Cameras In The Courtroom

Cameras in the Courtroom

Can you get a fair trial in this country? That is just one question asked when cameras are allowed in the courtroom. In most states cameras and recording devices are allowed in both trial and appellate courts. But the main issue today is whether cameras should be allowed in the courtroom during the pretrial phase of a hearing.

Most people in society believe that cameras should be kept out of the pretrial phase of the judicial system because of how they can influence a case during this delicate phase and cause more problems for the U.S. federal and state court system.

"Yes I think cameras can influence the court. People begin to play to the camera. They become more media savvy, especially in a high profile case," said Dr. Leigh Browning, director of broadcasting at West Texas A&M University, "on the other hand, they provide the public with better information on proceedings in the courtroom."

One argument is that if cameras are allowed in the courtroom they could cause problems. The defense or the prosecution could have problems conducting a fair trial, such as in the Scott Peterson case.

Fortunately for Peterson, murder cases in this country are decided through a trial by jury, not based on public sentiment or exaggerated media claims. But when defense attorney Mark Geragos promised to change public opinion about Peterson's guilt, Court TV proclaimed that that was about as likely as "June snow in Modesto". In fact, the New York Post, when breaking news of the Peterson arrest in April, showed a handcuffed Peterson accompanied by the headline, "Monster in Chains." How can any "monster" get

2/Cameras in the Courtroom

a fair trial? The media is treating Peterson like it did O.J. Simpson in 1994. His guilt is all but assured. The fact that there is no hard evidence implicating Peterson doesn't seem to matter. With cameras in the courtroom the public could be influenced by the prosecutions attempt to damage their clients case by trying him, not on the facts of the case but on his character and personality. And the prosecution has argued that with all the publicity in this high profile case they would have difficulty in finding an unbiased jury pool if cameras were allowed in.

When it comes to the privacy issues, the Kobe Bryant case is having problems keeping the victims information out of the press.

"D.A. Mark Hurlbert is going to face the daunting task of not only trying Bryant in the court of law but now the court of public opinion is primed and ready to start weighing in on what it thinks," according to WTEV-TV in San Antonio, "already a website that calls itself "Binary Report" is out to discredit the young lady. You can bet your last dollar that defense attorneys will use whatever information they can to discredit her."

This will enable public opinion to go against her and give the defense more leverage. By having cameras in the pretrial hearing, it could give the defense a better chance by manipulating the press to their side.

"If they're guilty, they're guilty and the defense can use it as a weapon to prove their innocence," said Cassie Hulsey, a junior in broadcasting at WTAMU, "the media has influences on everything. On what we wear, on what we buy. So, yes, I think it definitely influences public opinion."

3/Cameras in the Courtroom

But on the other hand professional painter, Eloy Martinez said, "No, it doesn't influence a person's right to a fair trial. There is too much other media coverage around on high