The nature of the judicial branch includes the possibility of a high-profile case appearing on a court’s docket at any time, sometimes without warning. In the last 20 years, several high-profile cases gained national or even international attention, forcing courts to learn in real-time how to navigate high-interest events in a modern world. In the calm following these cases, tools and resources were and continue to be developed. These tools assist courts in preparing for and more easily navigating high-profile cases, calming or even avoiding chaos on the path to a fair verdict.

Bush v. Gore, 2000

At the 2019 National Association for Court Management conference (NACM), Craig Waters^[1], public information officer for the Florida Supreme Court, discussed the difficulties of managing Bush v. Gore in 2000.^[2] At the time they struggled with how to get information from inside the court to outside of the court.^[3] Waters finally settled on telling the media he would be making announcements in 30 minutes on the courthouse steps.^[4] The announcements were not without their difficulties. As Waters spoke, hecklers shouted over the briefing, and threats made wearing a bulletproof vest during the announcements a necessity.^[5] Waters asserts if Bush v. Gore, or a similarly high-profile case,  happened today he would use social media to make those announcements.^[6]

Waters is not alone in turning to social media to help navigate cases of high interest. Court public relation experts say if courts do not have Facebook and Twitter, they are hindering their ability to deal with a crisis. Were Bush v. Gore to happen today, Waters would not limit his use of social media to just announcements. Waters recommends using hashtags and event branding, such as the branding created in the Pulse nightclub shooting, to make it easier for people to quickly find information, as a part of a broader strategy.^[7]

The People v. Scott Lee Peterson, 2003-2004

In 2003 Mike Tozzi was court executive officer for Stanislaus County Superior Court, California. On Monday morning, April 22, 2003, Tozzi arrived at the courthouse to find media satellite trucks lining the streets around the courthouse, reporters clamoring for the complaint at the filing counter, and cameras in the courthouse halls.^[8] Seeking to gain control, Tozzi rushed to obtain an order from the first arriving judge.^[9] The order cleared the courthouse of reporters.^[10] With space to breath, Tozzi’s focus turned to quickly create a website for frequently asked questions about the case.^[11] Several years earlier, another high-profile case managed by the county’s sheriff’s department helped create a roadmap for Tozzi to follow.^[12] From the sheriff’s department’s experience, Tozzi knew the court’s interactions with the media must be FAT—Fair, Accurate, and Timely.^[13] Additionally, as the messenger, Tozzi knew building and sustaining credibility with the media was critical.^[14] Though doubted originally, the FAT structure proved effective in ensuring the media abides by the rules the court established.

Breaking down the acronym:

Fair means all media get the same access.^[15] Online filing systems, social media, websites, and newly accepted streaming video formats for hearings and trials help provide equal access to both traditional and nontraditional media sources. Additionally, physical and digital security measures are crucial to the success and credibility of these systems. While streaming video systems, like WebEx, Zoom, or Facebook live, are still new to many courts, experts recommend configuring the court’s platform of choice to ensure the viewing public cannot interrupt the hearing. For social media and websites, courts may want to consider disabling commenting on posts.

Accurate means information is truthful and complete. To put it another way, release documents in their entirety; doing so shifts responsibility to the media for any misquotes or intentional omissions.^[16]

Timely means as soon as reasonably possible.^[17] Understanding news-reporting cycles ensures information is released regularly and reliably.

To manage the media, Tozzi created a webpage for the Peterson trial that contains all the information required to meet FAT, which allowed the media and public to find:

• Relevant agencies with contact information
• FAQs
• Jail information
• Court dates
• Court rules and information and media guidelines
• Court documents
• Court forms
• “Contact Us”
• Photos
• Links to other relevant websites^[18]

Links to case-specific pages or hashtags should be short and simple.^[19] Both should be easy to spell and easy to remember.^[20] If a relevant, appropriate hashtag already exists there is no need to recreate the wheel, but when creating the webpage, short links and hashtag branding should be considered.^[21]

Guide to managing high-profile cases

In 2015 the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) released High-Profile Cases in the 21st Century, an updated guide for handling high-profile cases.^[22] The guide is a collaborative effort between NCSC, the Conference of Court Public Information Officers^[23] (CCPIO), the National Judicial College, and a panel of judges, court administrators, jury managers, reporters, and others.^[24]

The guide provides advice for handling a variety of high-profile cases, including:

• Cases involving a celebrity
• Cases involving difficult litigants
• Cases involving terrorism or organized crime
• Political cases
• Reality TV cases
• Capital cases and cases involving a heinous crime^[25]

Key to managing a modern high-profile case is establishing a Case Team.^[26] This requires a broad base of skills and experience in court management, media relations, and court security, at the very least, but the inclusion of the administrative judge, a jury management expert, an information technology expert, and someone with expertise in trial support functions, as well.^[27] The guide also describes what the courts need from the media what the media wants from the courts during high-profile cases.^[28]

Getting started with social media

It is twenty years since Bush v. Gore and the Peterson case and most courts have a web presence, but many courts remain hesitant to leverage social media over concerns about impartiality and staying within their state’s ethics rules. NCSC’s guide to social media provides guidance in developing and navigating the dos and don’ts of establishing and maintaining a social media presence.^[29]

The guide highlights the legal use of social media, provides examples of state social media guidelines, and contains a step-by-step guide for those new to social media, quick tips, and court- and judge-specific resources.^[30] In addition to NCSC’s resource guide, those who join CCPIO have access to CCPIO’s Slack Workspace, Live Discussions, Member-Only content, and the benefits of a partnership with the National Judicial College and NCSC.^[31]

Navigating a high-profile case can be harrowing and overwhelming but it does not have to be. Utilizing the NCSC’s high-profile-case and social media guides, and the member resources of CCPIO, state courts can successfully and safely weather the storm of high-profile cases, further instilling public confidence in the judicial system.