Cameras In Court

Running Head: MOUSSAOUI TRIAL

Televising Moussaoui Federal Trial

Gerhard A. Grove

Dr. Ferry

PSC201

Northwood University

Televising Moussaoui Federal Trial

Abstract

This paper will cover the current issue and controversy of televising the Zacarias Moussaoui federal trial. The trial is the first trial of a suspected terrorist involved with the September 11, 2001 World Trade Center attacks. I intend to show that the decision of U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema to ban photographers and Court TV from the proceedings was wrong, based on the constitutional rights of the public and previous statutes. This paper will cover various cases involving televised court proceedings and public opinion concerning the media coverage of criminal trials.

Table of Contents

Background 4

Cameras in the Court 5

Supreme Court 6

Cameras Introduced to the Courts 8

Justification for Televising Moussaoui 9

Summary 10

References 11

Background

On September 11, 2001, perhaps the most vicious assault on the United States was committed in the form of a terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York. This attack claimed the lives of more than three thousand souls made up of innocent civilians, firefighters, and police officers. The incident involved the highjacking of two civilian airliners and using them as missiles to bring down the Trade Center. At the time the attacks were taking place in New York, an identical attack was being carried out against the Pentagon. This attack also involved the highjacking of two airliners and using them as missiles. Civilians aboard one airliner intervened, sacrificing their lives and preventing the terrorist from completing their unthinkable attack. The second group of terrorist was successful in their mission and took the lives of over three hundred inside the Pentagon.

Muslim extremist belonging to the Al Qaeda terrorist group carried out these attacks. Usama Bin Laden , the most notorious terrorist and the most wanted man in the world, lead this group. Officials quickly realized that the terrorist involved with the highjackings, whom were all killed in the attack, were only the tip of the iceberg. A massive manhunt and investigation ensued to identify and arrest any accomplices and prevent further terrorist attacks.

Zacarias Moussaoui was taken into custody on August 17, 2001 after a Minnesota flight school reported it had suspicions about him because of his insistence on learning how to fly large aircraft, including 747s, despite an apparent lack of skills. The FBI held Moussaoui in custody on immigration violation charges and questioned him concerning possible terrorist affiliation. Moussaoui refused to cooperate and was in the process of deportation when the attacks took place. After the attacks, the FBI linked Moussaoui to the terrorist network and conspiracy charges were filed citing the nineteen terrorist who died as co-conspirators. Moussaoui became the first person charged in connection to the terrorist attacks and faced the death penalty.

One of the first defense requests in the federal trial of Moussaoui was a request to have his trial televised. Moussaoui's attorney, Edward MacMahon Jr., stated, "By televising the proceeding this would add an added level of protection" (for a fair trial) (Associated Press [AP], 2002, 1). U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema denied this request and further banned all use of photography in the courtroom. She justified her decision based on the possible interference of an orderly, secure proceeding with the presence of cameras in the courtroom. She also declared her decision did not violate the constitutional rights of the public or the media (AP, 1).

Cameras in the Court

Cameras started appearing in the courts around the turn of the century. Published still photographs of trials started appearing in the 1920's. The first noted broadcast trial was that of Scopes vs. Tennessee, dubbed the "monkey trial". The defendant, John Thomas Scopes, violated the law against teaching the Theory of Evolution in the Dayton, Tennessee school system. The trial was broadcast over radio, by WGN, and still photography and newsreel were allowed in the court. The trial had several interferences by the presence of the media, most notably the request of the judge to pose during the trial (Cohn & Dow, 1998, 14).

The trial that had the greatest impact on the early opinions of cameras in the courtroom was the famous Lindbergh trial. The judge in this trial, Judge Thomas Trenchard, placed tight restrictions on the trial by limiting camera coverage to four still photographers in the back of the courtroom. Photographs were to be taken only during recesses, before court and after court was adjourned (Cohn & Dow, 1998, 15). No newsreels were to be allowed in the court. The local Sheriff, John Curtiss, made a behind the scenes gentlemen's agreement with the newsreel companies allowing two hidden cameras to be placed in the court. The companies were not supposed to release any of the newsreels until the case was over. These cameras were hardly hidden and the lighting in the court had to be enhanced. It was obvious to all that the proceeding was being filmed (Cohn & Dow, 15). The case turned into a media circus and the outcome was highly suspect due to the presence of the media.

Following the Lindbergh trial, the American Bar Association released Canon 35 - "Improper Publicizing of Court Proceedings" in 1937. This rule banned the use of cameras in the courtrooms. Although the canon lacked the force of law, it was adopted by virtually all courts in the land. The Canon was amended in 1952, prohibiting television cameras. Cameras, of any kind, were banned in the courts with few exceptions throughout the United States.

Cases were brought before several State Supreme Courts attempting to bring the cameras back into the courts. The decisions were varied on allowing the cameras in the courts. Colorado was the first to question the enforcement of Canon 35. Justice Moore concluded, "Canon