NCJ Number
58432
Journal
Judicature Volume: 63 Issue: 1 Dated: (JUNE/JULY 1979) Pages: 24-27
Date Published
1979
Length
4 pages
Annotation
THIS ARTICLE DISCUSSES THE GROWING USE OF CAMERAS IN COURTROOM COVERAGE, DESPITE THE CONTINUED LACK OF SUPPORT FROM THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION.
Abstract
EVEN THOUGH THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION STILL OPPOSES CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM, THE TREND IS FOR STATES TO PERMIT, WITH STRICT CONTROLS AND LIMITATIONS, THE USE OF STILL CAMERAS, TELEVISION, AND RADIO COVERAGE OF TRIALS IN PROGRESS. SEVEN STATES HAVE ADOPTED RULES PERMITTING SUCH COVERAGE AND 15 OTHER STATES, HAVE EXPERIMENTED WITH COURTROOM CAMERAS USUALLY WITH POSITIVE RESULTS. THE FEDERAL COURT SYSTEM DOES NOT APPEAR READY TO OPEN ITS TRIALS, BUT HAS DECIDED TO ALLOW CAMERA COVERAGE OF CERTAIN INVESTIGATORY AND CEREMONIAL PROCEDURES. ALABAMA AND WASHINGTON WERE THE FIRST STATES TO AGREE TO CAMERA COVERAGE, BOTH TAKING ACTION IN 1976. IN BOTH ALL PARTIES TO THE TRIAL, INCLUDING WITNESSES AND JURORS, MUST AGREE TO TELEVISION COVERAGE. GENERALLY, STATES LIMIT THE ACTUAL USE OF THE EQUIPMENT, REQUIRE THAT THE EQUIPMENT BE NOISELESS, AND STIPULATE THAT MEDIA PERSONNEL USE MICROPHONES ALREADY IN THE COURTROOM AND USE NEITHER FLASH ATTACHMENTS OR STRONG TELEVISION LIGHTS. THE STATED OPPOSITION TO THE USE OF CAMERAS AND RADIO COVERAGE IS BASED ON THE FEAR THAT CAMERA COVERAGE MAY DECREASE THE CHANCE FOR A FAIR TRIAL, INTERFERE WITH THE SMOOTH FUNCTIONING OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM, AND DUPLICATE THE BAD EXPERIENCES OF THE 1920'S. MUCH OPPOSITION MAY ALSO BE THE RESULT OF RELUCTANCE TO CHANGE. (KCP)