Annotated Bibliography Ariel Tix

DeBenedictis, Don J. "Gentile's Unanswered Questions." ABA Journal 79.4 (1993): 28. Criminal Justice Abstracts with Full Text. Web. 19 Feb. 2015.

The article goes over how the case may impact future cases and the decisions reached by court were a little unclear as to how the rule of 3.6 should be defined. The rule would protect attorneys giving certain information to the press. They are allowed to talk about the generalities of the case, but nothing too specific, this presents a gray area. It's hard to tell what statements can be the ones that endanger the fairness of a trial. There was talk of getting rid of the rule completely although that is unlikely.

The ABA article is not current, it was published in April of 1993. But it does contain relevant information, the case has to do with the fairness of a the court case Gentile v. State Bar of Nevada, due to media interference. The information presented could also help with finding other sources. The article was written for readers of the American Bar Association, so attorneys and those in the criminal justice system. The author is credible and has authority on the subject of criminal law, he writes for the ABA and his work reviewed by the ABA. DeBenedictis cites other articles and a court case, he is referencing credible sources, although there may be some bias in his citing his own journal. His purpose is to inform his peers of the continuing review of the court case and the implications it had, and how it may affect their practice of law.

I will probably use this source, it is dated, but I can use it to possibly tie into how the rule of 3.6 has changed over time and how the rule has set policy. The article was meant for the ABA but its pretty easy to understand, it also will be helpful because the author has credibility, his work was reviewed. This source was also helpful in finding other sources to due with the rule of 3.6.

Henton, Timothy., "Interactive Social Media: The Value for Law Enforcement" September 3, 2013. http://leb.fbi.gov/2013/september/interactive-social-media-the-value-for-law-enforcement Web. 23 Feb. 2015

The article was written by a California police officer, he advocates for the use of social media in police investigations. He believes that citizens equipped with social media could work with law enforcement to hope solve crimes. One of the benefits of the media is that they can get information out on crimes quickly and efficiently. there is a past and present section where it talks about old procedures involving the public.

The article is current enough, only two years old, and the subject discussed is very relevant today, the use of social media in police investigations. The author is a California police officer and has authority to speak on involving the press and other forms of media into investigations. The cite the page was accessed through is also reliable, the FBI database. The information seems to be accurate and credible the author is using his own views but because he has a police background they are trusted. The purpose of the article seems to be informative and to possibly persuade. He wants the advancement of social media to be helpful in police investigations.

I will probably use this source, it reads a little funny, I don't particularly like that way that it was written, and the content is a little strange he doesn't tie everything in together very well, but I found it interesting that he was advocating for more use of press and media in police investigations, even with the possible risk, which he did not address in his paper. I think its interesting that he wants more media involvement in investigations, granted that getting information in a case as soon as possible can be key to solving cases.

Jennifer L. Schulenberg. and Allison Chenier. "International Protest Events and the Hierarchy of Credibility: Media Frames Defining the Police and Protesters as Social Problems." Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice 56.3 (2014): 261-294. Project MUSE. Web. 18 Feb. 2015. <https://muse.jhu.edu/>.

The purpose of the article written by Jennifer Schulenberg and Allison Chenier was to continue to look at the portrayals of the protects and police action by media. The authors seek to find out how the media frames aspects of crimes. It also looks at and how they establish taking points among the masses that often skew the perception of crimes in the media. Schulenberg and Chenier asked questions like How does the media frame events? What are the primary and secondary effects of the framing? How are the police and protesters depicted? These questions were researched and looked at in several cases, some of the findings were that the media uses "bias by omission" telling only one side of the story to get their own view across. "Bias by interpretation" the author/ reporter of the new article adds subject opinion and comments about the case that may have to credibility behind them.

The catalyst appears to the massive detainment and charges brought against protesters and the media's portrayal it. The article was published in April 2014, this is still relevant information today The author defines the purpose of the article."The purpose of this paper is to analyse how mainstream corporate print media framed protesters, police, and events at the 2010 G20 Summit in Toronto" The authors themselves have backgrounds in criminology, sociology and legal studies, they also both write for the Canadian Journal of Criminal Justice. This gives them authority and credibility. The information itself was published in the "Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice". This journal is reviewed and referenced in other scholarly articles, It also has a long list of its own research and references, as well as many out side links showing their research.

This source is a useful one, it has credibility, it has been reviewed and referenced by other articles. It's current so its still useful information and relevant today. The article references studies that were done over time involving police tactics with protesters, and how the media depicted these events. This will be useful in showing how the media can interfere and misinform the public of the details of events. The article also draws attention to the "The hierarchy of credibility" which "is a framework for determining who defines reality, how things are, and what the truth is, based on the principle that the highest ranking groups have the right to define and interpret events" This will be interesting to look into further, it assumes some interesting things, such as the highest ranking have the ability to define "truth". The findings of the study/research of the authors is repeatable and relevant to the topic of media interference with police investigations.

JOY, PETER A., and KEVIN C. McMUNIGAL. "The Ethics Of Talking To The Media." Criminal Justice 28.4 (2014): 17-63. Criminal Justice Abstracts with Full Text. Web. 18 Feb. 2015.

The source is an excerpt from a book titled "Media Coverage in Criminal Justice Cases: What Prosecutors and Defenders Should and Should Not Say" specifically from chapter two "Basic Ethics: Criminal Practice and the Media" the chapter covers the potential risks and benefits of clients and attorneys speaking to the media, one benefit, is that the media my portray the defendant in a good way, which might make the public more sympathetic to their case. One risk is that speaking to the media could cause a negative response and skew the mindset of the jury and the public. One of the other interesting pieces is the Model Rule 3.6, and how it aims for the justice system to protect the defendant's right to a fair trial. In one particular case talked about, a man who was convicted of murder had his sentence over turned because the media had skew public opinion and made a "fair" trial unlikely.

The excerpt from the magazine was published in 2013, so its still pretty current, and relevant information. The information is useful, the ethics of the media are an important aspect to look into with regards to the topic of media influence on police investigations. The information is pretty easy to understand although some parts I will have look into further to better understand them. As far as the authors' authority, McMunigal is a professor at Case Western Reserve University, where he teaches criminal law. He also has degrees from Stanford and California, Berkley. I would say he has credibility and authority t on the subject of criminal justice. Joy is also a professor at Washington University Law, he teaches law and has degrees from Youngstown State University and Case Western Reserve University. The information comes from a book, some information is going to be opinion but it comes from a source that is peer reviewed so that builds on the credibility and accuracy of the excerpt. The purpose of the article is to inform of the dangers and advantages of including the media in criminal law.

I will likely use this source, it has a lot of useful information and gives examples/cites specific courts cases that I could look into for my paper. It also shows both sides of how the media works in criminal cases and investigations. Taking into account that this is a book and that the authors' bias is also in with the information I think it will still be a credible source to use. In the excerpt I cited the author's commentary was taken out. The currency of when the excerpt was published also helps and relates to court cases today. Both of the authors have authority on the topic which is also helpful and will be easy to reference. I think it's a great source to use.

Mitchell, Anne-Marie. "Presumed guilty: Casey Anthony: The inside story." Journal of Multidisciplinary Research 4.3 (2012): 93+. Expanded Academic ASAP. Web. 23 Feb. 2015.

The article is actually an evaluation of book written by Casey Anthony's attorney. The author, Mitchell writes that the case became an overnight sensation, due to the media. She says that the book points out some dysfunction within the justice system and how in this particular case the media made it hard for anyone to presume "innocent until proven guilty" one of the most importation assumptions in our justice system. She points out that people don't usually assume that and with the media portrayal of Casey, and other accused alike, its hard to assume and believe guilt.

The article is current it was written in 2012 in reaction to a book. It is relevant, the case takes about how the media can help form the public's (and future jurors) assumption of guilt. The source may be hard to use due to it being a book reviews and it is very short. The article infers as to how the media can sensationalize a case and skew the public's opinion. The source is accurate, it comes form a published journal and the author of the book's evaluation is a lawyer. This gives her some credibility and authority. The purpose of her article is to give some credibility to the book published by another lawyer.

Might not use this for a source, it is very short and there's not a lot of information. Although I did like the part where Mitchell talks about the media and how the case was nation wide overnight. I can remember having my own assumptions during the case, due to the media coverage. The coverage might have hindered "innocent until proven guilty"

Otto, Amy L., Steven D. Penrod, and Hedy R. Dexter. "The Biasing Impact of Pretrial Publicity on Juror Judgments." Law and human behavior 18.4 (1994): 453-69. ProQuest. Web. 24 Feb. 2015.

The case study seeks to look into and answer three questions involving how the bias of pretrial publicity has on the outcomes of criminal cases. "First, this study tests the differential effects of several different types of pretrial publicity on juror decision making. Second, this study explores the impact the presentation of trial evidence has on biases created by pretrial publicity. Finally, the study explores the psychological processes by which pretrial publicity effects may operate." one of the major concerns in the defendants reviving a fair trial, which may be inhibited by the popularity of the media.

The source is not very current is came out in 1994, but I think it may still be relevant, it examines how the media influences perception of defendants, and how this may bias any jury. The authors all have backgrounds in psychology and they have other articles in various journals that are peer reviewed and cited by others. They include a large list of reference to check their work. they all have authority ion the subject of media influence on jurors.
The study appears to be both credible and accurate. The purpose of the study was to see the effects of pretrial media coverage on juror assumptions and final decisions.

This is a good source to use, although it may be a bit outdated, the findings are interesting and the questions asked by the authors are still relevant. This source has more to do with the media's potential impact on juror decisions in criminal cases and the question of how fair a trial can be, than the initial question of how the media impacts police investigations.

Steven A. Kohm. and Courtney A. Waid-Lindberg. and Michael Weinrath. and Tara O'Connor Shelley. and Rhonda R. Dobbs. "The Impact of Media on Fear of Crime among University Students: A Cross-National Comparison." Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice 54.1 (2012): 67-100. Project MUSE. Web. 24 Feb. 2015. <https://muse.jhu.edu/>.

The case study seeks to find out the impact of the fear of crime media has on people, specifically university students. one point that is made is that fear has the potential to impede social interaction and can be detrimental to quality of life. They use statics like most news stations open with a crime segment, or one third of news stories focus on crime. One of the findings of the study: "As with previous research (e.g. Weitzer and Kubrin 2004) local TV news salience [End Page 86] was found to be the strongest and most consistent predictor of increased fear of crime of all the media and Internet related variables examined in this study."

The case was published in 2012 which is current enough for this subject, and it pertains to the subject, but the relevancy is questionable, it has more to do with how the public is affected by the media's coverage of crime than the actual result of the crime due to the portrayal of the crime. The authors all have authority in criminal justice, this gives the case credibility. in the case study there was numerous other references and research done, so you could check their work. The purpose of the study was to see the potential impact of different forms of media can have on the fear of crime on university students.

I really like this source, it has lots of references and the authors have done their part in research and I find it to be accurate research and findings. I don't quite know how I will use the information, I might have to go another direction but that's fine, I'm really interested in seeing how the media impacts our everyday lives and how in this case it might even be at least partially responsible for the fear of crime. I would also need to look into how this might be curbed and regulated.

Peer Review

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License