Room for Debate
May 27, 2011
In a letter to the Manhattan district attorney, the lawyers for Dominique Strauss-Kahn have complained that his "right to a fair trial is being compromised by the public disclosure of prejudicial material." They said they were holding on to damaging information about the hotel housekeeper who has accused the former I.M.F. chief of sexual assault.
The letter was seen as legal gamesmanship — allowing Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s lawyers to hint at negative material about the victim without revealing it -- but the lawyers also raised the general issue of the role of "the media frenzy" in the case.
We asked legal analysts, including well-known defense lawyers, for their views on what difference the intense pretrial media scrutiny might make at a trial. How does the barrage of coverage affect potential jurors? Or press-shy prosecution witnesses? We also asked a French lawyer, François Quintard-Morénas, an expert in the history of presumption of innocence in the U.S. and France, to explain why the French remain so rankled about the "Anglo-Saxon media" coverage of this case.
"The French Have a Legal Point"
François Quintard-Morénas, French lawyer
"Publicity vs. the Plea"
Kendall Coffey, defense lawyer, "Spinning the Law"
"Remember: Kobe Walked"
Laurie L. Levenson, professor, Loyola Law School
"The Voir Dire Is Key"
Shawn Holley, defense lawyer
"Pursue Justice, Not Rumors"
Anne Bremner, lawyer and legal analyst
"Jurors and Reasonable Doubt"
Gerald Shargel, New York defense attorney
More
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.