13 March
Videos
Bryan Kohberger. Fair Trial vs. First Amendment. The Media Court Battle. The Emily Show Podcast
- tcweekly
- emilybaker, emilydbaker
- 50 Comments
Unraveling the Bryan Kohberger case: dissecting the battle between a fair trial and the First Amendment. Amidst the media court battle, The Emily Show Podcast sheds light on the intricate details of this high-profile criminal investigation. Kohberger, a prominent figure in the community, stands accused of a heinous crime, sparking intense debate on the balance between press freedom and the right to a fair trial. Will justice prevail in this compelling true crime saga? Stay tuned as the investigation unfolds.
@TheEmilyDBaker
Visit https://oliveandjune.com/lawnerd for 20% off your first Olive & June System!
🌏 Get Exclusive NordVPN deal here ➼ https://nordvpn.com/emilydbaker It's risk-free with Nord's 30-day money-back guarantee! ✌
@dianecheney4141
I’m really interested in the psychic nonsense but I can see that they would want to delay that defamation hearing until after the murder trial
@aimeeterry7730
An innocent man is not afraid of details being released. A guilty man wants them suppressed so he can fins a loophole. And I believe 100% that Anne Taylor will look for a loophole even if she believes he is guilty
@ladyphantom7
The problem is the media and public already convicted him. The coverage has been nothing but slanted and one-sided.
@Lynds77
❤
@yabadabadue7889
1:00:24 – 😂 it's sports ball season!
@MariaML14
Right to a fair trial & impartial jury supercedes public's right to know/watch
@kateschneider1223
Would love deep dive on Sam Shepherd case
@sgdsingh9123
I agree better safe than sorry, play it extra safe so you don’t have to go through another trial because of something the media does
@ESPHMacD
Separate thread… How much of what they asked is covered by the actual order and how much is it the police just not wanting to answer and blaming it on the gag order instead of them being uncooperative or "no commenting" there way through all the media requests….
@ESPHMacD
Just to get my thoughts into a comment before you get to far into the podcast…. How expansive is the freedom of press and how that relates to them being "involved" in a trial? Because media these days is involved, they want to be included. The press is not these days a straight reporting of facts followed by opinion. Are they asking because they want to REPORT on the facts, or do they want to sensationalize headlines to get views or whathaveyou. I'm worried they are only choosing to fight the order because they can't catch views by creating outrageous headlines. Is that right protected if them doing that greatly increases the chance that jurors will be biased or that the public will follow sensationalized media over the actual court happenings. Because personally, if all they want to do is report on the facts to propagate actual info, can't they wait until the facts are out there and conclusion drawn? There's plenty else going on to sensationalized. I don't think he can get a fair trial if the media is given free reign over that (Since that is the right allowed to him). Limiting liability of getting a biased trial feels like the right move. If he is guilty and is found guilty, don't we want to make sure that happens with no involvement that can count as grounds for appeal?
I get the sheppard argument too: even if the jury didn't have access to the media, having them there could inform the jury of what the public wants and scare/sway them towards the outcome the public wants, and not the truth or what has been proven in court using court facts.
I agree with public access, but should it be fully and completely unrestricted? Is there a way to allow that and mitigate exploitation of the facts in ways that retraumatize victims or take advantage? With our current media set up, how accessible it all is and the way outrageous headlines are popular as opposed to just reporting on the facts. Its so clouded with bias one way or another, is there a way to allow reporting without some restrictions? /gen
Might edit as the pod goes on… just wanted the thoughts out of my head.
@Sonita888
So, who killed Sheperd's wife? Did she and her unborn child ever ger justice??
@chloeroche7880
I actually was wondering if u were talking about shepherd trial. Shane and Ryan while they were still doing buzzfeed unsolved covered the case and it is really interesting. I’d love if it was a podcast episode instead of members only but either way it’s startling what they allowed happen in that trial through the media. Also while I’m in Ireland ( which may be kinda make this point void even tho most people know about this case) I do know people who would be online a lot that didn’t know about this trial
@betsytrog813
I can't stand most media, but I want to be able to watch a trial and hear everything myself and make my own opinion. I don't go off of what other people thing. There have been times when I have disagreed with an entire jury. So yes, I believe I should be able to watch it and see what is said.
@betsytrog813
My husband doesn't watch the news and could care less about true crime or the stuff I watch. He could easily be on a jury for even a big case like this because he would know nothing about it.
@AL-fl4jk
56:52 “even I give legacy media shit when they overstep!” Means a lot less from someone who supported the ‘stop the steal’ nonsense.
@desertpunk6705
The State and it’s agents do not have any constitutional rights. The defendant can speak freely and the State should be automatically gagged.
@eriksmith2514
A gag order does not violate the First Amendment because the order was not a law enacted by Congress or a legislature. A gag order can infringe on the right to free speech, which existed before the First Amendment was made. The issue is whether letting people discuss the case will jeopardize the fairness of the proceedings. If so, the gag order should stand and apply to witnesses. I believe the court must find facts showing that the fairness of a trial will be affected. The media and witnesses' must argue the opposite. The media has a good point when it argues that those facts were not found or relayed to media.
@kimberlywilles8343
Happy Mother’s Day! 🩷🩷
@SeaBee1223
I will hold my judgement for now. I want to hear the statements of the roommates too
@rynndiane6488
I think the press isn’t really an issue. You can find 12 people who haven’t heard really. I know nothing about the case and am basically hearing about it now from this video
@joannegrieco8523
O.J.,and Michael Jackson got plenty of attention so did Casey Anthony and All of them were found not guilty, I don't believe it prevents a fair trial
@ll3328
please cover daniel penny
@jessvickery7686
Please do a membership deep dive on that cluster. Sounds entertaining 🤣
@shaniya_hope
I think gag orders can be used but I also think they imply that the court has no faith in the people to be honest with them when called to jury duty. If media has made a juror partial to one side we have to assume they will be honest and we have to assume if they have seen reporting and can ignore it we trust that too. And if they can’t the lawyers need to spot that and Yeet them!
@ndausky8212
You are simply unmatched in terms of YouTuber/streamer quality! Unbelievably polite, intelligent, and interactive. I can’t believe i haven’t found your channel up until now. Thank you from all of us!
@mirandatorres9616
Why does the media have to report anything beforehand? Just have the media at the trial and that’s it.
@carolinaalvesdelima675
I'm not an official lawnerd as I'm not a lawyer, but to me this is clearly unconstitutional due to the right to free press /Free speech 👀….
@nancythomas1954
Personally I think that until the jury is chosen, this case should be somewhat locked down if that is the main concern of the judicial system. I don't think that this boy should be spoken in the press as the killer if he has not been judged so in a court of law. As you have mentioned legacy news has a really bad habit of slanting news the way they want you to see it. Once the trial starts, I do believe that it should be telecasted ( is my age showing lol) so that people are actually able to hear the facts and allegations to make up their own mind. I think if more Heard (and maybe Depp) followers had actually watched the trial, there would have not been such mess afterward. My problem is that I don't trust the news agencies to not start convicting him before he even goes to trial. And why would the victim's families want to talk to the news? Money? Fifteen min of fame? Anyone with any grain of emotion would know what those poor people have gone thru. It is deplorable. If the believe that the police have got the right man and say so, isn't that going to prejudice whomever hears it against the defendant? I don't know, I just feel lol that it could go so wrong. Thank you for making the legality clear to us. And I really do basically agree with you.
@LemonSte
Havent watched the stream yet but have been following the case with you and other channels – i'm speaking as a brit, so maybe this is a USA thing, but I seriously dont understand the argument that the public NEEDS TO KNOW everything, especially before a trial has even started. Its seriously disruptive to the court process, even (and often especially!) if the person is guilty, if you have a great or weak case against someone, the last thing you want is for the case to be thrown out or for a mistrial to be declared just because the defence can argue the jury pool was tainted and/or so much misinformation is out there and affecting the case that theres now reasonable doubt. Even that aside, for me its the principle. This man is presumed guilty at this point, but we would not feel that way if we did not have all this info floating around 🙄 true ir not.
@corinnebunetto1296
I thought subscriber only chat was turned off maybe I'm wrong 😮
@RachelleEvanston
Love ❤the idea of a deep dive into Shepherd! So relevant as a seminal case as applied to due process and by extension, to freedom of the press. Great thought!🎉Let’s do it!💜😻
@cindyt1
It wouldn't let me watch it saying not allowed in my country due to copyright..not even from the email??
@samanthaholt5569
I wish you would cover the danny masterson trial some bombs being dropped over there to
@SamSolasdonSaol
Wow. Today's live got dinged fast. Sad I missed it.
@mamalu836
Who else tried to watch the new video from this Thursday and saw it got blocked by nbc??!!!
@tranceform9459
Releasing the gag order would be like blowing up a dam with a missile. Seems slightly unsafe.
Also, wouldn't that lead into media hounding LE, lawyers, investigators, witnesses, and everyone with information constantly until trial, giving more vindication to put out way more stories and conjure much more speculation.
The story seems like it's starting to spread less outside of the echo chamber this true crime community due to info rolling out much slower.
I'd say keep the gag order.
@whitneymcdonald4965
It’s more important to ensure a fair trial imo
@ViennaDarlingvd
I don’t really care about the medias access to information. I care about the public’s access to information. Just about every case I’ve watched with you, Emily (especially the JD case) has not been accurately reported by the media. I also think that despite the problems it causes, judges and lawyers need to be held accountable through transparency. So I don’t like what the judge has been doing in this case, because it doesn’t feel transparent in the slightest
@AriTheCentauri
Ian and Rob did a Trials of the Century video on that case!
@caseymccloy1951
Except for the extremely inappropriate and prejudicial comments made by his Pennsylvania attorney, sure maybe no terribly damaging public comments have been made. I wanna know all the things but the gag order should stand in the interest of justice
@forrestfey
I am invested in the Masterson case but am not sure I could have watched video from it because it would be hard to hear the victims testify. I think not having video in this case is a good thing, but they allow journalists in the court room. Other things I would love to se, like experts and I would love to understand more about the severety of unredackted discovery geting into the hands of a third party (scientology). Maby there could be a mix of showing and not showing. Gag orders could also be more specific instead of general.
@lisainthelab
I am in such Emily D. Baker trial-watch withdrawal!! 🥹
@zebrastrong9291
Can’t afford a membership at this time, but I would absolutely LOVE a historical deep dive!
@aisle_of_view
Re: Sarah Boone – We've seen all the interrogations, suitcase vid, you name it. But the I4 trial – crickets.
@blabl590
Great point emm!!@ if you don't click on a trial video the algorithm gives you less similar videos 😊😊😊
@treasurex6943
Quality horrible
@tammyjohnson3438
I 100% believe not only this one should be vacated, but any and all exactly like it… It is our constitutional right to know the information pre trial and during trial in EVERY court in this country! I live in NY and Jude’s don’t allow cameras in the courtroom… We have been fighting this FOREVER!!! I have hope this will change very soon! thank You Beautiful for the video! XOXO 😘 💜💜💜💜💜💜
@rebeccaglasgow1324
I have been to the dam where Shepherd jumped into the water in the movie
@Trainer_TaraFit
Emily!! Did you get lip filler? Looking fantastic as always ❤