Wednesday, April 14, 2010

The Dangers Outweigh the Benefits

The issue of whether or not cameras should be allowed in the courtroom if both the defendant and prosecutor agree is certainly a complicated one. On the one hand, free access for the public to trials is key in maintaining trust and faith in the judicial system. This idea is reflected in past cases that have reaffirmed the public’s right to attend a trial. With the advent of video technology and the ability to transmit a live stream on television, questions about a public’s right to view trials have come up, but have not been ruled on by the Supreme Court. The decision in the fight that CNN put up to broadcast the Westmoreland vs. CBS trial was that there was an important distinction between the constitutionally endorsed right to attend a trial, and the right to view it on television. I have a few different thoughts on this statement.
First off, many people believe (reasonably, in my opinion) that courtroom behavior, including that of witnesses, changes when people are aware that they are being filmed. The idea that this could disrupt or alter the outcome of a trial is something that is worthy of further research. Secondly, the idea of the court becoming a real-life drama that is beamed into people’s private homes is not consistent with the spirit of the Sixth Amendment’s “public trial” provision. The point is to ensure fair treatment of the defendant, an upholding of the “innocent until proven guilty” ideal, and to foster this greater sense of faith in government. If more people want to attend the trial than exist available seats, I think I would be okay with setting up a publicly viewed, closed-circuit area for people, although that would bring into play the semi-conscious psychological effects of participants being filmed.
My last point has to do with the free press. The First Amendment protects the free press whose job it is to transmit important information to the public. So as long as the press is allowed to attend criminal trials, the information of national importance should still get to the American people, and the values of trust and faith that we place in the judicial system will still be held up to a standard of scrutiny by the free press. Like the judges who have weighed in before me, I agree that the potential dangers to the defendant and the courtroom atmosphere outweigh the benefits of every single person being able to view a televised trial.

What do people think about the defendant's right to have a say in whether or not cameras should be allowed in the courtroom?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.