犯罪新聞報導對於司法官“認知”、“追訴”及“判決”的影響

The Effects of the Media's Coverage of Criminal Events and Trials on Prosecutors' and Judges' Perceptions, Litigations, and Rulings

10.6199/NTULJ.2006.35.03.02

彭文正(Dennis Weng-Jeng Peng)；蕭憲文(Hsien-Wen Hsiao)

犯罪新聞 ； 新聞報導 ； 新聞自由 ； 公平審判 ； 第三效果認知 ； 媒體效果 ； 媒體可信度 ； 閱聽人研究 ； 檢察官 ； 法官 ； coverage of criminal events ； news reporting ； freedom of press ； fair trail ； third-person perception ； media influence ； media credibility ； audience research ； prosecutor ； judge

臺大法學論叢

35卷3期（2006 / 05 / 01）

107 - 193

繁體中文

隨著近幾年來媒體蓬勃的發展，犯罪新聞的報導在新聞中的比例大幅提高，而各新聞台的報導方式也愈趨於煽情化，新聞媒體在報道犯罪新聞時，很容易就違反了許多刑事訴訟法上的原則，如偵查不公開原則、公平審判原則等；一個刑事案件在尚未獲得公正的審判程序前，就已經被媒體公布相關細節，甚至做出評論，這樣的報導究意會對於檢察官、法官及社會大衆産生時麽樣的影響？過去國內的相關研究僅限於犯罪新聞內容的文本分析，主要在檢討犯罪新聞的內容，而本研究則探討犯罪新聞與閱聽人間的關係，以在審判中扮演重要角色的的法官和檢察官作爲分析單位，以期瞭解犯罪新聞對於司法的影響。本研究發現： 一、人口變項對於檢察官和法官的電視及網路使用行爲均有顯著預測力。 二、年齡愈長的檢察官和法官愈相信媒體，網路新聞看的愈多者愈不相信媒體。 三、檢察官和法官都認爲一般民衆深受媒體影響，同事受到的影響其次，自己所受影響甚微。 四、愈相信與政治相關的司法新聞的檢察官和法官，愈相信司法新聞的描述手法會影響自己，然而一般新聞的可信度卻無此關聯。 五、檢察官比法官相信一般的司法新聞，也比較認爲自己受到報導描繪手法的影響；在面臨有關「被告惡劣」或「被害人可憐」的報導內容時，也比法官要傾向認爲同事易受影響，但在對一般社會大衆易受媒體影響的程度認知上，法官明顯地比檢察官要相信媒體的描述手法會對一般民衆産生較大的影響。

With the rapid growth and development of the media in recent years, the proportion of criminal activities covered in the daily news has greatly increased. Reporting the news has become less objective and more theatrical. When the media covers criminal activities, they tend to challenge the principles pertaining to the code of criminal procedure. For example, in regards to the principles related to the confidentiality of an investigation, criminal cases are reported by the media, and even discussed by the public, before the defendant is given a fair trial. What influences may these kinds of circumstances have over the prosecutor, the judge, and the public? In the past, research in Taiwan regarding these topics was about content analysis of the criminal news, and focused on their form and content. This project focuses on the relationship between the criminal news and the observer. To better understand the impact of the criminal news, prosecutors and judges were selected as the unit of observation as well as the unit of analysis. The findings show that: (1) Demographic variables have significant impact on prosecutors' and judges' TV-viewing habits and Internet usage. (2) Elder prosecutors and judges trust the media more; the more they view the news online, the less trust they have in the media. (3) Both prosecutors and perceive that the media's coverage of criminal activities has significant effects on the general public and moderate effects on other prosecutors and judges, but has little effect on themselves. (4) The more the prosecutors and judges trust the coverage of political scandals, the more they believe that the writing style of the coverage will impact them. (5) Compared to judges, prosecutors trust general crime news more, perceive greater media effects on themselves, perceive that characterizations, such as ”malicious suspects” or ”poor victims”, have more effects on their colleagues and have less effects on the general public.

1. (2003)。沒有一個人是贏家的司法悲劇。聯合報
2. Bare, J.(1990).The war on drugs: A case study in opinion formation.The Public Perspective,29-31.
3. Berlo, D.(1960).The process of communication: An introduction to theory and practice
4. Chaffee, S. H.,Hochheimer, J. L.,M. Gurevitch,M. R. Levy(1985).The beginnings of political communication research in the united states: Origins of the "limited effects model".Mass communication review yearbook,5,75-104.
5. Davison, W. P.(1983).The third-person effect in communication.Public Opinion Quarterly,47(1),1-15.
6. DeFleur, M. L.,Ball-Rokeach, S. J.(1982).Theories of mass communication
7. Dixon, T. L.,Linz, D.(2003).Television news, prejudical pretrail publicity, and the depiction of race.Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media,46(1),112-136.
8. Driscoll, P. D.,Salwen, M. B.(1997).Self-perceived knowledge of the o.J. Simpson trial: Third-person perception and perceptions of guilt.Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly,74,541-556.
9. Duck, J. M.,Hogg, M. A.,Terry, D. J.(1999).Social identity and perceptions of media persuasion: Are we always less influenced than others?.Journal of Applied Social Psychology,29,1879-1899.
10. Festinger, L. A.(1964).Behavior support for opinion change.Public Opinion Quarterly,28,404-417.
11. Gamson, W A.,Croteau, D.,Hoynes, W.,Sasson, T.(1992).Media images and the social construction of reality.Annual Review of Sociology,18,373-393.
12. Gerbner, G.,Gross, L.,Morgan, M.,Signorielli, N.(1980).The "mainsteaming" of America: Violence profile no.11.Journal of Communication,30(3),10-29.
13. Gunther, A. C.,Mundy, P.(1993).Biased optimism and the third-person effect.Journalism Quarterly,70,58-67.
14. Hoffner, C.,Plotkin, R. S.,Buchanan, M.,Anderson. J. D.,Kamigaki, S. K.,Hubb, L. A.(2001).The third-person effect in perceptions of television violence.Journal of communication,51,283-299.
15. Kiapper, J. T.(1960).The effects of mass communication
16. Lang, G. F.,Lang, K.(1983).The battle for public opinion: The president, the press, and the polls during watergate
17. Lasorsa, D. L.(1989).Real and perceived effects of "amerika".Journalism Quarterly,66,373-378.
18. Lavidge, R.,Steiner, G.(1961).A model for predictive measurements of advertising effectiveness.Journal of Marketing,25(6),59-62.
19. Mackie, D. M.,Hamilton, D. L.,Russkind, J.,Rosselli, F.,C. N. Macrae,C. Stangor,M. Hewstone(1996).Social psychological foundations of stereotype formation.Stereotypes and stereotyping,41-78.
20. McCombs, M. E.,Shaw, D. L.(1972).The agenda-setting function of mass media.Public Opinion Quarterly,36,176-187.
21. Moran, G.,Cutler, B. L.(1991).The prejudicial impact of pretrial publicity.Journal of Applied Social Psychology,21,345-367.
22. Noelle-Neumann, E.,H. Eguchi,K. Sata(1973).Return to the concept of powerful mass media.Studies of broadcasting: An international annual of broadcasting science,67-112.
23. Ogloff, J. R. P.,Vidmar, N.(1994).The impact of pretrial publicity on jurors: A study to compare the relative effects of television and print media in a child sex abuse case.Law and Human Behavior,18,507-525.
24. Otto, A. L.,Penrod, S. D.,Dexter, H. R.(1994).The biasing impact of pretrial publicity on juror judgments.Law and Human Behavior,18,453-470.
25. Padawer-Singer, A.,Singer, A.,Singer, R.(1977).Legal and social-psychological research in the effects of pretrial publicity on juries, numerical makeup of juries, nonunanimous verdict requirements.Law and Psychology Review,3,71-79.
26. Perloff, R. M.(1993).Third-person effect research, 1983-1992: A review and synthesis.International Journal of Public Opinion Research,5,167-184.
27. Sallach, D. L.(1974).Class domination and ideological hegemony.Sociological Quarterly,15(1),38-50.
28. Schramm, W.,W. Schramm,D. Roberts(1971).The nature of communication between humans.The process and effects of mass communication,3-53.
29. Severin, W. J.,Tankard Jr, J. W.(1997).Communication theories: Origins, methods, and uses in the mass media
30. Signorielli, N.,M. Morgan(1990).Television`s mean and dangerous world: A continuation of the cultrral indicators perspective.Cultivation Analysis: New Directions in Media Effects Reserch,85-106.
31. Tajfel, H.,Turner, J. C.,W. G. Austin,S. Worchel(1979).An integrative theory of intergroup conflict.The social psychology of intergroup relations,33-47.
32. Tankard Jr, J. W.,Hendrickson, L.,Silberman, J.,Bliss, K.,Ghanem, S.(1991).Media frames: Approaches to conceptualization and measurement.Paper presented at the the annual meeting of the Communication Theory and Methodology Division of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication,Boston:
33. 尤英夫(1994)。犯罪新聞報導與新聞倫理。台大新聞論壇，1(1)，70-78。
34. 台灣媒體觀察教育基金會(1999)。犯罪新聞中媒體侵犯人權調查報告。
35. 李鴻禧憲法教室
36. 林子儀(1992)。新聞自由與事前限制。大眾傳播法手冊
37. 林子儀(1997)。新聞自由的意義及其理論基礎。言論自由與新聞自由
38. 林俊益(2000)。偵查密行原則。月旦法學雜誌，65，18-19。
39. 林恆志(2002)。新聞報導自由與偵查不公開原則衝突之研究（上）。軍法專刊，48(6)，24-35。
40. 林紀東(1998)。中華民國憲法逐條釋義
41. 林紀東(1989)。比較憲法
42. 林鈺雄(2004)。刑事訴訟法（上）
43. 林鈺雄(2004)。刑事訴訟法（下）
44. 法治試、董保城(2004)。憲法新論
45. 侯友宜(2002)。刑案偵查過程中之新聞處理。刑事科學，54，113-130。
46. 段重民(1992)。新聞自由與公平審判。大眾傳播法手冊
47. 翁曉玲(2002)。新聞報導自由與人格權保護。當代公法新論（上）：翁岳生教授七秩誕辰祝壽論文集，台北:
48. 張大裕、陳宏達、馮建三(2003)。社會新聞報導的檢視。當代，188，4-8。
49. 莊佩容、陳建瑜、管偉筠、簡碧萱(2002)。電視犯罪新聞、性別與被害恐懼感之關連性研究。廣播與電視，19，99-125。
50. 許宗力(2002)。台灣憲法之縱剖橫切
51. 陳新民(2001)。新聞自由與司法獨立。法治國家論
52. 傅崑成(1991)。美國大眾傳播法－民主傳播與憲法
53. 楊敏華(2004)。中華民國憲怯釋論
54. 廖書雯(1992)。性暴力犯罪的新聞報導與相關法律問題－應否立法限制傳播媒體揭露性暴力犯罪被害人姓名及身份資訊之相關探討。台大新聞論壇，3，1-21。
55. 褚劍鴻(2000)。刑事訴訟法論（上冊）
56. 蔡念中(1999)。提升電視新聞節目品質…電視社會新聞羶色腥現象之探討。廣播與電視，14，167-187。
57. 蔡墩銘(2001)。刑事訴訟法論
58. 羅文輝、牛隆光(2003)。自尊、第三人效果與對限制媒介支持度的關聯性研究。新聞學研究，75，141-167。
59. 羅文輝、朱立(1993)。台港審判前犯罪新聞之比較研究。新聞學研究，47，85-106。

1. 林茂弘(2017)。政府效能、公平審判與保密義務：檢察官之言論自由與限制。臺大法學論叢，46(2)，423-489。
2. 彭文正(2007)。第三人效果的理解與疑惑。中華傳播學刊，12，3-52。
3. 王正嘉(2018)。進行中刑事案件之新聞報導的應然與界限。臺大法學論叢，47(3)，1221-1281。
4. 蕭憲文、彭文正(2007)。犯罪新聞描述手法與影響認知之實證研究。東吳法律學報，19(2)，27-68。
5. (2012)。「誰開了這臺刀？」⎯⎯「告知後同意」法則的精緻化與法學實證分析。科技法學評論，9(2)，249-300。