Article Abstract:
Ohio, Oregon, and Illinois have come to different decisions regarding the use of cameras in courtrooms. The Ohio Supreme Court allowed live television coverage of a case's oral argument for part of a high school educational program and had a permanent transmitting signal installed for future use. The Oregon Supreme Court chief justice had the rules for camera use in the courts moved from the judicial conduct code to the uniform trial court rules, stating that the rules were more appropriate to procedures than ethical conduct. However, the Illinois State Bar Assn voted not to support a proposal for having cameras in their courts.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Article Abstract:
There has been much judicial consideration of cameras in the courtroom in 1993. Judges in Nebraska, Florida, Tennessee and Puerto Rico have heard cases on cameras in the courtroom. The Reporter's Committee on the Freedom of the Press was only one of the government organizations supporting cameras in the courtroom during hearings before the DC Superior Court. A television station was barred from an Ohio court for two months for covering court proceedings with concealed cameras.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Article Abstract:
New York has joined 44 other states and voted to allow cameras in its courtrooms. The law has several restrictions: witnesses in criminal trials can decide not to have their faces seen, victims of sex crimes cannot be shown without consent, judges must consent before a trial is televised and the law must be reviewed in Jan 1995 for renewal. The law was a compromise between the Republican-controlled Senate and the Democrat-controlled State Assembly.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic: