The first case that I chose to listen to the live recording of was the case of the “Hiccup Girl aka Jennifer Mee:” Even before this case and trial the “hiccup girl was already famous. She was once on the Today show because she had unstoppable hiccups for five weeks and no doctor could figure out why. However, even before all the fame with the hiccups and crime she was troubled. Men raped her on a daily basis. In addition, she started selling drugs at the tender age of 13. She mostly sold crack on the street. Not only was she selling drugs on the street but she was also in a extremely abusive relationship as her boyfriend at the time beat her so badly that it caused her have a miscarriage. Kids at her school would make fun of her because of the hiccups as they would say that she was faking it, drunk or pregnant. Due to the teasing from other students at school and giving up on ever finding a cure even with all the home remedies, but she began to suffer from depression even more given the fact that she was already prone to it.While on a segment that she did with former NBC Today Reporter Matt Lauer, he noticed that she only hiccupped when she stopped talking and jokingly told her ” So there’s the solution right there. Don’t stop talking.” That comment alone did more harm than good.She received hate mail saying that she was faking and that she was only making her hiccups louder and more animated to get attention. It was only after a hypnotist worked with her for three hours that five weeks later she was cured.When she realized that people began to slowly no longer care about her hiccup problem anymore she turned back to the streets to satisfy her need for attention. This would be her greatest downfall yet. While all this was going on she pursed a relationship with rapper Lamont Newton. She was using Lamont by set up robbery victims by making dates with them online. One person that specifically fell victim of this was 22- year old Shannon Griffin. Griffin was supposed to meet Jennifer in order to make an exchange for small amount of Marijuana. Shannon thought he was going to meet Jennifer for a date, but she was actually the one who lured him down here. Jennifer set this all up with one of Newton’s best friends Laron Raiford. Mee left after the drugs were exchanged. The intention of Raiford was to rob him and minutes later a fight breaks out. Shannon is dead after the fight from five gunshots to the chest. Based off the live court trial, Jennifer cried at the sentencing and verdict. In real life one can see some cases in films where they show positively no emotion at all and have “resting bitch face.” or they make the emotions way more dramatic than they need to be in order to draw attention themselves because aren’t getting from the jury and judge. I found it extremely interesting that Jennifer only cried at the sentencing and verdict and in my opinion I feel like she tried to convince the jury that she played them one more time to try and sway their minds before they went to discuss the case and verdict.Jennifer is charged with first degree murder because even though she did not pull the trigger, or had knowledge that would be killed, and left before the shooting occurred in the state of Florida anyone who participates in a robbery which results in a death can still be sentenced to life without parole and this is exactly what happened to Jennifer. In addition, in the court videos we see Jennifer’s attorney argue that she is schizophrenic. In the media we see this as some who is mental unable to stand trial and non competent. In the media we see this used a lot when the trial that is being presented deals with murder. This is because they hope that it will benefit them if convicted of the crime they are charged with. However, in Jennifer’s case it does not benefit her as she is found competent to stand trial after a psych evaluation.When the jury is presented the evidence in her case they are told that her DNA was discovered on Griffin’s license. This is a very important piece to the jury because not only was here DNA on his driver’s license, but his wallet and keys were found at her apartment.In the media we can see how those pieces of crucial evidence might start to sway the jury on whether or not she guilty. Mee’s attorney came back with a strong argument in her defense as he theorized that she could not have been behind this because she did not own a cell phone at all and couldn’t have arranged to meet Griffin. However, you can see the jury not take that into consideration as they are letting the DNA speak for itself. In the media, they would indeed let the physical evidence speak for itself because they just like everyone else think her DNA was found on his personal belongings so that means she is in fact guilty, but the media does take into consideration of the fact that she supposedly had no phone creating some doubts in the public and not those at the trial. They tend blow the one thing that can create doubt about someone out of proportion. This is what causes problems within the jury sometimes because if they go home they are more than likely going to see more information in the media that may have not been presented in court yet or the attorneys and judge have no knowledge of yet.Some of the things in this case that I noticed are not the same as tv court are it can deliver instant justice whereas in real life that is more so than not the case they can take hours, days, weeks or months. It all depends on the jury and the arguments that were presented for the case that they heard. In many of the shows or movies that we watch we see justice almost always being served to the person held accountable. Unfortunately in real life we discover how the criminal justice can fail on someone. On Tv shows they do not want to show the downsides of the criminal justice system for fear that they will be portrayed the way it truly can be in some cases.Even in one of the articles that I read children had problems with understanding what the courtroom and judge looks like in person versus what they see on TV shows. “A group of psychologists from Kiel found out that, even after seeing pictures of a German courtroom, children still believed that the judge would have a gavel or at least wear a wig.” (Machura and Ulbrich 2001). This is often times one of the preconceived assumptions that not only children, but adults too have about judges when they are in the courtroom.In addition, in movies if a perpetrator confesses to the crime they are punished immediately in court whereas in reality incriminating evidence is not allowed it can potentially be allowed, but only after following certain procedures that are not instant. In movies Litigations that deal with the public are filed in district court, but they are actually supposed to be filed in high court or supreme court. Often times in movies we see lawyers arguing with each other for dramatic effect, but most of the times they are actually friends with each other except for when they are in court together and judges are addressed by the lawyers. In movies we tend to see the lawyers insult everyone by being sarcastic, but in real life anyone who does that in a position like that will not be heard or even have to leave. Lastly in movies we see the verdict instantly read and in real life it is held until both sides have heard everything and can take months to occur.We need to help break the barriers of this and educate everyone on the topics of TV court and what court is truly life is like in real life because if you think TV court is what you will be experiencing, boy you are about to be so wrong on that topic and its because many of us are uneducated on the courts and that needs to change. According to Valkenburg and Patiwael, they found that those who watched crime shows to learn about the American Judicial System actually had a more negative view on crime in society than other people with different motives of watching these kinds of shows(1998). In the case of Jennifer Mee, she probably thought because she made national news a few years before she was charged with murder that she could use that to her advantage in the courtroom. We need to make a change to how people understand TV court and court in real life because they will be shocked if they are in court one day and it is not like what they would watch on TV everyday. So as you can see with Jennifer’s case and how the media portrays court, they are indeed no where near to being the same and I don’t think that they ever will be close to getting it right.