The Bernardo case involved the abduction, confinement, rape, and murder of two teenage females in a city about 100 kilometers west of Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Participants were then given a possible scenario of what the trial would contain. The research gathered information collected from 63 men and 92 women who visited the Ontario Science Center and responded to a sign on a bulletin board. Results revealed a strong association between exposure to publicity and both opinions and verdicts before the trial. Those who had heard more about the case were more likely than others to think that Bernardo was guilty. Once they had read the account of the trial, the effect of pretrial publicity virtually disappeared. The only remaining effect was that those who had heard the most were somewhat more likely to vote guilty than those who had heard the least. One factor, knowledge that Bernardo was also charged with other counts of rape, appeared to account for this small effect. In addition, among those living in Ontario, where the crimes occurred, all of whom had heard at least a little about the case, no relationship existed between the amount heard and the ratings of guilt or verdicts either before or after the trial account. Findings suggested that pretrial publicity has less effect than is commonly thought and that whatever effect it does have depends on the particular content and its relationship to the facts of the specific case. Tables, notes, and 19 references (Author abstract modified)