair trial, especially when media coverage destroys the impartiality of the jury pool.
5. Long-Term Reputational Damage
Even when a press release is issued in the spirit of “transparency” or public safety, it may have long-term consequences on a defendant’s reputation. In cases of wrongful accusations or situations where the charges are later dropped, the mere fact that a press release was issued can continue to haunt the accused long after their case is concluded. A defendant’s name may be permanently associated with the crime they were accused of—even if they were never convicted—simply because of the media’s role in amplifying the message from the press release.
The rise of online news, social media platforms, and search engines means that these stories live on in the digital world, often outliving the actual legal proceedings. A press release leaves a permanent stain on an individual’s life, even if they were ultimately found innocent. This can be particularly damaging for people in the aftermath, derailing their careers and lives.
The Need for Balance Between Transparency and Fairness
Press releases play an essential role in the public’s right to know, particularly in criminal cases. However, they must be issued with caution, recognizing that the presumption of innocence is a fundamental principle that must be safeguarded. Law enforcement, prosecutors, and other authorities need to carefully consider the language and timing to protect a defendant’s right to a fair trial.
The media also bears responsibility in how it handles press releases. The Sentencing Project has released some sound guidance on how journalists can strike better balance on this front. Journalists should strive to provide balanced coverage and avoid sensationalizing the contents of a press release, especially when it involves individuals who have not yet been proven guilty in a court of law. Society must be aware of the potential consequences that a prejudicial press release can have on the reputation and future of those accused of crimes.
Ultimately, the presumption of innocence requires care from all parties involved; law enforcement, the media, and the public. It’s up to all of us to preserve fairness in the criminal justice process and prevent harm.
