In the public’s eye

In a world where most people get their information online, the media unavoidably became a place to broadcast cases involving celebrities or controversial societal issues.

Take the Johnny Depp-Amber Heard defamation trial that took place earlier this year. Instead of focusing on the allegations and facts of the case that could have sparked a conversation centered around mutual domestic abuse, media platforms portrayed the trial like a movie.

Entertained by the dramatized case, people shared videos and memes on the internet. Consequently, some platforms picked specific parts to publish that would generate the most engagement from their audience.

“They tend to kind of reduce it to what’s easy to report and what they think their readers or viewers will find interesting, so they rarely give a complete picture,” Matthews said. “In their defense, it’s sometimes impossible to do that within however many column inches you get or how much time you get on the news, but it’s never completely accurate.”

In that brief article, the media might even formulate two opposing sides, a good and evil.

“Generally, media coverage of publicized trials can become like sporting events, where the viewers tend to choose a side and get invested in the outcome. A one-sided portrayal may also influence the outcome and sway the public against the person on trial, undermining the courtroom,” Cueva said. “Everything is subjective.”

This subjectivity appears in the role human nature plays in determining public opinion on a case. After hearing or reading about the police arresting someone for an egregious crime, people tend to believe that the individual is guilty.

“As human beings, it’s easy to presume a person is guilty just because the evidence is shocking or what you hear on the news is sensational. It’s just how we’re inclined to think as law-abiding members of society,” Cueva said.

In one positive experience with the media, Cueva represented a fugitive who was on the run for over 40 years, during which he reinvented himself by becoming a college counselor, raising a family, and being a community leader.

“The media portrayed him in the most positive light by paying less attention to the crime that he committed some 42 years ago and focused more on all of his accomplishments,” Cueva said. “The outcome was favorable, partly because the public opinion was certainly positive.”

While this outcome turned out favorable for the defense, it nonetheless becomes difficult for people to form an accurate, fair conclusion when the media only gives snippets of the case or presents the trial from a tinted angle.

“The news is supposed to sell a story, and they might not have time to go through a preamble,” Cueva said. “But people should remember that everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty and to keep an open mind.”

Without a good idea of the law, perspectives on a publicized trial turn inaccurate.

“I’ve noticed that most people are not informed of the law; they like to make opinions or statements based on what they think is happening,” said Supriti Bhopale, a Carlmont freshman who has participated in Mock Trial since first grade. “A lot of people do not take into account what is legal and what is not and are misinformed in that way.”

From her time participating in Mock Trial practices, Bhopale discovered how various pieces of crucial evidence can come in throughout the entire course of the trial. She suggests that people who want to know about a certain case listen to the full hearing to better understand all the evidence being presented.

“You’ll actually be hearing what’s happening in the courtroom — that is the way you’re going to get the most truthful facts because you’re hearing what’s going on word for word,” Bhopale said. “If you don’t have knowledge of the law or if you don’t understand the evidence being presented, then it’s not fair to create just a blanket statement of support.”

If people cannot listen to every witness’s testimony and closing arguments, it is still important to be well-informed of the case and the charges being made and to understand how information on the internet may only be a small part of what is really happening.

Even so, there may not be such a clear distinction between right and wrong.

“People like the idea of there being a good guy and a bad guy and being very black and white about that, and that’s rarely true,” Matthews said.