why do they have this stupid thing where you can’t have phones / cameras / etc in the courtroom? it’s 2023, give us streams. it’s public record isn’t it?
Well I can think of at least one case in the past few years where courtroom recordings turned the whole trial into a media fiasco and a witch hunt. Maybe it’s justified in some cases, but on the whole I personally think it’s unhealthy for justice.
Keep in mind any and all of that he would just use to get donations and campaign ads. I think that’s the main reason he hasn’t gotten the perp walk with handcuffs, he wants it!
It tends to turn court rooms into drama rooms. Everybody starts performing instead of acting serious. The OJ trial is a great example of how damaging cameras can be. Whether you agree with this or not, this is generally the reason why.
I actually disagree, I like how Britain handles it-the media is allowed to record the trial, but can’t release any footage or discuss any details until the jury releases a verdict. I don’t think that the public should be getting real time updates, because our system is designed to have someone be innocent until proven guilty-and when the whole country is watching every second of a case, if the person is found to be innocent then the damage to their reputation is way too big.
I know people will often look at big cases like this and go “we should be able to see this though he is clearly guilty,” but that ignores the large number of false accusations and convictions that happen in this country. Our police don’t care about pursuing evidence, they care about locking someone up in the vast majority of cases-even if the evidence doesn’t work.
Imagine that you were accused of a murder that was on national news, but you knew you were innocent-would you really want footage of the trial broadcast in real time? I know I wouldn’t.
why do they have this stupid thing where you can’t have phones / cameras / etc in the courtroom? it’s 2023, give us streams. it’s public record isn’t it?
Well I can think of at least one case in the past few years where courtroom recordings turned the whole trial into a media fiasco and a witch hunt. Maybe it’s justified in some cases, but on the whole I personally think it’s unhealthy for justice.
Keep in mind any and all of that he would just use to get donations and campaign ads. I think that’s the main reason he hasn’t gotten the perp walk with handcuffs, he wants it!
It tends to turn court rooms into drama rooms. Everybody starts performing instead of acting serious. The OJ trial is a great example of how damaging cameras can be. Whether you agree with this or not, this is generally the reason why.
I feel like this is a rule that is going to be done away with at some point in our lifetimes.
I actually disagree, I like how Britain handles it-the media is allowed to record the trial, but can’t release any footage or discuss any details until the jury releases a verdict. I don’t think that the public should be getting real time updates, because our system is designed to have someone be innocent until proven guilty-and when the whole country is watching every second of a case, if the person is found to be innocent then the damage to their reputation is way too big.
I know people will often look at big cases like this and go “we should be able to see this though he is clearly guilty,” but that ignores the large number of false accusations and convictions that happen in this country. Our police don’t care about pursuing evidence, they care about locking someone up in the vast majority of cases-even if the evidence doesn’t work.
Imagine that you were accused of a murder that was on national news, but you knew you were innocent-would you really want footage of the trial broadcast in real time? I know I wouldn’t.