Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Should most trials be televised?

  • 18-03-2010 03:41PM
    #1
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭


    Given that the public wants to see more transparency in the way our laws work and are seen to be used, is it about time we started broadcasting state criminal cases?

    * Leaving out "Family Law" and certain other cases where identity of victims takes precedent without question.

    Q. Is it time the public actually was able to see what goes on in court on a daily basis?

    Is it time the public actually was able to see what goes on in court on a daily basis 70 votes

    Yes
    0% 0 votes
    No
    34% 24 votes
    Unsure
    58% 41 votes
    Other
    7% 5 votes


«13

Comments

  • #2
    DrumSteve
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,798 ✭✭✭✭DrumSteve


    yeah... so we can see how they get away with it.


  • #3
    chin_grin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,808 ✭✭✭✭chin_grin


    No, I wouldn't want to watched hyped sensationalism of Judge Judy. It'll just be more bullsh!t manufactured martyrism the TV is renowned for.......sigh.......<stares in to distance>


  • #4
    Dyr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    In one of my crazier moments I thought that we should have details of everyone who is convicted of an offence on a website, where we can search for them via name address, look up on a map. Read the court proceedings and sentence etc. Time for a bit of name and shame :)


  • #5
    mikom
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    Biggins wrote: »
    Should most trials be televised?

    Would love it.

    "You are about to enter the courtroom of Judge John-Joe. The people are real. The cases are real. The rulings are final. This is his courtroom. This is Judge John-Joe."


  • #6
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    No, people have a right to privacy until proven guilty.

    I agree with the public gallery but not with Media reporting anything that occurs mid-trial when someone could still possibly be innocent.

    You cannot undo reputation destruction.

    Mud sticks.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    How about the recording of a trial?
    If a person is found guilty, their trial could be subsequently televised but if found innocent, its not broadcast?

    Just an idea - open to be shot down. :)


  • #8
    Turtyturd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,404 ✭✭✭✭Turtyturd


    Yes, anything that takes away from a scumbags anonyminity (sp?) is a step in the right direction.


  • #9
    m5ex9oqjawdg2i
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,217 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    Not at all... RTE have their hands full at the moment mass producing shíte, you want to add to this dung heap? Shame on you biggins :P


  • #10
    gaz wac
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,333 ✭✭✭gaz wac


    IBTC (camera)


  • #11
    sidneykidney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 591 ✭✭✭sidneykidney


    No,who would want to watch the utter drivel that RTE would produce if it got its hands on the rights to screen cases.

    If your that interested,go down to the court,theres public (aka nosey fooker) galleries in most of them afaik.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    Arielle Disgusting Tambourine wrote: »
    Not at all... RTE have their hands full at the moment mass producing shíte, you want to add to this dung heap? Shame on you biggins :P
    We can stick it on the Irish channel - its viewer-ship might increase from single digits! :D


  • #13
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    Biggins wrote: »
    How about the recording of a trial?
    If a person is found guilty, their trial could be subsequently televised but if found innocent, its not broadcast?

    Just an idea - open to be shot down. :)

    Yep, would agree with that.

    Don't get me wrong, I got the Hot Dogs, Popcorn and Beer out for the OJ trial but I'm older now and see it for what it was .. a zoo.

    The man was not proven Guilty, we had no right as a society to watch his trial.

    Recording, I have no objections with.

    I watch many crime documentaries where trials are shown after someone has been found guilty.


  • #14
    pickarooney
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 36,496 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    Nobody would watch that crap. Most trial proceedings make Oireachtas Report look like Celebrity Deathmatch.


  • #15
    amacachi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,315 ✭✭✭✭amacachi


    Are there not typed records of Trials freely available?


  • #16
    hooradiation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,922 ✭✭✭hooradiation


    I fail to see how broadcasting trials will do anything even approaching good.


  • #17
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    pickarooney wrote: »
    Nobody would watch that crap. Most trial proceedings make Oireachtas Report look like Celebrity Deathmatch.
    This is very true.
    I've been involved with many, many trials and sometimes, most times it was a long, LONG day.
    For the national cases though, the editing process would be a godsend however.

    I'm not advocating trials all day, every day.
    Maybe an hour once a week, just to show how things are actually done to a wider audience?


  • #18
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    OutlawPete wrote: »
    No, people have a right to privacy until proven guilty.

    I agree with the public gallery but not with Media reporting anything when someone could possibly be innocent.

    You cannot undo reputation destruction.

    Mud sticks.
    But what would be the difference between walking into the public gallery and watching it online.

    I think it would be good for all to see trials, it's the working of public law. The courts are doing our bidding so we should be able to supervise what they're doing.


  • #19
    m5ex9oqjawdg2i
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,217 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    Biggins wrote: »
    We can stick it on the Irish channel - its viewer-ship might increase from single digits! :D

    They could adopt the Iran Road Eireann slogo:

    "We're not there yet"


  • #20
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    There is the argument by some that if the public actually saw what went on in the Irish court rooms of the land, they might be more shocked at the pace of things, the way they were done and demand resolutely to their TD's that changes were implemented from the stoic outdated methods currently used.

    Some out there might fear exposure for other reasons!


  • #21
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,779 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Biggins wrote: »
    How about the recording of a trial?
    If a person is found guilty, their trial could be subsequently televised but if found innocent, its not broadcast?

    Just an idea - open to be shot down. :)

    No, sorry - i don´t think real live legal trials should be reduced to public entertainment. I don´t for one secodn see it as being ¨educational¨ - especially if the ratings start to fall.

    In any case, what kind of crimes are you suggesting? Murder? Never going to happen. Non-payment of TV licence? gripping stuff!!
    Biggins wrote: »
    There is the argument by some that if the public actually saw what went on in the Irish court rooms of the land, they might be more shocked at the pace of things, the way they were done and demand resolutely to their TD's that changes were implemented from the stoic outdated methods currently used.

    Some out there might fear exposure for other reasons!

    I quote Homer Simpson:
    ¨Marge, do you want it done fast, or do you want it done right?¨

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    No, sorry - i don´t think real live legal trials should be reduced to public entertainment. I don´t for one secodn see it as being ¨educational¨ - especially if the ratings start to fall.

    In any case, what kind of crimes are you suggesting? Murder? Never going to happen. Non-payment of TV licence? gripping stuff!!

    I quote Homer Simpson:
    ¨Marge, do you want it done fast, or do you want it done right?¨

    Good points with strong foundation.


  • #23
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    No, sorry - i don´t think real live legal trials should be reduced to public entertainment. I don´t for one secodn see it as being ¨educational¨ - especially if the ratings start to fall.
    It won't ever get good ratings, most people will have absolutely no interest in watching it but every citizen should have the right to supervise a trial is they want to.


  • #24
    Helix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,661 ✭✭✭✭Helix


    Biggins wrote: »

    Q. Is it time the public actually was able to see what goes on in court on a daily basis?

    they can already

    just pop into the courthouse and watch it from the public gallery


  • #25
    amacachi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,315 ✭✭✭✭amacachi


    Biggins wrote: »
    This is very true.
    I've been involved with many, many trials and sometimes, most times it was a long, LONG day.
    For the national cases though, the editing process would be a godsend however.

    I'm not advocating trials all day, every day.
    Maybe an hour once a week, just to show how things are actually done to a wider audience?

    So an editted version of the trials? I really don't see how that would in any way improve awareness of how things are done without adding some kind of spin to the proceedings.


  • #26
    My name is URL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,626 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    No I don't think it would be a great idea, especially if a jury is involved. There's already too much of a media frenzy around some cases and that can skew the outcome of a trial


  • #27
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    Some good points being made for both sides to be fair.


  • #28
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    ScumLord wrote: »
    But what would be the difference between walking into the public gallery and watching it online..

    Because Millions can see it online.

    The public Gallery is limited access and a judge can block Media reporting.


  • #29
    Theta
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,760 ✭✭✭Theta


    Have you ever been to a trail. I went into the public gallery once. My god its so boring.

    You would swear if they put it on tv it would turn into an episode of Single Female Lawyer!


  • #30
    Hank_Jones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,783 ✭✭✭Hank_Jones


    After sitting in court a few times (no, I was not accused), I can honestly say that I would have absolutely no interest in watching it on tv.
    The majority of cases (even in the supreme court) don't last very long in front of the judge, so there wouldn't be much stuff for televising.

    Plus it's boring as fcuk.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    Helix wrote: »
    they can already

    just pop into the courthouse and watch it from the public gallery
    But what if your living on the other side of the country, disabled, on the run from the guards? Making people go to the court house does guarantee that most members of the public won't see the trial.
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    Because Millions can see it online.

    The public Gallery is limited access and a judge can block Media reporting.
    I understand that it would be difficult for those in court if all their neighbors and piers saw them in court but the fact is they'll know anyway. I've been in court and had my name in the local papers, had people talk about me and I wish they could have actually seen the trial, that way they would have known the facts instead of relying on humors and gossip.
    Being caught with hash turned into me being a heroin dealer caught with pounds of heroin and I got 10 years in jail (I got no jail time). We're not going to do anything to stop ignorance in the public by with holding information from them because they're to ignorant.


Advertisement
Advertisement