The Jodi Arias RTV Event

   I don't know about you but I am disgusted by the lengths the modern media machine will go to in order to generate revenue.  This hyper-fixation on the blow-by-blow of sensational trials (O. J. Simpson; Casey Anthony; Jodi Arias) is un-American at its core - not merely because of the overkill in coverage but rather, due to the prejudicing of either the defense's or prosecution's case by ratings motivated talking heads seeking to capitalize on other people's misfortunes. Though I don't think the excessive coverage is warranted where it comes to the local media because they should be concentrating on national issues, I understand the natural impulse of a media outlet to be drawn to the stories that strike a cord with the public at large. For the people in the communities where those crimes took place it would be a benefit to them to have media resources that enthusiastically pursue stories of interest but the national media ought to show some restraint.

Let's see...what have the three most sensationalized cases all have in common...

Jodi Arias




Casey Anthony



Nicole Brown Simpson



...young, attractive, white women. That's what all of these cases have in common. Neither of these cases needed to be so amplified by the national media seeing as the outcomes of these cases were/are not truly impactful upon the law & order of the country. Because these cases involve young, attractive white women the national media realize that at least 70% or more of society will be stimulated by them and therefore will drive viewership and thus, advertising (a.k.a.: revenue).  It always gets back to money with our media, it seems.  There are plenty of cases that could/have had a meaningful impact on our society and the law & order thereof but how many of those cases has the media done a blow-by-blow account of?  HLN (Headline News) has gone so far overboard with the Jodi Arias trial that you would think that nobody else has died in this country since Jodi killed her ex-boyfriend or at least that no one as important.  They have even paid to have live reproduction of the apartment made in full scale so that they may re-enact the crime as it is proposed to have taken place by the defense and prosecution.

   How many heinous crimes take place in this country every day that don't receive this type of coverage?  The only reason that they don't is that the actors involved (non young, attractive, white females) can't stimulate enough interest to generate competitive levels of revenue for the media machine.  Let's however, not take that easy and obvious road down the path of revenue motivated racism and discrimination.  Instead, let's look at the unfairness and consequential violation of the rights of the accused that occurs as a result of this hyper-sensationalizing of these stories.  Let's use the most recent case of Jodi Arias as an example.

   Ideally, in our country, when a person is accused of a crime they are supposed to be considered innocent until proven guilty.  There are really good and obvious reasons for this but the chief of all reasons for such a law is that we don't believe that a person's life should be destroyed because someone else points a finger at them and accuses them of something.  We, ideally, should not drag a person's name through the mud because of an accusation because if they are not proven to be guilty, their lives might be irrevocably damaged byt such acts.  All day, every day on the HLN channel, Jodi Arias is being judged guilty several times a day by different talking heads and that's just one media outlet doing this.  If this woman is not convicted of this crime there is no way in hell that she will ever again have a normal and productive life after the national media has made it their business to burn her name, face and a prejudgement of "guilty" into the consciousness of everyone who watches their channel.  This is exactly what we are not supposed to be doing in this country.  People should not be tried in the media!

   Let's say that she is found guilty and is not given the death penalty but rather a sentence which will see her released from jail at some point with enough time left to still have some sort of life.  A person ought to be able to do something with their life if they have paid their debt to society.  Again, this is why we are not supposed to be slandering people or exploiting their situations in the way the national media is doing.  Also, the criminal justice system in this country is unfairly weighted to the benefit of the prosecution when it should be the other way around, constitutionally because our constitution lays the burden squarely upon the shoulders of the prosecution to prove their accusations.  One way the constitution ensures this is true is by mandating that the accused be given a speedy trial.  This is so important because what this part of the law does is it prevents the law enforcement community from forcing you to serve a full sentence for a crime before you have been convicted of committing it.  Without this protection in place, the police could conceivably arrest and jail you so long before bringing you to court that no matter the outcome, they have already caused you to be fully punished for the crime.  In America, non-felonious convict cannot receive sentences greater than a year and a day because anything greater than that period of incarceration is considered felony-level punishment.

   In other words, serious criminals receive sentences greater than a year of incarceration while less serious offenders receive sentences that are less than a year.  In order that you are not serving a criminal sentence of any level as merely an accused person, a speedy trial is, in most cases, considered a period of six to eight months.  That is enough time for the prosecution to prepare and present its case without causing irrevocable damage to the life of the accused should they not be convicted of the accusations.  What most people don't know however is that a speedy trial is one of the few constitutional rights that aren't automatically granted to you if you are accused.  You have to apply for a speedy trial!  Worse still is the fact that you aren't even informed by the court that this is the case or the means to accomplish this so if you have a bad attorney, you could be sitting in jail so long that you could witness several people who have actually been convicted of crimes, serve their time and be released, before you even have your day in court.  That's what had happened to Jodi Arias and many other people in the country.  The crime occurred on June 4, 2008 and Jodi Arias was arrested on July the 15th of the same year.  She has been in jail since then waiting for her day in court.  She has already served several felony sentences and now the media is attacking her in such a way that whatever of her life that has not been utterly devastated by five years of incarceration, will follow.

   I personally understand the burdens of prosecuting complicated crimes such as this one (the chief reason being overbooked courts) but in my opinion, if it takes five years to build your case against someone, that probably means that you charged them prematurely.  If the prosecutors charge someone with a crime and later realize that they can not prosecute within the window of what would be considered a constitutional speedy trial, then bond should be automatic.  No one should have to serve multiple felony sentences in jail because the prosecution or the courts can't perform justice in a constitutionally expedient manner.  An accused person should furthermore not have to walk around for almost decade with the dark cloud of accusation and uncertainty over their head.  If the prosecution or courts can't provide a speedy trial, they should only be given so much time to effect a prosecution, so as to not cause irrevocable damage to the life of the accused.  Can you imagine trying to advance in your career or relationships when there is the uncertainty about whether or not you will ultimately be killed incarcerated by the criminal justice system for the rest of your life?

   I don't want to seem to be taking Jodi Arias' side in this.  In fact, it doesn't matter to me if she is guilty or innocent.  What concerns me is the manner in which justice is accomplished and handled along the way to accomplishment.  Some people might think it cruel of me to say that I'm not concerned about the outcome of this case but all I'm saying is that I'm no more concerned about this one than I am about any of the other thousands of cases that are happening daily.  This case has no direct or immediate impact on me at all but how it's handled by the criminal justice system and the media is indirectly impactful upon us all as Americans.  Preservation of the integrity of due process is crucial to us all because any of us, as I know from personal experience, can be accused and arrested for a crime and should that happen, we will wish that we had fought  for a fair system before that corrupt system got its hands on us.  So NOW is the time to fight for fairness in how we prosecute the accused because it will be too late to do so should the day come that it is us on the other side of the bars - rightly or wrongly.