THE DAY BEFORE a sentencing hearing was due to begin for the convicted murderer of an 8-year old boy and his mother, the Connecticut Post ran a long, front page story revealing the names of the jurors.
Traditionally, media outlets do not broadcast or publish the names of jurors before or during the hearing.
The Post not only provided names but hometowns and background info (jobs, military service, family, etc).
Did they go too far? Or was this fair since the trial is a public event?
The judge refused to grant a mistrial but allowed several jurors to step down.
The public already knows about the background of the murderer. Shouldn't the public know more about the people deciding the fate of the killer?
Does the public's First Amendment rights to a free press trump a convicted killer's Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial?
10 months ago