Muster your military photos
Area H.S. football: Week 8
Water for your dog
Judge rules crime-based TV shows off-limits to jurors
Certain shows like 'CSI' or Court TV can build false expectations, she asserts.
Comment: Do you agree with this ruling?
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
HAMILTON — Jurors in Butler County Common Pleas Judge Patricia Oney's courtroom have limited television viewing choices until the verdict is in. In fact, the Disney Channel may be the best bet.
For nearly a decade, judges, prosecutors and detectives have been experiencing the "CSI blowback" in local courtrooms. This has created an unrealistic expectation of what can and cannot be done with evidence in the minds of jurors, said Oney, who was a defense attorney before donning the black robe.
Butler County Common Pleas Judge Patricia Oney, shown inside her courtroom, bars jurors from watching Court TV and popular fictional crime dramas, including any of the 'CSI' shows.Oney has upped her standard instruction for jurors. Media coverage of the case is a given and routine instruction for judges, but she also has a list of fictional viewing "no-nos."
"So many shows now are pulled in part from cases all over the country," Oney said. "I don't want jurors watching them while they are in deliberation."
Butler County Prosecutor Robin Piper said seminars in "dealing with the 'CSI' effect" are common in training conferences for attorneys, and last week before a murder case, Assistant Prosecutor Jason Phillabaum said "CSI" is to forensics as "Star Trek" is to space travel.
Fellow Butler County Common Pleas Judge Noah Powers, who is new to the bench this year, said he was unaware of Oney's instruction, but said it sounds like a good idea.
"I think I might ask her for that list," Powers said.
Defense attorney Melynda Cook-Reich, who is certified to represent defendants in death penalty cases, said she agrees with Oney's no-viewing list while jurors are in the middle of deciding a case.
"But I think otherwise those shows can be a benefit to make people aware of what kind of testing can be done," Cook-Reich said, noting it gives people a peek into a world that they would not ordinarily know about.
Contact this reporter at (513) 820-2168 or lpack@coxohio.com.
Comments
By Amy
August 15, 2007 12:16 PM | Link to this
You’ve got to be kidding, right? Fictional shows are just that - fiction. Anyone who can not differentiate between fiction & nonfiction should not be selected for jury duty to begin with. I think that this judge is just looking for ways to get her name in the paper.
By Gail
August 15, 2007 12:56 AM | Link to this
I agree with the judge. I see where she is coming from. All people are not realistic, many get into those shows and still know their fake, they love the show so much, its part of their world. The judge is correct 100%
By Tammy Clooney
August 14, 2007 7:39 PM | Link to this
The tv shows she mentions are not on a “hit list”. It’s just a suggestion. No one is going to come to your house and monitor what’s on your television! If more people would actually serve jury duty you would understand. I was amazed at the people that actively tried to be excused. Whether you agree with our justice system or not, jury duty is where you get to see how it REALLY works. Then you can watch and enjoy the “law” programs for what they really are. Entertainment.
By Tammy Clooney
August 14, 2007 7:31 PM | Link to this
I was a juror in her court room the beginning of the year… Judge Oney is a fair and partial judge. She did NOT sit up there and toss out demands like you are some kind of an idiot. These were another part of her instructions to please refrain from watching the news or reading the newspaper while the trial went on. If you think about it.. it makes sense. There is so much that goes on in a trial, so much to take in.
By Mike
August 14, 2007 5:19 PM | Link to this
What’s wrong with this judge? I gusee she thinks we are so stupid that we can’t separate TV Holliwood fiction from real life. I agree with not watching something like a news report about what the trial is about since it is directly related but not a TV show. What’s next on her hit list, Matlock?
By CH
August 14, 2007 11:44 AM | Link to this
I agree with George. Judge Oney does need to get a grip. She, or any judge for that matter, shouldn’t be allowed to tell jurors wha they can or cannot watch. It’s stupid. Have of the jurors probably don’t want to be there anyway; so they shouldn’t be told they can’t watch certain shows on t.v.
By c
August 14, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this
was’nt james lawson on one of those shows.tell his victim’s family it was’nt true.
By judy
August 14, 2007 10:45 AM | Link to this
maybe she is trying for her own t.v. show an needs puplicity.i think she is a decent judge,but needs to concentrate on throwing the book at crack dealers and child molesters.butler co. is full of both.
By Robert
August 14, 2007 9:23 AM | Link to this
I think JUDGES should quit obsessing about live TV (remember that buffoon Florida judge in the Anna Nichole paternity case) and spend more time on their jury conviction and sentencing instructions .
By Don Carpenter
August 14, 2007 9:20 AM | Link to this
This is just another example of some of the judicial excellence we take for granted in Butler County. Judge Oney demonstrates once again, the reason why the voters have such faith in her and I can see why she would ask jurors to abstain from watching anything that could potentially hamper impartiality. The rules of evidence are most certainly different in ‘real life’ versus hollywood drama which is manipulated for effect. Thank you Judge Oney for taking a stand and protecting justice.
By Baxter Barrett
August 14, 2007 8:59 AM | Link to this
If these shows can affect an opinion during deliberation, why would watching the same show a week or a month earlier not have the same affect?
By T
August 14, 2007 8:56 AM | Link to this
I, for one, have found myself thinking that SOME of the techniques on CSI have credibility only to be told by a Police Detective that I know how fictional the show really is. After talking with him and the examples he gives…I can see how it COULD taint a jurors perceptions. I agree with the judge.
By Ray
August 14, 2007 8:22 AM | Link to this
I strongly agree but from a different viewpoint. TV needs to be cleaned up in many ways especially with regards to violence and language. TV should not be the crimal’s “cool” role-model. The FCC has failed to keep clean programming standards. I don’t think that judges should have the right to say what people watch in their homes merely because of a specific case. Jurors should be sequestered in cases where there is such sensitivity. The judges actions borderlines activist judging.
By Sherry
August 14, 2007 7:48 AM | Link to this
I agree with the judges decision. People have a tendacy to look at those shows as fact even when they know they are fiction. Judges everywhere should make the same ruling. I agree with the judge 100%.
By Amanda
August 14, 2007 7:33 AM | Link to this
I think it’s a good idea. Even though TV is just TV, it has a basis in fact and people start to believe that they are developing the understanding of how to “work a crime scene”. There is even a new reality show for people to work an old case. People are going to know that CSI is fiction, but they are going to think that they know better.
By George
August 14, 2007 6:24 AM | Link to this
I think the Judge should get a grip! If someone thinks CSI is all true and tested science, they have a problem before the trial starts. TV is TV, not real life. All shows on TV are edited for the outcome they want.