Legal analysts use media to educate public about issues

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Lawyers and judges who eat, sleep, and breathe the law might find it easy to forget that not everyone understands the finer points of how the justice system works. Issues of public interest, high-profile court cases, and even the day-to-day workings of the court can create drama and lead to misunderstanding.

This is where legal commentators – analysts of the inner workings of the legal system – come into play.

pundits Marion Superior Judge John Hanley hosts legal public access show “Off the Bench.” (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

Throughout Indiana, a number of attorneys and judges share their professional expertise and insights on legal issues through television and radio shows. A law school dean who comments on various sports topics and has an affiliation with the NFL Network; a former Marion Superior judge who now has a small firm and frequently works with local network stations covering legal news; and a current Marion Superior judge who hosts a monthly show about the court for a government cable access channel in Indianapolis discuss their experiences.

Sports law analyst

If you watch the NFL Network, you may have recognized one of its commentators. Indiana University School of Law

– Indianapolis Dean Gary R. Roberts has been serving as an on-air legal analyst for the network discussing the current dispute between National Football League team owners and players.

Roberts-DeanGary-mug Roberts

So far, he has done a few call-in interviews, including one on March 11 to discuss the labor negotiations. That interview was recorded at the WFYI studio in Indianapolis and is available on the NFL Network’s website.

In that interview, Roberts explained the role of lawyers and the possible trajectory of the NFL labor negotiations through the court system.

When he gives his analysis on any item in sports news, he said, he doesn’t take sides and only comments on the legal aspects, such as whether one side has a strong or weak legal argument and why.

During the March 11 interview, Roberts told the other commentators, who were in the NFL Network studio in Los Angeles, that he expected both sides to come to an agreement shortly before the 2011 NFL season is scheduled to begin and that he expects there to be a Super Bowl in Indianapolis in 2012.

Roberts said the NFL Network contacted him to be a commentator likely based on his past analysis for other media outlets regarding legal issues of various sports. The law school dean is a leading expert on sports law and antitrust law and has testified nine times before congressional committees. He is a certified commercial and sports arbitrator with the American Arbitration Association and is a founding member and serves on the board of directors of the International Association of Sports Professionals and Executives.

Roberts said he enjoys explaining the legal issues surrounding sports because there are so many and the latest developments in this area of law are something he studies on a regular basis. He also enjoys doing it because it helps him to promote the law school in Indianapolis.

“It brings our institution into the public’s consciousness, where good people are doing interesting things,” he said.

When he began his tenure as dean of the law school in 2007, Roberts hoped to incorporate more sports law courses, but he said finding external funding has been difficult. The school currently offers two sports law courses, one taught by the dean and the other by Scott Bearby, managing director of legal affairs and associate general counsel to the NCAA.

Local news analyst

Gary Miller, an attorney who has taught ethics as an adjunct professor and is known for his lectures involving scenes from television shows and movies featuring lawyers that illustrate unethical behavior, can now be seen on television as himself.

Gary Miller Miller

Miller, a former Marion Superior judge who is now a name partner at MillerMeyer in Indianapolis, is a frequent commentator on a number of local network stations that reach audiences in central Indiana.

When he was on the bench, he oversaw a number of high-profile cases and got to know a number of journalists covering those cases. After Miller left the bench, those reporters and producers started calling him.

“Anything that involves the law is something that reporters and news directors want help explaining to the lay audience,” he said. “It runs the gamut of Officer (David) Bisard’s arrest to Tim Durham’s situation, to the woman who took rat poison to self-induce abortion. For all legal issues, reporters are looking for credible sources.”

Sometimes he’s on-air, and sometimes he is simply asked to explain a legal issue in a way that the reporter can use to make it understandable to viewers during the next broadcast.

When he is going to be on-air, he said, “the very first thing you have to realize is the amount of time you have to explain something is very short. The only thing I know in advance is what’s the general topic and do I need to find out a specific law. I will try to put myself in a position of a lay person who will be watching, and say what kind of information about this topic is important.”

He said he’s yet to get any legal business as a direct result of being on the air, and most of the time when he is on television he is identified as a former judge and not by his firm name. But, he said, that isn’t why he does it.

“Anytime they call and I’m in town and available, I’m more than happy to help,” he said. “Most of the people I deal with are friends, so when a friend calls I try to help. It’s just the way I’ve always operated.”

“Off the Bench”

In Marion Superior Court, a program called “Off the Bench” has covered a number of legal topics since it started airing in 2005. Issues addressed have included alternatives to juvenile incarceration and Marion County juvenile justice reform efforts, re-entry programs, identity theft, voter laws, the justice system’s response to mentally ill offenders, and court appointed special advocates.

The program has had four hosts since it started: Judge Cale Bradford, now with the Indiana Court of Appeals; Judge Gerald Zore; and most recently, Judge Robert Altice. The current host is Judge John Hanley, who taped his first show in early March.

In that show, he hosted Marion Superior Judges David Dreyer and David Shaheed who discussed their work with the April 4 commemoration program to recognize the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and the speech Robert Kennedy gave in Indianapolis on his presidential campaign tour that night.

As a student he had done some reporting for his college radio station and newspaper at the University of Notre Dame, and Judge Hanley said he had not been on-air since then. However, he felt fairly comfortable on-air for his first show, he said, and is looking forward to future programs.

Selected “Off the Bench” programs may be viewed online at Select “Government TV; On Demand; Special Events” and search “Off the Bench.”

While all three commentators got onto television in different ways, a common thread is the desire to explain legal issues to the community in a way that increases understanding of the law and clarifies the legal process.•


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Especially I would like to see all the republican voting patriotic good ole boys to stop and understand that the wars they have been volunteering for all along (especially the past decade at least) have not been for God & Jesus etc no far from it unless you think George Washington's face on the US dollar is god (and we know many do). When I saw the movie about Chris Kyle, I thought wow how many Hoosiers are just like this guy, out there taking orders to do the nasty on the designated bad guys, sometimes bleeding and dying, sometimes just serving and coming home to defend a system that really just views them as reliable cannon fodder. Maybe if the Christians of the red states would stop volunteering for the imperial legions and begin collecting welfare instead of working their butts off, there would be a change in attitude from the haughty professorial overlords that tell us when democracy is allowed and when it isn't. To come home from guarding the borders of the sandbox just to hear if they want the government to protect this country's borders then they are racists and bigots. Well maybe the professorial overlords should gird their own loins for war and fight their own battles in the sandbox. We can see what kind of system this really is from lawsuits like this and we can understand who it really serves. NOT US.... I mean what are all you Hoosiers waving the flag for, the right of the president to start wars of aggression to benefit the Saudis, the right of gay marriage, the right for illegal immigrants to invade our country, and the right of the ACLU to sue over displays of Baby Jesus? The right of the 1 percenters to get richer, the right of zombie banks to use taxpayer money to stay out of bankruptcy? The right of Congress to start a pissing match that could end in WWIII in Ukraine? None of that crud benefits us. We should be like the Amish. You don't have to go far from this farcical lawsuit to find the wise ones, they're in the buggies in the streets not far away....

  2. Moreover, we all know that the well heeled ACLU has a litigation strategy of outspending their adversaries. And, with the help of the legal system well trained in secularism, on top of the genuinely and admittedly secular 1st amendment, they have the strategic high ground. Maybe Christians should begin like the Amish to withdraw their services from the state and the public and become themselves a "people who shall dwell alone" and foster their own kind and let the other individuals and money interests fight it out endlessly in court. I mean, if "the people" don't see how little the state serves their interests, putting Mammon first at nearly every turn, then maybe it is time they wake up and smell the coffee. Maybe all the displays of religiosity by American poohbahs on down the decades have been a mask of piety that concealed their own materialistic inclinations. I know a lot of patriotic Christians don't like that notion but I entertain it more and more all the time.

  3. If I were a judge (and I am not just a humble citizen) I would be inclined to make a finding that there was no real controversy and dismiss them. Do we allow a lawsuit every time someone's feelings are hurt now? It's preposterous. The 1st amendment has become a sword in the hands of those who actually want to suppress religious liberty according to their own backers' conception of how it will serve their own private interests. The state has a duty of impartiality to all citizens to spend its judicial resources wisely and flush these idiotic suits over Nativity Scenes down the toilet where they belong... however as Christians we should welcome them as they are the very sort of persecution that separates the sheep from the wolves.

  4. What about the single mothers trying to protect their children from mentally abusive grandparents who hide who they truly are behind mounds and years of medication and have mentally abused their own children to the point of one being in jail and the other was on drugs. What about trying to keep those children from being subjected to the same abuse they were as a child? I can understand in the instance about the parent losing their right and the grandparent having raised the child previously! But not all circumstances grant this being OKAY! some of us parents are trying to protect our children and yes it is our God given right to make those decisions for our children as adults!! This is not just black and white and I will fight every ounce of this to get denied

  5. Mr Smith the theory of Christian persecution in Indiana has been run by the Indiana Supreme Court and soundly rejected there is no such thing according to those who rule over us. it is a thought crime to think otherwise.