Jury Trials and Crimes of Great Media Impact

Abstract

The study, whose theme was "Jury Trials and Crimes of Great Media Impact," analyzed the conflict between freedom of the press, the presumption of innocence, and the impartiality of popular judgment within the legal system. The work demonstrates that the Jury Trial, provided for in Article 5, item XXXVIII, of the Federal Constitution, is a relevant democratic mechanism with popular participation in the administration of justice, particularly in intentional crimes against life. However, the growing influence of the media and social networks has provoked reflections on the vulnerability of jurors to media pressure and the so-called "trial by media." The research corroborates that the media plays a significant role in shaping public opinion, potentially anticipating social judgments before the conclusion of the judicial process. There is widespread repercussion; the defendant is frequently seen as guilty by society, even though the Constitution asserts the presumption of innocence until the final judgment of conviction. Thus, a conflict is revealed between the right to information and the protection of the fundamental rights of the accused. Regarding methodology, the research adopts the deductive method, starting from the analysis to formulate broader theoretical considerations about the influence of media in the Jury Court. This is a basic research, with a qualitative approach and descriptive character, based on the analysis of documentary data, doctrine and procedural elements. The work points to the lack of justification in the jurors' decisions, an attribute proper to the Jury Court, and broadens the understanding of the influence of emotional and extra-procedural factors. Although intimate conviction conceives a democratic expression of popular judgment, it can also compromise the rationality of the decision associated with the social clamor provoked by the media. This study also highlights the current challenge, which does not consist of restricting freedom of the press, but in establishing ethical and legal demarcations in order to prevent premature social condemnations. In view of this research, a contribution emerges to the debate on the precise balance between democracy, freedom of information and the guarantee of equitable trials, reinforcing the importance of protecting fundamental rights in criminal proceedings.