There are many arguments with whether or not it's acceptable to allow cameras in a courtroom. In 1981 states have permitted cameras in a courtroom hearing, but how effective is it. Some say that allowing cameras in a courtroom gives a better insight of the trial. Others may say that interferes with people's privacy.
There are multiple reasons why people who would like to see the trails televised. Recording a trial would add a new insight to the judge and the lawyers who are in the trial. If the case were to reopen at a certain point they defendants and the plaintiffs' lawyers could review the trail and how the proceeding went. In Illinois the Supreme Court allowed cameras in 41 of their counties and 102 had cameras in their courtrooms.There …show more content…
This source states that there was no evidence found that there was no negative impact on the trail. If anything camera can help with review of the trail and how the person acts while on camera.Sharon Burdette, sister of Patricia Leigh Mills, urged law enforcement to review her sisters case. She became suspicious about her sister's death because her sister's husband got remarried soon after her death and acquired her sister's insurance money and gave up there son. She said reviewing the photos and videos of the trail helps answer questions that she had. He was soon convicted of his deceased wifes murder on January 17, 2013, 10 years later after her sister's death.(Pro-con: Should cameras be allowed in courtrooms?) Also having cameras creates a bigger audience and it enlightens the public with information.The public's understanding will broaden and will have more confidence and respect of the judicial system, creating a stronger bond with them by relieving them knowing that justice was …show more content…
and taking live video."(Debate continues over cameras in the courtroom).By allowing cameras in the courtroom the primary audience would change from the people in the courtroom to the entire public at the end it would not give the accused a fair chance and trail guilty or not guilty. Juries would be concentrated with being on television it would not concentrate on the trail at hand. Having a hearing televise can affect the juror's thoughts about the trial. Prime example, if it's a three day trial and on day one the juror think the defendant is guilty, but leaves the court and here's others opinions about it can affect the judgment of the juror. "I think jurors are human and they're nervous enough about their responsibility to be fair and be wise in making a judgment on somebody else's future," Talty said.(Debate continues over cameras in the
There are multiple reasons why people who would like to see the trails televised. Recording a trial would add a new insight to the judge and the lawyers who are in the trial. If the case were to reopen at a certain point they defendants and the plaintiffs' lawyers could review the trail and how the proceeding went. In Illinois the Supreme Court allowed cameras in 41 of their counties and 102 had cameras in their courtrooms.There …show more content…
This source states that there was no evidence found that there was no negative impact on the trail. If anything camera can help with review of the trail and how the person acts while on camera.Sharon Burdette, sister of Patricia Leigh Mills, urged law enforcement to review her sisters case. She became suspicious about her sister's death because her sister's husband got remarried soon after her death and acquired her sister's insurance money and gave up there son. She said reviewing the photos and videos of the trail helps answer questions that she had. He was soon convicted of his deceased wifes murder on January 17, 2013, 10 years later after her sister's death.(Pro-con: Should cameras be allowed in courtrooms?) Also having cameras creates a bigger audience and it enlightens the public with information.The public's understanding will broaden and will have more confidence and respect of the judicial system, creating a stronger bond with them by relieving them knowing that justice was …show more content…
and taking live video."(Debate continues over cameras in the courtroom).By allowing cameras in the courtroom the primary audience would change from the people in the courtroom to the entire public at the end it would not give the accused a fair chance and trail guilty or not guilty. Juries would be concentrated with being on television it would not concentrate on the trail at hand. Having a hearing televise can affect the juror's thoughts about the trial. Prime example, if it's a three day trial and on day one the juror think the defendant is guilty, but leaves the court and here's others opinions about it can affect the judgment of the juror. "I think jurors are human and they're nervous enough about their responsibility to be fair and be wise in making a judgment on somebody else's future," Talty said.(Debate continues over cameras in the