In today's worldwide access to media, can alleged victims or special interest groups taint a local jury pool? Do certain accused defendants attract excessive negative pretrial publicity?

Consider accused DUI defendants. A drunk driving suspect can be held in jail after a mere accusation and well past any reasonable chance to still be under the influence. Yet, many groups offer public humiliation for the accused by way of press releases and internet chatter. The public seems to think that stopping drunk driving rationalizes trial by newspaper and innuendo.

In a Florida DUI manslaughter case, the defendant allegedly left the scene of an accident in which a car flipped into a canal and the other driver drowned. Yes, this is an extreme case. But doesn't the accused still deserve a fair trial with an unbiased jury pool?

The DUI homicide defendant in this Florida case is a well-known, wealthy man in his community. This is making for an interesting spin in the defense's recent request that the trial be held in a new location. The wealthy are painted as criminals every day in the news, according to the defense, and that, along with supposedly biased media coverage about the high-profile accident, leads the defense to argue that a fair trial is only possible if held outside of the Palm Beach area.

Wealthy drunk drivers who leave the scenes of accidents where people are injured or dead do not gain sympathy with too many people. When they are accused and judged publicly before a trial, with excessive coverage of the story that consistently uses provocative language, fair trials are not likely, argues the defense.

Every criminal suspect deserves a fair trial, not just easily sympathetic people. If the trial jury is biased or otherwise prejudges the case, the guilty verdict could be challenged on appeal. That taxes the system and the time of every person involved with a criminal case.

Source

The Palm Beach Post: "Goodman attorneys seek to move DUI manslaughter trial," Daphne Duret, Jan. 11, 2012