Court reports RTE

Mena Mitty

Just wondering when RTE news footage of courts are shown on the news, nine times out of ten the defendants are seen entering or leaving the court on their own. Why is this.
Any time I've been to my local court, many defendants have most of their family and half their street there to support them. Just wondering like.

Ted111

Their brief will have told them in advance to expect cameras and consider options. The family might want not to be pictured. Alternatively it can look good to jury to see your family standing by you - literally. You also have the option of the hand over the face, the newspaper manoeuvre, full on balaclava mode or maybe a donald trump mask

Dravokivich

Ted111 wrote: »

Their brief will have told them in advance to expect cameras and consider options. The family might want not to be pictured. Alternatively it can look good to jury to see your family standing by you - literally. You also have the option of the hand over the face, the newspaper manoeuvre, full on balaclava mode or maybe a donald trump mask

Surely a jury should be avoiding media related to a case they are over viewing?

Mena Mitty

Think it's that lonesome walk in or out with cameras rolling is when they need someone around. I always thought the defendants were co-operating with the camerapeople and it was all choreographed....obviously not.

The flying mouse

As well as above media have to be careful they don't photograph or put someone not charged in the photo, as they could be automatically assumed to be involved in the case & sue.

Ted111

Dravokivich wrote: »

Surely a jury should be avoiding media related to a case they are over viewing?

Yeah, sorry you're right. It would come into play more inside the court.

HalloweenJack

The most interesting cases are the ones where people try to defend themselves, would explain the lack of a legal team.

Arsemageddon

The RTE thing of following people on the street outside of a court is just bizarre. Filming a person who is on trial is one thing, but filming witnesses is just mental.

At the Graham Dwyer trial RTE filmed other lads who had hooked up with Elaine O'Hara on fetish websites and they did the same with many of the expert witnesses. I've also seen them do the same with expert witnesses in gangland trials.

There's no law against filming in a public place, but a bit of fvckin' cop on wouldn't go astray.

listermint

Op if you're in the courts so often you'd know the score man.

Mena Mitty

listermint wrote: »

Op if you're in the courts so often you'd know the score man.

Well RTE wouldn't have any interest in found-ons.

nullzero

Jackets pulled over heads in a haphazard fashion are de rigueur around the courts I'm told.

hullaballoo

I see it every day and tbh I don't get it. I can understand releasing pictures of dangerous criminals as a matter of public concern but I don't see why they feel the need to capture every PI plaintiff going.

Arsemageddon

Ted111 wrote: »

Their brief will have told them in advance to expect cameras and consider options. The family might want not to be pictured. Alternatively it can look good to jury to see your family standing by you - literally. You also have the option of the hand over the face, the newspaper manoeuvre, full on balaclava mode or maybe a donald trump mask

There is also the option of having your friends/cronies shield you from the press. However, sometimes this can backfire...

mrsdewinter

Arsemageddon wrote: »

The RTE thing of following people on the street outside of a court is just bizarre. Filming a person who is on trial is one thing, but filming witnesses is just mental.

At the Graham Dwyer trial RTE filmed other lads who had hooked up with Elaine O'Hara on fetish websites and they did the same with many of the expert witnesses. I've also seen them do the same with expert witnesses in gangland trials.

There's no law against filming in a public place, but a bit of fvckin' cop on wouldn't go astray.

I'd say it's just the narrative of the news bulletin & some basic rule of TV storytelling that people like us aren't aware of. If the reporter is reading out a report of what Mr X said in court that day, it makes sense to show the person who made the contribution.

Re the Graham Dwyer case, I wondered why only some of those guys were shown. iirc, about 3 of them gave evidence but I think only 1 of them was shown walking away from the Courts of Justice.

Arsemageddon

mrsdewinter wrote: »

I'd say it's just the narrative of the news bulletin & some basic rule of TV storytelling that people like us aren't
aware of. If the reporter is reading out a report of what Mr X said in court
that day, it makes sense to show the person who made the contribution.

That's a fair point.

RTE news has a habit of filling their TV reports with really simplistic images. If it's a story about water charges it will inevitably have images of someone filling a kettle, a tap being turned on, a lad digging a hole in the road to put in water meters etc. It often looks like it was put together to teach primary school kids

Re the Graham Dwyer case, I wondered why only some of those guys were shown. iirc, about 3 of them gave evidence but I think only 1 of them was shown walking away from the Courts of Justice.

Maybe the other two fetish lads were just unrecognisable in their gimp masks?

Ferrari3600

Arsemageddon wrote: »

The RTE thing of following people on the street outside of a court is just bizarre. Filming a person who is on trial is one thing, but filming witnesses is just mental.

At the Graham Dwyer trial RTE filmed other lads who had hooked up with Elaine O'Hara on fetish websites and they did the same with many of the expert witnesses. I've also seen them do the same with expert witnesses in gangland trials.

There's no law against filming in a public place, but a bit of fvckin' cop on wouldn't go astray.

The reality is that a % of the adult population engage in fetish, and engage in it on a 'safe, sane and consensual' basis, and have nothing to do with the Graham Dwyers of this world.

It strikes me that those people were brave to come forward (particularly for those who don't even live in Ireland, as presumably they had no legal obligation to do so).

It is possible that one practical effect of some of the reporting is potentially to discourage witnesses from coming forward in a similar case in future.

As you say, a bit of cop on from RTE and similar wouldn't go astray.

learn_more

I think it's totally outrageous. It's gratuitous and unnecessary. Both parties would be stressed out enough without dealing with television cameras as they enter and leave. God forbid I'd ever be in that situation but I'd be inclined to trip them over if they came too close.

There is so little big news in Ireland in comparison to the UK. Hardly a news bulletin goes by without 1 or more court cases being reported each day complete with on location reporter and crew.

Cut the 6/1 news to half an hour, ditch a presenter, ditch a cameraman and a reporter or 2, and lower the license fee.

I might pay it then if they did

SEPT 23 1989

gramar

Ted111 wrote: »

Their brief will have told them in advance to expect cameras and consider options. The family might want not to be pictured. Alternatively it can look good to jury to see your family standing by you - literally. You also have the option of the hand over the face, the newspaper manoeuvre, full on balaclava mode or maybe a donald trump mask

..or the Martin Cahill Mickey Mouse jocks...

learn_more

Another court case getting top billing on 6/1 news this evening. More wonderful video footage of Bernadette Scully accused of manslaugher entering and leaving the central criminal court. She didn't look much different than she did yesterday and I noticed she was wearing the same coat and cap. I think the coat is a M&S number but could possibly be Debenhams too.