# 1 is actor David Janssen. He was the star of the television series, "The Fugitive." It aired from 1964-1967. In the show, Dr. Richard Kimble escaped from prison after being convicted of murdering his wife. He traveled the country searching for the mysterious intruder known as the "one-armed man." He adopted various disguises and performed good deeds in each episode as he barely stayed one step ahead of the authorities.

# 2 is actor Harrison Ford. He was the star of the 1993 full-length motion picture, "The Fugitive." He also escaped from prison after his conviction and eventually finds the one-armed man who wears an artificial limb in the film version of this story. Dr. Kimble finds his wife's killer and uncovers a colleague's motive for having Mrs. Kimble murdered.

# 3 is Dr. Sam Sheppard. He was convicted of murdering his wife, Marilyn, in 1954. Dr. Sheppard was released from prison after ten years but never returned to the practice of medicine and never found anyone else who was found to be his wife's killer. He died at age 46 after a brief career as a professional wrestler. The Sheppard's son is currently waging a campaign to establish his father's innocence through forensic science methods unavailable at the time of the murder.

The fictional Dr. Kimble escapes from prison when a bus transporting prisoners wrecks and provides the opportunity. Dr. Sam Sheppard was released from prison after a Supreme Court decision in 1966 declared he had not been given a fair trial.

Sheppard's original trial will serve as the basis for learning about a defendant's due process right to a fair trial by an impartial jury.

Teacher Instructions for Student Activity

Discussion Guide Questions

1. Where students influenced by what they read in the news reports?
   
   
2. Did reading the reports affect anyone's ability to be impartial?
   
   
3. How many jurors read the final report even though it was suggested they shouldn't?
   
   
4. Should all of the guilt meters in the juror pile say innocent? (Teacher Note: The legal system in the United States operates on the principle that a person is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This presumption of innocence remains with the defendant until the trial is over. At this point, the ideal situation would be for everyone to say they were unsure about guilt since the evidence for both sides has not been presented and none of the jurors should have made up their minds. Is this realistic?)
   
   
5. Is it appropriate for potential jurors to be influenced by news reports?
   
   
6. Is it appropriate for members of a jury to be influenced by news reports?
   
   
7. What can be done to ensure an impartial jury before a trial starts? (TEACHER NOTE: In the Sheppard case, the Court suggested various safeguards that were appropriate to use. Among these were change of venue, continuances, no-comment rules and voir dire.)
   
   
8. What can be done to maintain an impartial jury after the trial starts? (TEACHER NOTE: In the Sheppard Case, the Court suggested properly instructing the jury and/or sequestrating it.)
   
   
9. Check the student's comprehension of the suggested safeguards by asking them to identify which ones would be suggested by the following quote from the Sheppard decision.

   "…where there is a reasonable likelihood that prejudicial news prior to trial will prevent a fair trial, the judge should continue the case until the threat abates, or transfer it to another county not so permeated with publicity."
   
   Answer: Continuance/Change of venue
   
   

10. An optional portion of this lesson would be to share with students the letter detailing a private investigator's proposal for acquiring proof of media influence on individual jurors in the Sheppard case. This letter was discovered during research at the Chicago Historical Society. Ask students if the time, effort and money required for this investigation is a burden that could have been avoided had the judge taken adequate precautions from the beginning of the case.

Teacher Resource Sheet: Background Information

After being convicted of second-degree murder for the death of his pregnant wife, Sam Sheppard challenged the verdict because it was a result of an unfair trial. He alleged the trial judge failed to prevent massive, widespread and prejudicial publicity before and during his trial. Sheppard claimed the jury was inappropriately influenced in his case by the extensive media coverage and lack of safeguards employed by the judge. He appealed his case to the U.S. Supreme Court on November 13, 1956. His appeal was denied on December 17, 1956. The Supreme Court has discretion over which cases it selects for review. Four justices must agree to accept a case or it is denied review. The refusal of the Court to accept a case is subject to misinterpretation by the general public. When denying Sheppard's petition for certiorari, Justice Frankfurter used the occasion as a forum to reiterate what a denial of certiorari means.

"Such denial of his petition in no wise implies that this Court approves the decision of the Supreme Court of Ohio. It means and means only that for one reason or another this case did not commend itself to at least four members of the Court as falling within those considerations which should lead this Court to exercise its discretion in reviewing a lower court's decision."

In other words, the Court is not saying it agrees or disagrees with the decision of the lower court. It simply means there was not sufficient interest or merit in the case among the Justices for it to be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court. The lack of interest on the part of the Justices was overcome in 1966 when the Supreme Court agreed to review it.

Teacher Resource: Items and explanations extracted from the majority opinion in Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333 (1966)

1. Jurors were subjected to newspaper, radio and television coverage of the trial while not taking part in the proceedings.
2. Jurors were allowed to go their separate ways outside of the courtroom, without adequate directions not to read or listen to anything concerning the case. The judge's "admonitions" at the beginning of the trial are representative: "I would suggest to you and caution you that you do not read any newspapers during the progress of this trial. That you do not listen to radio comments nor watch or listen to television comments, insofar as this case is concerned. I am sure that we shall all feel very much better if we do not indulge in any newspaper reading or listening to any comments about the matter while the case is in progress. After it is all over, you can read to your heart's content."
3. Jurors were thrust into roles as celebrities by the judge's failure to insulate them from reporters and photographers. The numerous pictures of the jurors, with their addresses, which appeared in the newspapers before and during the trial itself exposed them to expressions of opinion from both cranks and friends. The fact that anonymous letters had been received by prospective jurors should have made the judge aware that this publicity seriously threatened the juror's privacy.
4. The press coverage was massive and pervasive regarding Sheppard's prosecution.
5. Charges and countercharges were aired in the news media besides those for which Sheppard was called to trial.
   
   
6. Bedlam reigned at the courthouse during the trial and newsmen took over practically the entire courtroom, hounding most of the participants in the trial. The erection of a press table for reporters inside the bar is unprecedented. The bar is designed to protect the witness and the jury from any distractions, intrusions or influences, and to permit bench discussions of the judge's rulings away from the hearing of the public and the jury.
   
   
7. The judge gave the throng of newsmen gathered in the corridors of the courthouse absolute free rein. Participants in the trial, including the jury, were forced to run a gantlet of reporters and photographers each time they entered or left the courtroom. The total lack of consideration for the privacy of the jury was demonstrated by the assignment to a broadcasting station of space next to the jury room on the floor above the courtroom, as well as the fact that jurors were allowed to make telephone calls during their five-day deliberation.
   
   
8. Much of the material printed or broadcast during the trial was never heard from the witness stand. These included charges that:
   
   • Sheppard had purposely impeded the murder investigation and must be guilty since he had hired a prominent criminal lawyer
   • Sheppard was a perjurer
   • He had sexual relations with numerous women
   • His slain wife had characterized him as a "Jekyll-Hyde"
   • He was "a bare-faced liar" because of his testimony as to police treatment;
   • A woman convict claimed Sheppard to be the father of her illegitimate child.

1. As the trial progressed, the newspapers summarized and interpreted the evidence, devoting particular attention to the material that incriminated Sheppard, and often drew unwarranted inferences from testimony.
   
   
2. At one point, a front-page picture of Mrs. Sheppard's blood-stained pillow was published after being "doctored" to show more clearly an alleged imprint of a surgical instrument.
   
   
3. This deluge of publicity of publicity to which the jury reached at least some of the jury. On the only occasion that the jury was queried, two jurors admitted in open court to hearing the highly inflammatory charge that a prison inmate claimed Sheppard as the father of her illegitimate child.
   
   
4. Despite the extent and nature of the publicity to which the jury was exposed during trial, the judge refused defense counsel's other requests that the jurors be asked whether they had read or heard specific prejudicial comment about the case

• ". . . where there is a reasonable likelihood that prejudicial news prior to trial will prevent a fair trial, the judge should continue the case until the threat abates, or transfer it to another county not so permeated with publicity."
  
  
• "If publicity during the proceeding threatens the fairness of the trial, a new trial should be ordered."
  
  
• ". . . the cure lies in those remedial measures that will prevent the prejudice at its inception."