Communications 300 Lesson 8
This quiz if from Lesson 8 of Comm 300
- 1.
Which of the following is not correct?
- A.
The free press/fair trial issue is a conflict between the First and a. Sixth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution
- B.
The Supreme Court has held that restrictions on the media may be imposed by judges whenever they feel they need to in the interest of protecting the defendant's rights.
- C.
Prejudicial publicity may make it difficult to find impartial jurors
- D.
During-trial publicity may taint a sitting jury
Correct Answer
B. The Supreme Court has held that restrictions on the media may be imposed by judges whenever they feel they need to in the interest of protecting the defendant's rights.Explanation
The explanation for the given correct answer is that the statement "The Supreme Court has held that restrictions on the media may be imposed by judges whenever they feel they need to in the interest of protecting the defendant's rights" is incorrect. The Supreme Court has not held this position, as it would go against the First Amendment's protection of freedom of the press. The First Amendment guarantees that the media can report on court proceedings, and any restrictions on the media must be narrowly tailored and justified by a compelling government interest.Rate this question:
-
- 2.
Which of the following is correct?
- A.
Jurors may arrive at a verdict based on any knowledge and evidence with which they have come in contact in any setting
- B.
Jurors must be totally ignorant of the facts and issues involved in a case to be considered impartial
- C.
Exposure to information about a defendant's prior convictions or to news accounts of the crime with which he is charged will make a potential juror unfit for jury duty because of assumed bias.
- D.
An unbiased juror is one who may have light impressions about the case, but which may yield to the testimony that may be offered in court
Correct Answer
D. An unbiased juror is one who may have light impressions about the case, but which may yield to the testimony that may be offered in courtExplanation
An unbiased juror is someone who may have some initial thoughts or impressions about the case, but is willing to set them aside and be open to the testimony and evidence presented in court. This means that jurors do not need to be completely ignorant of the facts and issues involved in the case, but rather they should be able to consider the information presented during the trial and make a fair and impartial decision based on that evidence.Rate this question:
-
- 3.
True or False? Newspapers must follow court rules of evidence in deciding what to publish about criminal cases so as not to taint the jury pool with prejudicial information.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
B. FalseExplanation
Newspapers are not required to follow court rules of evidence in deciding what to publish about criminal cases. While they should strive to provide fair and accurate reporting, they are not bound by the same rules as the court. Their primary responsibility is to inform the public, and they have the freedom to exercise editorial judgment in determining what information to publish. However, they should still be cautious about publishing prejudicial information that could potentially influence the jury pool.Rate this question:
-
- 4.
In the famous Sheppard v. Maxwell case, Sheppard's conviction was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court because of
- A.
Prejudicial pre-trial publicity
- B.
Publication of Sheppard's prior criminal records
- C.
A totality of circumstances including pre-trial publicity, juror exposure to publicity during the trial, and trial disruptions caused by the media
- D.
The judge's failure to move the trial
Correct Answer
C. A totality of circumstances including pre-trial publicity, juror exposure to publicity during the trial, and trial disruptions caused by the mediaExplanation
The correct answer is a totality of circumstances including pre-trial publicity, juror exposure to publicity during the trial, and trial disruptions caused by the media. In the Sheppard v. Maxwell case, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Sheppard's conviction because the combination of pre-trial publicity, juror exposure to publicity during the trial, and trial disruptions caused by the media created a prejudiced and unfair environment for the defendant. This ruling highlighted the importance of ensuring a fair trial by considering the cumulative impact of various factors on the defendant's right to a fair and impartial jury.Rate this question:
-
- 5.
Which of the following is not correct?
- A.
The trial judge has responsibility for protecting a defendant's right to a fair trial
- B.
Prejudicial publicity that biases juries has been found by studies to be a factor that must be dealt with in most murder cases
- C.
Prejudicial information may be greater when it reaches jurors through the media than in court because it is not tempered by protective procedures.
- D.
Research does not clearly demonstrate that publicity affects jurors' impartiality.
Correct Answer
C. Prejudicial information may be greater when it reaches jurors through the media than in court because it is not tempered by protective procedures.Explanation
The given statement suggests that prejudicial information may be greater when it reaches jurors through the media than in court because it is not tempered by protective procedures. This means that when jurors are exposed to information through media outlets, there are no safeguards or regulations in place to ensure that the information is fair and unbiased. However, in reality, the court system has various protective procedures in place to ensure that jurors are not influenced by prejudicial information. Therefore, this statement is not correct.Rate this question:
-
- 6.
Which of the following remedies for prejudicial publicity has First Amendment implications?
- A.
Measures designed to compensate for the existence of prejudicial publicity
- B.
Measures designed to prevent prejudicial publicity
Correct Answer
B. Measures designed to prevent prejudicial publicityExplanation
Measures designed to prevent prejudicial publicity have First Amendment implications because they potentially restrict the freedom of speech and press. The First Amendment protects the right to freedom of expression, including the right to disseminate information and opinions. By implementing measures to prevent prejudicial publicity, there is a risk of infringing upon these rights. However, it is important to note that the First Amendment is not an absolute right and can be limited in certain circumstances, such as when there is a compelling government interest, like ensuring a fair trial.Rate this question:
-
- 7.
In the voir dire process
- A.
Lawyers can dismiss potential jurors even if they do not exhibit bias
- B.
Judges make the choice of jurors after questioning them without any involvement by lawyers
- C.
Both the prosecution and the defense can challenge an unlimited number of jurors on preemptory challenges
- D.
Lawyers can dismiss only a limited number of jurors on challenges for cause
Correct Answer
A. Lawyers can dismiss potential jurors even if they do not exhibit biasExplanation
In the voir dire process, lawyers have the ability to dismiss potential jurors even if they do not exhibit bias. This means that lawyers can choose to remove jurors from the pool based on their own judgment or strategic reasons, regardless of whether the jurors have shown any clear bias or prejudice. This allows lawyers to shape the composition of the jury to their advantage and ensure that they have a fair and impartial jury for their case.Rate this question:
-
- 8.
Which of the following does a judge not have to prove in order to issue a constitutionally protected "gag" order?
- A.
There is, or is likely to be, widespread prejudicial publicity
- B.
None of the usual methods of ensuring a fair trial will work.
- C.
Each juror has been exposed to pervasive pretrial prejudicial publicity
- D.
The "gag" order will effectively stop the prejudicial publicity
Correct Answer
C. Each juror has been exposed to pervasive pretrial prejudicial publicityExplanation
A judge does not have to prove that each juror has been exposed to pervasive pretrial prejudicial publicity in order to issue a constitutionally protected "gag" order. The question is asking for the option that the judge does not have to prove, and this option states that each juror has been exposed to pervasive pretrial prejudicial publicity. Therefore, the judge does not have to prove this particular condition in order to issue a "gag" order.Rate this question:
-
- 9.
True or False? Although prior restraints against the press usually are unconstitutional, gag orders directed against participants in trials (lawyers, witnesses, etc.) have been upheld bycourts.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
Gag orders, which restrict participants in trials from speaking to the press or public about the case, have been upheld by courts. While prior restraints against the press are generally considered unconstitutional, the courts have recognized the need to balance the right to a fair trial and the integrity of the judicial process. Gag orders are seen as necessary to prevent potential prejudice, interference, or disruption in the legal proceedings. Therefore, the statement that gag orders against trial participants have been upheld by courts is true.Rate this question:
-
- 10.
With regard to the collateral bar rule
- A.
Journalists can disobey judge-imposed gag orders if the orders are clearly unconstitutional without fear of being found in contempt
- B.
Journalists should obey a court gag order even if they feel it is clearly unconstitutional.
- C.
Journalists cannot be found in contempt of court for disobeying a gag order because they are protected by the First Amendment
- D.
The Providence Journal Rule will protect journalists in all federal circuits except the Fifth
Correct Answer
B. Journalists should obey a court gag order even if they feel it is clearly unconstitutional. -
- 11.
In Chandler v. Florida, the Supreme Court made it clear that allowing cameras in a courtroom is
- A.
Constitutionally permissible
- B.
Constitutionally required
- C.
An automatic violation of a defendant's Sixth Amendment rights
- D.
Inherently unfair and prejudicial to all parties
Correct Answer
A. Constitutionally permissibleExplanation
The Supreme Court's decision in Chandler v. Florida established that the use of cameras in a courtroom is constitutionally permissible. This means that it is legally allowed and does not violate any constitutional rights, including the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights. The court's ruling indicates that the presence of cameras does not inherently compromise the fairness of the proceedings or prejudice any of the parties involved.Rate this question:
-
- 12.
True or False? In has long been a settled area of the law that the press and the public have a right of access to all court records after the cases are settled or closed. This rule currentlyapplies also to electronically stored records.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
B. FalseExplanation
The statement is false. While it is generally true that the press and the public have a right of access to court records after cases are settled or closed, this does not automatically apply to electronically stored records. Access to electronic court records may be subject to additional regulations and restrictions, such as privacy concerns or security measures. Therefore, it is not accurate to say that the right of access to all court records after settlement or closure applies to electronically stored records.Rate this question:
-
- 13.
True or False? There is no right of access to preliminary hearings because they are not part of the defendant's official trial
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
B. FalseExplanation
False. There is a right of access to preliminary hearings even though they are not part of the defendant's official trial. Preliminary hearings are conducted to determine if there is enough evidence to proceed with a trial, and they play a crucial role in the criminal justice process. The public and media have the right to attend these hearings to ensure transparency and accountability in the legal system.Rate this question:
-
- 14.
A federal official may require that persons seeking a public record
- A.
State the purpose for which they will use the information
- B.
Prove that the requesters have a "legitimate purpose" for requesting the record
- C.
Prove that they are not working for a foreign government
- D.
None of the above
Correct Answer
D. None of the aboveExplanation
The correct answer is "none of the above" because a federal official may not require persons seeking a public record to state the purpose for which they will use the information, prove that they have a "legitimate purpose" for requesting the record, or prove that they are not working for a foreign government. These requirements would go against the principles of transparency and access to public information.Rate this question:
-
- 15.
A reporter files a Freedom of Information Act request with the Department of Justice. The first response the reporter receives denies access to the record. The reporter now
- A.
Appeals to higher Department of Justice officials
- B.
Appeals to the federal courts
- C.
Appeals to the state courts in the state in which the reporter works
- D.
Has no appeal
Correct Answer
A. Appeals to higher Department of Justice officialsExplanation
The reporter should appeal to higher Department of Justice officials because they are the next level of authority within the same department. They may have more power to review the initial denial and overturn it if they find it unjustified. Appealing to the federal courts or state courts would be the next steps if the appeal within the Department of Justice is unsuccessful. However, it is important to note that the given information does not mention any specific reasons for the denial, so the reporter's chances of success in the appeal may vary.Rate this question:
-
- 16.
True or False? If a request for information falls under one of the nine FOIA exemptions, the law requires that the agency withhold the record
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
B. FalseExplanation
The statement is false. If a request for information falls under one of the nine FOIA exemptions, the law does not require the agency to automatically withhold the record. Instead, the agency has the discretion to determine whether to release or withhold the requested information, taking into consideration the specific exemption that applies and any other relevant factors.Rate this question:
-
- 17.
The Freedom of Information Act gives reporters (and others) access to documents controlled by
- A.
Congress
- B.
Federal executive agencies and departments
- C.
Federal courts
- D.
State executive agencies and departments
- E.
All of the above
Correct Answer
B. Federal executive agencies and departmentsExplanation
The correct answer is federal executive agencies and departments. The Freedom of Information Act grants reporters and others the right to access documents that are controlled by federal executive agencies and departments. This means that individuals can request information from these entities and expect to receive it, as long as it does not fall under any exemptions outlined in the Act. The Act does not provide access to documents controlled by congress, federal courts, or state executive agencies and departments.Rate this question:
-
- 18.
The U.S. Supreme Court has generally ruled that the First Amendment protects
- A.
Neither publication nor newsgathering
- B.
Publication and newsgathering
- C.
Publication but not newsgathering
- D.
Newsgathering but not publication
Correct Answer
C. Publication but not newsgatheringExplanation
The correct answer is publication but not newsgathering. The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held that the First Amendment protects the freedom of the press, which includes the right to publish information without prior restraint or censorship. However, the Court has also recognized that newsgathering activities, such as gathering information or sources, do not receive the same level of protection and can be subject to certain limitations or regulations. This means that while the First Amendment grants strong protections for the publication of information, it does not necessarily provide the same level of protection for the gathering of that information.Rate this question:
-
- 19.
Which of the following is true?
- A.
Journalists cannot be found liable when they break promises of confidentiality to sources
- B.
The death of Princess Diana resulted in federal legislation against paparazzi newsgathering practices
- C.
Journalists can not be found liable if they enter private property with police without property owner permission
- D.
Journalists can take pictures of students on a playground from a public sidewalk.
Correct Answer
D. Journalists can take pictures of students on a playground from a public sidewalk.Explanation
Journalists can take pictures of students on a playground from a public sidewalk because they have the right to gather news in public spaces and capture images of events that are visible to the public. As long as they are not trespassing on private property or violating any other laws, journalists are generally allowed to photograph individuals in public places without their consent. This is protected by the First Amendment rights of freedom of the press and freedom of speech.Rate this question:
-
- 20.
Which of the following is not true?
- A.
The First Amendment guarantees press access to correctional facilities
- B.
Newsgathering activities may be restricted on government property not open for general public use
- C.
Journalists must obey orders from officials at disaster and crime scenes because their newsgathering is protected by the First Amendment.
- D.
Journalists have no right of access to executions
Correct Answer
A. The First Amendment guarantees press access to correctional facilitiesExplanation
The First Amendment does not guarantee press access to correctional facilities. While journalists may have some access to correctional facilities, it is not an absolute guarantee under the First Amendment. Access to correctional facilities can be restricted or limited by prison officials for various reasons, such as security concerns or privacy issues. Therefore, the statement that the First Amendment guarantees press access to correctional facilities is not true.Rate this question:
-
Quiz Review Timeline +
Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.
-
Current Version
-
Jul 30, 2023Quiz Edited by
ProProfs Editorial Team -
Mar 24, 2010Quiz Created by
Cucaracho
Back to top