Jury Orders ‘Jenny Jones’ to Pay $25 Million

A jury in Michigan returned a $25-million civil judgment against the “Jenny Jones” show on Friday, a stinging indictment of the “trash TV” genre that could have a chilling effect on a wide variety of TV programs, say television producers and executives.

The verdict in a suit that sought $71 million is seen as precedent-setting in holding a television program accountable for the actions of a guest--in this case, Jonathan Schmitz, who murdered Scott Amedure in March 1995, three days after taping a never-broadcast episode of Jones’ show about “secret crushes.” Schmitz learned during the taping that his admirer was not a woman but was Amedure, who was interested in a gay relationship.

After seven hours of deliberation, the Pontiac jury agreed the show was negligent and ordered the producers to pay $5 million for pain and suffering, $20 million for the loss of Amedure’s companionship to his family and $6,500 for funeral expenses.

Officials from Warner Bros., the studio that produces and distributes the syndicated talk show, responded defiantly and angrily to the verdict, insisting the jury was motivated by emotion. They said the company will prevail on appeal.

“This judgment is ridiculous and absurd,” said Jim Paratore, president of the studio’s Telepictures Productions, which produces “Jenny Jones.”

Paratore and other executives predicted that the judgment, if allowed to stand, will affect not only “trash TV” but other news and entertainment shows that deal with unpredictable situations.

“It’s going to have a chilling effect on everyone,” Paratore added. “Whether it’s a newsmagazine like ’60 Minutes’ or a show like ‘Jenny Jones’ or ‘Candid Camera,’ we’re put on notice that you better screen the mental background of the participants and be responsible for their behavior after the show, whether it’s three days, three months or three years.”

Larry Lyttle, president of Big Ticket Television, which produces “Judge Judy” and “Judge Joe Brown,” agreed that the judgment would probably have some kind of chilling effect on talk shows and other programs on which guests may be caught off-guard.

On the other hand, Lyttle said that the decision will not necessarily lead to the end of the so-called trash talk show.

“An instance like this will not contribute to the demise of the talk show,” he said. “People don’t seem to mind that these shows are like freak shows. They don’t mind seeing people pound the stuffings out of each other. It’s perverse.”

Few other companies associated with the genre--which includes similarly formatted programs hosted by Jerry Springer and Sally Jessy Raphael--were willing to speak on the record, but reaction among them was mixed as to whether the verdict would alter the content of such programs.

The judgment was announced during the May rating sweeps, when both Springer and Raphael are airing their most confrontational episodes in order to attract larger audiences and boost advertising rates. The brawls this month on Springer’s show have been more frequent and violent, and, in Friday’s installment of “Sally Jessy Raphael,” one guest threatened to “kill” another panelist.

Paratore contended the attorney for Amedure’s family, which brought the suit, “never dealt with the facts of the case.” Instead, the executive said, attorney Geoffrey Fieger told the jury “to send a message to talk shows. He put talk shows on trial. This is not about messages. If he wants to send a message, he should have used Western Union.”

Fieger, who has also represented assisted-suicide advocate Dr. Jack Kevorkian, stated after the verdict that talk shows exploit people for profit, adding, “This industry’s got to clean up itself.”

Some advocates and elected officials who have railed against the “trash TV” trend expressed hope that the ruling will compel producers to tone down programming.

“The real point here is that behavior, and in this case irresponsible behavior, has consequences,” said Dan Gerstein, spokesman for Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.), who has long campaigned against shows that he says are sleazy and harmful to children. “Maybe this decision will cause the media to think twice before continuing with this exploitative behavior. Shame has not been enough to affect their conduct, but maybe a decision that will address their bottom line will. It’s certainly not a bad message to send to Jerry Springer and his producers.”

Springer, Raphael and show executives declined to comment on the case, but they have denied in previous statements that they are acting irresponsibly.

Producers for Springer have pointed out in the past that potential guests are required to sign a waiver that contains a list of all the possibilities of what could be revealed on the show. The potential panelist must check off on each scenario, saying they would not be overly upset if a specific revelation or situation were to occur.

Other insiders said that Raphael’s show has an on-staff therapist who is backstage every show and keeps in touch with guests for as long as a year after the broadcasts.

Michael H. Shapiro, a constitutional law professor at USC, views the verdict as being highly vulnerable on appeal. “The question is, was this foreseeable,” he said. “It seems to me a stretch that someone could have reasonably foreseen that one guest was going to kill another.”

Lawyers for Warner Bros. have insisted Schmitz was told his “secret admirer” could be a man or woman. They also suggested Schmitz might have killed Amedure because the two had a sexual encounter after the taping, a charge Fieger denied.

Schmitz, characterized as a mentally disturbed young man pushed over the edge by the “Jones” episode, was convicted of second-degree murder in 1996, a verdict overturned in September by the Michigan court of appeals because of the trial judge’s failure to remove a certain juror. Prosecutors are appealing that ruling.

Questions linger as to whether the verdict has any implications beyond the talk-show genre, in terms of other efforts to find television and movies liable for criminal behavior.

In March, the Supreme Court refused to block a lawsuit accusing director Oliver Stone of some responsibility for a murderous spree the plaintiffs say was inspired by his 1994 movie, “Natural Born Killers.” A suit is pending regarding school shootings in West Paducah, Ky., and the film “The Basketball Diaries,” and additional legal action is possible in the wake of the most recent killing spree by teenagers in Littleton, Colo.

In a statement, Jones said she was “shocked and saddened” by the verdict, adding that “the only real tragedy here is that Scott Amedure lost his life. I refuse to lose my faith in the law and in the people I work with, even in the face of this outrageous judgment.”