Transcript
What role does the media play in criminal cases? Sometimes, a lot more than people think.
Media coverage can affect public opinion and even influence juries. Sometimes it influences the court itself; they see the media there, and they’re thinking about how they’re going to be published in the newspaper. Courts could limit this by ordering suppression orders but they’re rare. For an accused person, the media attention can be incredibly stressful and damaging because everybody hears about it. They often hear information that’s not correct or slightly wrong, and they jump to conclusions about people. Engagement with the media is something that your lawyers should be discussing with you; it’s not something you do yourself. You don’t talk to the media unless you’ve talked to a lawyer. A lot of the time, you wouldn’t talk to the media, and your lawyer would tell you we’re not allowed to talk about this stuff.
This is obviously general advice. There are a whole lot of conferences that you need to have to discuss how you’re going to deal with the media. And, obviously, in 99% of cases, the media is not interested in them. It’s only in very unusual circumstances that the media will want to publish.
How Media Coverage Can Affect Criminal Cases
Media coverage can influence criminal cases in ways many people do not anticipate. This video explains how reporting interacts with public perception, jury decision-making, and the lived experience of an accused person in Victoria. It also examines when courts can lawfully restrict publicity and why unadvised contact with journalists creates serious legal risks. For anyone facing criminal charges, understanding the role of the media — and knowing when silence matters — plays a critical role in protecting both legal rights and personal reputation.
In criminal proceedings, the media does more than report events. In certain cases, particularly those involving serious allegations, unusual facts, or public figures, coverage can shape how a matter appears long before a court determines the outcome. As a result, perception can develop independently of the evidence.
Open Justice and Media Reporting
In Victoria, the law generally requires criminal courts to operate in public. Journalists may attend hearings and report what occurs in court. This approach reflects the principle of open justice, which promotes transparency and accountability within the legal system. However, openness also creates risk when reporting lacks context, contains errors, or emphasises allegations rather than proven facts.
The Impact of Media Coverage on Jury Fairness
A key concern involves the effect of publicity on juries. Courts direct jurors to decide cases solely on the evidence admitted during the trial. In practice, extensive media exposure can complicate that task. Reporting may reveal allegations that never reach the jury or include commentary that suggests guilt before a verdict. In response, lawyers may seek procedural protections, such as trial delays, jury directions, or, in rare cases, the discharge of a jury. These measures exist to protect fairness, but they cannot always remove the influence of prior publicity.
When Courts Can Restrict Media Reporting
Victorian courts also hold the power to make suppression or non-publication orders. These orders can restrict the reporting of specific information, including identities, evidence, or particular allegations. However, courts do not grant such orders lightly. The law requires judges to make them only where strictly necessary, such as to preserve a fair trial or protect vulnerable participants. In most cases, courts start from open justice and intervene only when the risk of prejudice becomes demonstrable.
The Personal Consequences of Negative Publicity
For accused people, media attention often causes significant personal harm. Reports may oversimplify complex allegations or quote material without proper context. Once published, information can circulate permanently online. That exposure can affect employment, relationships, and well-being, even where charges later fall away or a court returns a not guilty verdict.
Why You Should Avoid Speaking to Journalists
Many people worsen their situation by engaging directly with journalists. Speaking informally, attempting to correct a story, or relying on “off the record” assurances creates real danger. Journalists may publish statements, summarise them inaccurately, or place them beside damaging allegations. In some circumstances, prosecutors may later rely on public statements as admissions or use them to challenge credibility. Media engagement can also undermine bail applications or negotiations with police.
The Importance of Seeking Legal Advice Before Making Public Statements
For these reasons, accused people should make all decisions about media contact through their criminal defence lawyer. In most cases, silence offers the strongest protection. Where legitimate media interest exists, lawyers can assess whether a controlled statement serves a purpose, whether legal restrictions prohibit comment, or whether court intervention is available. They can also respond to inaccurate reporting through proper legal channels.
Managing Media Risks During Criminal Proceedings
Many criminal matters never attract sustained media attention. When publicity does arise, however, careful and informed handling becomes essential. Early legal advice allows risks to be identified before damage occurs. Protecting a case often starts with controlling what enters the public domain — and ensuring that trained professionals manage it.
