Unintended consequences !

The rape and murder of ABC radio employee, Jill Meagher in Melbourne touched a nerve with most people in Australia.   It seemed uncanny that a beautiful young woman could disappear without trace just a short distance from her home, on a street that was far from deserted.   There was a steady stream of cars, trams and taxis - and cctv cameras disclosed other pedestrians.

When her body was discovered days later, buried in a shallow grave beside a country road the outpouring of grief from complete strangers was overwhelming.   A massive memorial of flowers started to accumulate at the site of a bridal shop whose security camera depicted the last images of her still alive, and by word of mouth people gathered after a man was taken into custody and charged with murder.   A hundred or so were expected to walk that street in her memory - instead tens of thousands of people turned up in an almost endless stream.   The pictures on television reminded some of the events in London that followed the tragic death of Princess Diana.

Now that sympathy for Jill Meaghers family is turning to rage against the man accused of her murder.  Legal circles are becoming concerned that social media is being used to express that rage in a manner that may prejudice the forthcoming trial.   In particular, comments on Facebook could cause his defence lawyers to claim that a " fair trial " is now impossible because all jurors will have been influenced by the media hype surrounding this case.

Facebook has been requested to withdraw the more sensational posts - and has refused.   It seems that we are seeing the conflict between the principles of free speech - as opposed to the right of an accused to have a trial before jurors who have not been exposed to pre-judgement by media.

Legal proceedings are not expected to get under way until at least next year and the wheels of justice grind slowly.   It would be unfortunate if the public interest that was so publicly aroused by Jill Meaghers disappearance caused events that resulted in the person responsible being granted a mistrial.   That would certainly be an unintended consequence.

The public would be well advised to refrain from direct comment - until that trial is concluded !