Reply
Fri 29 Mar, 2013 07:54 pm
USAToday reports today"In plea bargain that avoids a media-saturated trial."
Well, since the trial has avoided media saturation, how could USAToday knows it? Does it imply the incompetence of the court?
Context:
A Maine fitness instructor pleaded guilty Friday to running a one-woman prostitution business from her Zumba studio in a small seaside town.
In plea bargain that avoids a media-saturated trial, Alexis Wright, 30, pleaded guilty to 20 misdemeanor counts, including three tax-related felonies that were reduced.
More:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/03/29/maine-zumba-instructor-prostitution-guilty/2036545/
@oristarA,
Ori, In the US, they often print the names of arrested people in the newspapers. When Alexis Wright was arrested her name was every where. People were privy to all kinds of information. By agreeing to a plea bargain and pleading guilty, she will not have to go through the media-frenzied trial. In most cases, plea bargain deals are kept quiet and the details - that would be uncovered during a trial, are frequently not released to the public.
No, it doesn't imply anything about the court. A media-saturated trial is one which becomes for some reason a cause-celebre, for whatever reason. Stories on it run in every paper and on TV for weeks and weeks. Talking heads pontificate about it. Late night TV hosts make jokes about it. It seems to be everywhere, on everyone's lips. The question then becomes is everyone including the jury swayed by what they hear and see in the media, which can theoretically make rendering a fair verdict, rther than what the media decides, difficult to reach. Some lawyers will think so, others will think making their case in the media helps their side, so plaqintiff and defendant might want very different media relations.
@MontereyJack,
I've got two cool replies.
Thank you both.
Learning English is learning its culture.