Should Court Rooms be televised

PHB

Im wondering what peoples opinion on this topic would be as I have a debate on it soon and would like some alternate ideas

Just to get the ball rolling wouldnt you thinnk thats its in the best interest of democracy for court cases to be televised as it will show other nations how the courts work and hence foster democracy in other countries?

Victor

Generally, no. Such measures would merely result in voyeurism akin to pornography. It would also make it difficult to maintain the division between judge (who rules on the law) and jury (who rules on the [edit]facts). Would your proposals include family courts, juvenile courts and sex offence cases? How do you prevent prospective jurors from seeing preliminary hearings?

And how would you control the coverage of such cases. Would personalities / celebrities be treated differently?

leeroybrown

Ultimately No.

We're not americans and consequently do not need live feed of people being tried 24/7

Apart from that, it's not really necessary for judicial accountability (something which doesn't as such legally exist in Ireland right now) and ultimately will only prejudice people.

Mercury_Tilt

This post has been deleted.

PHB

Generally, no. Such measures would merely result in voyeurism akin to pornography. It would also make it difficult to maintain the division between judge (who rules on the law) and jury (who rules on the law). Would your proposals include family courts, juvenile courts and sex offence cases? How do you prevent prospective jurors from seeing preliminary hearings?

And how would you control the coverage of such cases. Would personalities / celebrities be treated differently?

How exactly would such measures result in voyeurism.
Are you suggesting that the Judges would be influenced by the TV?
Obviously it would absolutly have to be regulated in sex offense cases etc. but in tribunals of political corruption and murder cases etc., that do not involve extensive private information, which could be shown on TV.
Absolutly not on the celebrity front, but I see your point that judges might be influenced if they were particuarly weak judges, in which case they shouldnt be judges anyway?

The other two points are non combackable afaik
Any got any positive aspects to this?

Neil3030

No.

The only two cases that i can recall to have been televised resulted in blatantly guilty people walking free. I will not specify the cases but I am sure you can narrow it down.

As to whether or not the televisation of the affore mentioned trials, (well, afore refered to, unspecified trials;)), had an influence on the outcome, i would have to say yes. In the second case in particular where the judge overturned the sentance to allow the accused walk free, i can't help but feel that the media hype from the accused's country, as a result of it being broadcast live, pretty much 24/7, had an influencial role.

Plus, the televisation of images of members of the jury is SURELY not the best idea in the world. Supposing a mob boss is up for trial? They might as well just have a caption at the bottom of the screen saying "HERE ARE THE 12 PEOPLE THAT YOU MUST THREATEN IN ORDER TO GET YOUR BOSS OF THE HOOK" or better yet, "ONCE YOUR BOSS IS SENT DOWN, KILL THESE PEOPLE". I for one would certainly NOT sleep well at night knowing that my image was common knowledge to the gang members of the person standing accused in a trial that i was acting juror.

Would you?

Victor

Society has an accepted norm for court publicity. Putting it on TV will corrupt that.

Originally posted by PHB
Are you suggesting that the Judges would be influenced by the TV?

Yes to some degree, but more importantly it would affect juries.

PH01

Yes.

Court cases which are already open to the public and where the judge hasn't put a media ban, should be televised.

amen

yes should be televised after all justice must be seen to be done.
as for

for one would certainly NOT sleep well at night knowing that my image was common knowledge to the gang members of the person standing accused in a trial that i was acting juror.

the gang members could walk into court and identify them that way.

Chaos-Engine

Family and Criminal Law should not ever be televised as it only is the business of the parties involved.

Procedings involving Corporatation's(public and private), the state(and other states) being prosecuted, coruption, NGOs(Church, etc) are int he public interest and therefore should be televised.

I'm not fond of all these unneccessary tribunials. Legal procedings shoudl take place once the suspect-guilty parties have been identified. Tribunials shoudl only take place were absolutly neccessary, e.g. Bloody Sunday Enquiry...

Neil3030

Originally posted by amen
yes should be televised after all justice must be seen to be done.
as for

So...no justice for the blind eh?

I accept your point about the gang members walking into the courtroom but I would still feel very ill at ease, should the court case be broadcast worldwide to a potential audience of billions. There would be a much greater threat to my well being.

no. Personally i don't think its any of our business what happens in those "closed doors". I believe that there should be privacy for victims, and judges alike in what goes on inside a courtroom.

Victor

Originally posted by Neil3030
I accept your point about the gang members walking into the courtroom but I would still feel very ill at ease, should the court case be broadcast worldwide to a potential audience of billions. There would be a much greater threat to my well being.

This is exactly the point, the gang members whould then have the jury and witnesses on tape / stills, which they can spread around in their search for someone (all photography is currently banned in courts and court premises). This is soemthing they can't do now.

Victor

Media face court charges over fatal crash coverage
From:ireland.com
Friday, 17th January, 2003

Four national newspapers and the producer of the Gerry Ryan Show on 2FM are due to be charged with contempt of court next Monday.

The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has brought the case against the Sunday World, Irish Independent, Evening Herald, The Star and 2FM because of their coverage of a crash involving a stolen car which led to the death of a 16-year-old youth and a taxi driver.

The media groups are being prosecuted for allegedly breaking the rules of sub judice which requires a court to decide on matters of fact in relation to a case.

The DPP is seeking sequestration of assets and an injunction restraining the organisations from what it describes as "interference" in the case.

The crash occured in the early hours of January 12th on the North Circular Road in Dublin.

Two 16-year-old youths were arrested following the crash in which taxi driver Mr Robert McGowan (30) and Edward Gavin (16) died. The DPP says the youths are children in the eyes of the law and their identities are protected under the Children's Act.

But some of the newspapers published articles naming the arrested youths, and used their photographs. An interview between Gerry Ryan and RTE crime correspondent Paul Reynolds the day after the accident is also cited by the DPP.

The proceedings are against Independent Newspapers Ireland Limited and Mr Michael Roche, managing editor, over articles in the Evening Herald and Irish Independent on January 13th.

Sunday Newspapers Limited and its editor Colm McGinty over articles on January 12th and Independent Star Limited trading as the Irish Daily Star and its editor Mr Gerard Colleran over articles published on January 13th.