To answer your question, yes we do take issue with media and net and twitter accounts of trials as they are happening.

They report complex pieces of evidence in tiny soundbites and they do so out of the context of the entire case and minus the body language, intonation and facial expression and frequently without the accompanying visual evidence, that the court gets to hear and see.

Further, given as a society we charge our courts with making the decision as to criminal guilt or innocence we question the appropriateness of the practice of such reporting when such reporters/bloggers/tweeters know that those hearing the reports are going to take the information and asess whether they think the accused is innocent or guilty and publicly speculate.

To my mind this is not appropriate; the charges are serious, a person’s entire future and reputation is at stake and in this instance several people lost their lives. It is the court’s place to decide and it potentially undermines the presumption of innocence that all accuseds are entitled to receive from society. Further, in this case, there is an attempt to deflect guilt onto someone who is dead who cannot defend himself who too deserves the presumption of innocence.

In addition, if there is a mistrial and a new jury has to be selected it makes doing so and ensuring a fair trial very difficult.

So no, Matt and I will not participate in trial by blogosphere or permit our blog to be used to do so.

I’ve written a response to this post:

http://kiwipolemicist.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/are-we-innocent-until-proven-guilty-in-a-court-of-law/