Prejudice In Court Cases

Under Contempt of Court Act 1981, once cases are ‘active’, ‘anything published which creates a substantial risk that the course of justice will be seriously prejudiced or impeded will be a contempt of court’ (Legislation.gov.uk, n.d.). Prejudice can be some publication which might make the judge or jury biased to the prosecutor or the defendant. Impediment here means creating an obstruction to fair trial (Lawcom.gov.uk, n.d.). In other words, if the case becomes active, contempt affects what can be published to the public. In the practice, the pattern of publication news has changed and have prejudicial influence on the justice system (The Hindu, 2006). Media plays an important role in molding the opinion of the society. In a way, news report

It is unfair to the defendant. According to presumption of innocence, everyone charged with a criminal offence is innocent until proved guilty. The defendant should be treat equally as the victim under the law. In Yao’s case, media produce news by compare the family background of Yao and victim Zhang, using emotional words as cold-blood to describe Yao. According to Devika Singh and Shashank Singh (2015), Public naturally believe what they are told by an authoritative institution such as the press. To a large extent, public opinion is the direct response made after perceptual cognition. Out of sympathy，public are more willing to trust the victim and consider a severe sentence is necessary for the defendant. The effect of media interference is such that public judge the defendant through their own looked on to facts conveyed by the media rather than legality of the matter. Even though the defendant was acquitted after trial, it does not change the public opinion on him based on what was conveyed by media. The public still regard the accused as person who indeed commit the crime. It can cause double victimisation of the

Media, influencers and general public has a complex flow of influencing public opinion (Watts and Dodds, 2007). With the rapid development of information technology, the competition of media industry is fierce. In order to grab the headlines, the media are likely to release some unproven or false news when the news event just come out. Those news report are tendentious and lack of objectivity. It may lead to the public do not understand the actual situation and following the crowd. It is neither conducive to protect the legitimate rights of the people involved in the case, nor contribute to the smooth progress of the trail. In Yao’s case, media report involved Yao’s family background is exaggerating, his father is just an ordinary worker and his mother was already retired. However, his family background is the focus of public opinion throughout of the juvenile process, from the reception, trial process to the execution procedure. Assuming he is an ordinary person without powerful background at first, this case won’t get that much social attention. Without the pressure from public opinion, Yao may escape death penalty. Misleading guidance of public opinion imposed a substantial threat to the criminal defendant’s right to a fair