Resources for PR Teachers

« Counseling an innocent client to plead guilty | Main | Williams & Connolly blasts DOJ's resolution of discipline for prosecutors in Sen. Stevens case »

May 25, 2012

Comments

Monroe Freedman

Who wrote the headline is irrelevant. The press treatment was predictable. And the press release was both unnecessary and, under both the DC Rules of Professional Conduct 3.8(f), and ABA MR 3.8(f), unethical: "Except for statements which are necessary to inform the public of the nature and extent of the prosecutor's action and which serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose, [the prosecutor shall not] make extrajudicial comments which serve to heighten condemnation of the accused."

That is, the prosecutor is forbidden to use pretrial publicity to punish an accused without the due process of a trial.

The prosecutor was privileged to publish in the indictment what otherwise would be libelous. At that point, the prosecutor had served a legitimate law enforcement purpose. The press release, with or without a disclaimer about the presumption of innocence, served no further legitimate law enforcement purpose (e.g., informing the public that an accused is at large and dangerous).

The comments to this entry are closed.

Subscribe Share/Bookmark

Site Statistics