Skip to main content

Home/ Groups/ Cameras in courtrooms
Cathryn Bahe

Cameras in Courtrooms: Debatabase - Debate Topics and Debate Motions - 2 views

  • innocent until proven guilty
  • television, the general public will be able to reach conclusions about guilt or innocence that may not be reflected in the final verdict of the jury.
  • Although the identity of alleged victims of certain crimes are protected by law, the judge in a criminal trial rarely orders that the defendant should remain anonymous
  • ...16 more annotations...
  • defendant.
  • the effect upon the witnesses and victims of crime, and the possible corruption of the jury and witnesse
  • We should not jeopardise individual liberty in the pursuit of a real-life courtroom thriller.
  • The system of justice will actually be harmed by televising trials
  • publicity he has already suffered may ruin his chances of future employment or anonymity
  • misled.
  • A video record of a trial will provide a powerful new tool for both the judiciary and the defendant.
  • There is therefore no constitutional reason why trials should not be televised. However, at the moment only a few people can take advantage of their rights. As courts sit during the week, it is difficult for people in full-time employment to watch a trial. Travelling to courts across the country is costly. The galleries for the public have only a limited number of spaces. Visitors to well- publicised trials often have to arrive several hours in advance of the hearing in order to ensure a seat. We should not have to make such sacrifices of time and money in order to enjoy our democratic rights.
  • Coverage on television could include a commentary that would make
    watching a trial a more profitable and educational experience.
    In the age of the television, and even the internet, we should utilise modern technology to enhance the rights of the citizens.
  • Courts should be televised for the same reason that we see the proceedings in parliament on our televisions.
  • Consequently, the decisions in courts could have as much impact on our lives as those taken in parliament. We have a right to know about these decisions.Secondly, even if every case does not determine new law, we should know how laws are to be applied.
  • Putting cameras in court will improve public confidence in the judiciary and the system of justice as a whole.
  • Yet, by watching the video record of this evidence, judges would be able to assess the demeanour, body language and overall impression given by each witness ; elements that are inevitably missing from a written transcript. These characteristics are nevertheless necessary in order to ascertain the veracity of the evidence.
  • Putting cameras into court will
    improve the trial process,
    as public monitoring provides a powerful incentive for the judiciary and the lawyers to increase their efficiency and adhere to good standards of behaviour
  • Televised trials will be an antidote to the hysterical and sensationalist coverage of trials that we see in the print media. Instead of relying on a journalist’s report of a case, and the sketches of a courtroom artist, we will be able to see for ourselves the evidence, the demeanour of the defendant, and the trial process. Cameras in the courtroom will prevent the public being
  • Would any judge make an occasional ignorant comment if he or she knew that it would be beamed into every home in the land?
    I don't know about this site. The author has no background info on the subject that would make him an expert. I tried to find out more about him and couldn't.

Lawyers Are Divided on Cameras in the Courtroom - 1 views

  • possible results
  • singled out
  • witnesses refusing to testify on camera to witnesses getting previews of the style and approach of the lawyers who would be questioning them
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • which he said would distort a trial's outcome
  • "put yourself in the shoes of the victim."
  • Compare just having your name in the paper versus
  • the TV
  • testifying before 12 people and 12 million people
    lawyers opinion about the outcome of having cameras in the courtroom and the victims perspective

Ruling Upholds Ban on Cameras in Court - New York Times - 1 views

  • ban on televising or filming most courtroom proceedings violates neither the federal nor state Constitution
  • individual judges should be able to decide whether to allow cameras in their courtrooms
    background info about the ban of cameras in the courtroom in New York

Court Operating Rules - Court Operating Rule 16: Cameras in the Courtroom - 1 views

  • Permission first shall have been expressly granted by the judge
  • Media coverage of a proceeding shall not be permitted if the judge concludes that under the circumstances of the particular proceeding such coverage would materially interfere with the rights of the parties to a fair trial.
  • Media coverage is prohibited of any court proceeding that, under Missouri law, is required to be held in private. Further, no coverage shall be permitted in any juvenile, adoption, domestic relations, or child custody hearing. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the news media, if permitted by the judge, may record and photograph a juvenile who is being prosecuted as an adult in a criminal proceeding
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • Objections. The judge shall prohibit the video recording, audio recording, and photographing of a participant in a court proceeding if the participant so requests and the participant is a victim of a crime, a police informant, an undercover agent, a relocated witness, or a juvenile
  • Upon the objection of a party, the objection of a participant, or on the court's own motion, and for good cause shown, the judge may prohibit any or all of the following: the visual identification, video recording, audio recording, or photographing of a participant in a court proceeding or any or all of the participant's testimony.
    Missouri ruling on if you can or cannot use cameras in the courtroom.
Alexis Macklin


  • The best reason against it is the problem that we could become a symbol since we are the Supreme Court, and if it was in our court, it would be in every court in the country, criminal cases included…When you have television in some, not all, criminal cases, there are risks. The risks are that the witness is hesitant to say exactly what he or she thinks because he knows the neighbors are watching. The risk might be with some jurors that they are afraid that they will be identified on television and thus could become the victims of a crime. There are risks involving what the lawyer might or might not be thinking…Is he influenced by that television when he decides what evidence to present?
  • If you introduce cameras, it is human nature for me to suspect that one of my colleagues is saying something for a soundbite. Please don’t introduce that insidious dynamic into what is now a collegial court. Our court works…We teach, by having no cameras, that we are different. We are judged by what we write. WE are judged over a much longer term. We’re not judged by what we say. But, all in all, I think it would destroy a dynamic that is now really quite a splendid one and I don’t think we should take that chance.”
    Has quotes from justices about cameras in courtrooms
Alexis Macklin

NM&L (Fall 2002): Judges restrict camera access in courtrooms - 0 views

  • judges have the authority to allow camera access
  • California Court Rule 980, which prohibits the use of images depicting spectators in court
    Didn't find much.
Alexis Macklin

Against cameras in courtrooms - by a judge in minnesota - 2 views

shared by Alexis Macklin on 12 Feb 10 - Cached
  • 1983, the Minnesota Supreme Court approved an experimental program
    • Alexis Macklin
      Read this. Sounds interesting.
  • experimental program has been a failure
Alexis Macklin

Both Sides- Cameras in Courtrooms - 0 views

  • citizen's right to a fair and impartial trial
  • itigants, witnesses, and jurors
  • negative impact on the trial process
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • sensitive personal information
  • 46 percent of the judges
  • cameras make witnesses less willing to appear in court
  • every citizen receives his or her constitutionally guaranteed right to a fair trial
  • jeopardize that right
1 - 10 of 10
Showing 20 items per page