Introducing 

Prezi AI.

Your new presentation assistant.

Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.

Loading…
Transcript

Sheppard

v.

Maxwell 1966

Historical Background

Background

Samuel Sheppard was accused of bludgeoning his pregnant wife to death in the bedroom of their Cleveland home. He told his wife, Marilyn, that he was tired, so he dozed off, and was woken up by what sounded like his wife screaming. Rushing up to the bedroom, he saw a figure over his wife’s body. He was said to have chased the figure, wrestled with it, but was eventually knocked out.

Sheppard contributed that he was unconscious on their basement floor, with teeth missing and bruises on his body, as well as other injuries (that doctors say he couldn’t have given himself.) Sheppard didn’t feel as though the trial warden took proper precaution against publicity.

Background 1.0

Key Argument

Key

Arguements

Key arguements each side brought to court.

Plaintiff: Sheppard

Plaintiff

  • Sheppard argued that he wasn’t subjected to a fair trial since the judge let the media have free reign over the trial.
  • Maxwell, the Warden of the court, allowed the media specific seats to cover the case.
  • The judge was biased, saying Sheppard was, “guilty as hell.”

Defendent: E.L. Maxwell

  • E.L. Maxwell was the warden of the court, who allowed all of the media access during the trial. He allowed special seats for anyone who was tied to the media. He also had the jury biased against Sheppard.
  • He argued that he press could do whatever they wanted, since press is part of the First Amendment

Defendant

Questions

The question taken to court was the same: What threshold must be crossed before a trial is said to be so prejudicial, due to context and publicity, as to interfere with a defendant's Fifth Amendment due process right and Sixth Amendment to a fair trial?

Questions Taken to Court

Amendments

Amendments at stake

Amendments

First Amendment

1st amendment - freedom of press and speech - If media is allowed in courts. It was questioned if media is allowed in courts, since it allows for swaying of the jury.

1st

Sixth Amendment

6th

Because media was allowed free reign in the court, it was questioned if this was impeding on the 6th Amendment rights - right to a fair trial, and right to a trial with an impartial jury.

Decision

Decision

  • Chief Justice of the case: Earl Warren
  • Majority Opinion Writer: Tom C. Clark
  • Margin of the court: 8-1
  • Decison of the Court: for Sheppard

Explanation for the Court

The court decided that, due to all the media coverage in the court, Sheppard was not given a fair trial. The physical arrangement of the court room allowed for swaying, and put the media coverage first, instead of justice, instead of proving the accused innocent or guilty. The Court concluded that the courtroom judge should have postponed the trial or went to a different courtroom.

Explanation

Implications

Implications

To restrict media for his retrial, and to allow little to no media in any sort of court to sway the jury. The lessening of media will make for a fairer trial.

Aftermath

Aftermath

Sheppard was allowed a retrial. In that retrial, a dentist spoke for him saying that there was no way he could have broken four of his own teeth, and a doctor stated that, “Sheppard for a broken neck that could not have been self-inflicted” (mtsu.edu). In his retrial, he was found innocent, where he was released from prison.

Works Cited

Works

Cited

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/384/333

https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/334/sheppard-v-maxwell

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1965/490

https://www.thefire.org/first-amendment-library/decision/sheppard-v-maxwell-warden/

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/384/333

Learn more about creating dynamic, engaging presentations with Prezi