Court of Public Opinion: How the Convicted Perceive Mass Media Have Affected Their Criminal Trials and Personal Lives
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Syracuse University SURFACE S.I. Newhouse School of Public Mass Communications - Dissertations Communications 8-2012 Court Of Public Opinion: How the Convicted Perceive Mass Media Have Affected Their Criminal Trials and Personal Lives Marti Cecilia Howell-Collins Syracuse University Follow this and additional works at: https://surface.syr.edu/com_etd Part of the Communication Commons Recommended Citation Howell-Collins, Marti Cecilia, "Court Of Public Opinion: How the Convicted Perceive Mass Media Have Affected Their Criminal Trials and Personal Lives" (2012). Mass Communications - Dissertations. 90. https://surface.syr.edu/com_etd/90 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications at SURFACE. It has been accepted for inclusion in Mass Communications - Dissertations by an authorized administrator of SURFACE. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Abstract This paper is designed to provide insights into a neglected aspect of crime news effects. This mixed-qualitative methods study explores what effects convicted criminals report experiencing in the wake of media coverage of their alleged crimes and trials. There are two primary areas of focus in this study: What effects inmates perceive media coverage has had on their cases and how they feel they have been personally affected by media coverage of their alleged crimes and subsequent trials. Court of Public Opinion: How the convicted perceive mass media have affected their criminal trials and personal lives By Marti Cecilia Howell-Collins B.A. University of Nevada, Reno, 2004 M.A. University of Nevada, Reno, 2007 DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Mass Communications in the Graduate School of Syracuse University August 2012 Copyright 2012 Marti Cecilia Howell-Collins All Rights Reserved Acknowledgements I would like to offer my humble thanks to my dissertation advisor, Dr. Joan Deppa, for her expert guidance and unending patience. It has been my great joy to consult with her on all things from grammar to dogs. Thank you for being the calm in the storm. Thank you to my dissertation committee members and FPP mentors Barbara Fought, J.D., and Bob Lloyd, M.S., for their investment in my future success and their involvement in this project. It was my honor. Thank you, Dr. Dennis Kinsey, Director of the Doctoral Program at the S.I Newhouse School of Public Communications at Syracuse University. I was so very pleased to have you on my dissertation committee. I would like to recognize a member of my committee who has been a steadfast source of support since I arrived at Syracuse University. Dr. Patricia Stith, in addition to serving as chair of my committee, presided over the Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement Program at SU. This program and the people who represent it are responsible for my belief that I could be more than a newspaper photographer. I offer my heartfelt gratitude to Dr. Stith for never wavering in her belief in the same dream for me. Thank you to Marsha Dupree, M.A., and Rita Escher, Ph.D., of the Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement Program at the University of Nevada, Reno. Special thank you to my first McNair mentor, Donica Mensing, Ph.D., of the University of Nevada, Reno. There were times when I did not know if this day would ever come, but they never had a doubt. A sincere thanks to Paul Griffin, Ph.D., and Brian McDowell, M.A., of Morrisville State College for hiring me on faith. The semester I spent in the journalism department there was the best thing that ever happened to me. No offense, UNR and SU. Thank you to Jeanne Diederich of the Institutional Review Board at Syracuse University for helping us navigate the process. Thank you, too, to the members of the IRB who helped me narrow the focus of my research and ensure that the participants were protected. I would like to thank the Deputies of the Madison County Sheriff’s Office and the State Troopers of both the State Police of New York and the State Police of New Jersey for helping me understand their trade language. Finally, my most sincere gratitude to Lawrence “Doc” Mason, III, Ph.D., legendary photojournalist, wise mentor, friend. It was he who set the example for me to follow. As a gifted photographer and a beloved professor, Doc showed me that if your heart is in the right place, you can achieve anything. Thank you, Sir. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 1 Research questions 27 Significance of study 27 Outline of study 28 II. LITERATURE REVIEW 30 Media construction of crime news 34 Race and crime news 53 Sensational coverage of crime news 59 Pretrial publicity 67 Trial coverage 86 The “perp walk” 97 Crime victims 104 III. METHODS 112 Research design 112 Method 112 Context 123 Vulnerable population 127 Sample 128 Collection and analysis of data 132 Risks to participants 138 Study timeline 141 Role of researcher 142 Summary of preliminary study 143 IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS 146 Participant quick reference 148 The participants 149 Media terms 155 “In their own words…” 156 The data 157 “Trial by media” 158 v TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Sensationalism 160 The “perp walk” 162 “Naming” the suspect 165 Labels 166 Credibility of law enforcement sources and the media 170 Access to media 175 Pretrial publicity and tainted jury pools 178 Effects on the individual 182 Race, socioeconomic divides and stereotypes 184 Crime victims 188 Perceived media effects on family members 190 Reflections from prison 193 V. RESULTS 197 Summary 197 Conclusions 199 Discussion 201 Suggestions for future research 209 Appendices 211 References 219 Vita 237 vi 1 Court of Public Opinion: How the convicted perceive mass media have affected their criminal trials and personal lives Chapter One Introduction Crime is an unwelcome influence in our lives. The levels on which it affects individuals in our society are as varied as the acts of crime themselves. Homicide victims are obviously the most profoundly affected of crime victims. One homicide leaves in its wake a host of secondary victims – family members and friends of the slain and, in a different but perhaps no less tragic way, those connected to the perpetrator. In addition, a community may be affected by a single homicide in terms of loss of a sense of safety. Often, after murders occur in small towns, people who never locked their front doors before suddenly find themselves being concerned about home security. On a larger scale, terrorist acts have the same effect on communities and entire nations. The Oklahoma City bombing and the 9/11 terrorist attacks are examples of crimes that influenced large sectors of society, leaving victims that ranged from the homicide victim to the person who lived thousands of miles away, seemingly untouched by the crime itself but in reality changed because of it. In ways big and small, all of our lives are impacted by crime and, therefore, by individuals who commit crimes. It could be said – and maybe even should be said –that criminals are not among our best decision makers. Yet, their decisions affect our lives and society as a whole. It is natural, therefore, for people affected by these decisions to commit crime to want to know why these events come to pass. While knowing why 2 someone commits a crime will not undo the damage of the criminal act, knowing what the underpinnings of the decision-making process are can be of value to society on several levels. As it stands, society affects and is affected by crime through a multitude of interactions. One key player in this drama is the press. Others include the law enforcement community and the public. Each group has specific goals when forming – or avoiding – relationships with potential criminals. It is within these dynamics that valuable information may be gained or lost. For the most part, the approach of various societal groups to criminals works in favor of their goals. For example, the general public tends to avoid contact with people who they perceive as threatening or dangerous. This type of behavior diminishes the chance of becoming the victim of crime. Law enforcement officials, on the other hand, engage in purposeful, direct engagement with criminals on a daily basis to meet their goal of suppressing criminal activity. The more tuned in the law enforcement community is to the criminal world, the more successful they will be in their endeavors. The media, however, have a less systematic approach. Communication between individuals who commit crimes and the media tends to be sporadic, with some cases including interviews with the criminal and other stories spanning years without a single quote from a perpetrator. This can only result in less comprehensive coverage of crime stories. Mass communication is the source that provides the public with not only news of crime and criminals but also with the interpretation of those events and the profiles of the individuals. Society depends on the media to explain the “why” of events like the Oklahoma City bombing. It is not enough to report the “facts” of a crime. The public has 3 a need to understand the motivation behind seemingly senseless acts of violence and mayhem. The person who can answer these questions is the perpetrator himself. He alone possesses the knowledge of his motivation, his goals and, often, the details of his crime. Exploring these issues with the perpetrator is already a worthy avenue of pursuit for practitioners of psychology and criminology. Their work depends heavily on communication with perpetrators of crime in order to understand other criminals and crime itself.