126 / 164
126
Social Media
Should Not
Be Allowed
To Interfere
With The
Administration
Of Justice
these pages impulsively, this is the type of media attention that has
the potential to interfere.
The case of Jill Meagher is certainly very recent and high profile,
however, this is not the only time that social media has threatened
the administration of justice. There was a case just last year involving
18-year old Kieren Loverage who was accused of killing Thomas
Kelly in an unprovoked attack at Kings Cross. After Loverage’s
arrest, photos were published by social media users of the accused
accompanied with captions such as ‘murderer’ and ‘monster.’ This is
yet another example of how the public seems to decide on the guilt
of a person and, through the use of social media, incriminates them
before their trial has even commenced. The fundamental notion of
innocent until proven guilty is being compromised.
It’s clear that something needs to be done to address this problem,
and the first step must be to raise awareness of the need for restraint
and discretion in our online behaviour. The police made Facebook
take down pages that incriminate the accused in Jill Meagher’s case,
but perhaps there should have been stricter regulations as to what
can be published on social media in the first place.
I am in no way bemoaning the role of social media in our lives.
I’m as partial to a cheeky photo ‘like’ and a hilarious meme as the
next person. We should use Facebook, twitter and the like to enrich
our lives. It should serve to keep us in touch, it should serve to
entertain us, but it should
N
ot
serve to administer justice.
‘
12