The murder case of 'Mad Dog' Irvin Miller was one of the most famous trials of the 20th century, resulting in Miller being convicted of murder in 1955 and sentenced to death. However, surprisingly, the Supreme Court overturned this ruling because of 'pretrial publicity.' Considering our unit on media and the courtroom, how do you think 'pretrial publicity' could have been a factor in overturning Miller's conviction? If you were the judge during the trial, what alternative measures could you have used to limit pretrial publicity and ensure a rightful conviction?