[TheSpottedOwl]

Unlike a certain other recent trial..........

Hopefully police departments and courts have learned a lesson about keeping their mouths shut. It's our right as American citizens to be judge by a fair and impartial jury. In theory. The OJ jury was the low watermark, imo...

[UCANSEE2]

When you see a Judge trying to protect the rights of the accused, to keep items sealed that will jeapordize the proper outcome of case, then you can have some faith in justice being done.

When you see a Judge not only allowing, but welcoming media influence, you know the case is out of control, and the outcome is not good for anyone.

It isn't the police departments and courts that are the problem. It is the appetite of the public that believes it has the RIGHT TO KNOW, and a media that is more than willing to feed that RIGHT.

In a trial matter, the truth is you don't have a right to know. If public release of information alters the verdict of the jury, then the accused rights have been compromised.
The accused could get a not guilty plea, when actually guilty and vice versa. Cops and courts know what they are supposed to say and not say in public.
When the media sues for release of information DURING or BEFORE a trial, you see how their want for the info to capitalize on their business (greed) outweighs an individual's right to justice. It is this way because we let it.