A possibilidade de renúncia ao julgamento popular como uma forma de defesa contra o abuso midiático

Abstract

This dissertation investigates the possibility for the defendant to waive trial by jury in cases of significant media influence, proposing this alternative as a means of defense against external pressures that jeopardize the fairness of the proceedings. The study begins with a historical analysis of the Jury in Brazil, highlighting its development and the debates during the 1987-1988 Constituent Assembly, which affirmed the Jury as a fundamental right. It then examines the deficit of representativeness in the jury and the effects of sensationalist media coverage, which often lead to parallel judgments and magnify cognitive biases, ultimately undermining juror impartiality. To substantiate its main hypothesis, a qualitative and exploratory methodology is employed, including bibliographic review and case law analysis, with insights from behavioral economics to illustrate how heuristics and biases may be mitigated when trials are conducted by professional judges. The study also assesses the shortcomings of current mechanisms such as change of venue and the limited appealability of jury decisions, concluding these measures are insufficient to counterbalance media-driven prejudice. The findings suggest that allowing defendants the option to waive the right to a jury trial, particularly in highly publicized cases, upholds the guarantee-based approach of the Brazilian criminal justice system, reaffirming the autonomy of the accused under conditions prone to public-opinion contamination. The dissertation concludes that renouncing jury trial in exceptional situations does not erode the constitutional status of the Jury but rather enhances the due process of law and protects the fundamental rights of the defendant.