As much as I have enjoyed watching some high profile trials recently that have been broadcasted on TV, I do not think cameras should be allowed in the courtroom. I believe extensive media coverage of any court case encroaches upon the defendant's right to a fair trial as well as their right to due process. In the 1960s, after the media was allowed in the courtroom during the trial of Estes v. Texas, the Supreme Court overturned the conviction on the grounds that the camera coverage distracted trial participants and deprived the defendant of a fair trial. Just the next year, the Supreme Court ordered a retrial of Sheppard v. Maxwell, citing the trial was marred by the extensive media coverage (Hetzel & Strickland, 2024). Furthermore, the trial of O.J. Simpson renewed more debate on allowing cameras in the courtroom. Critics have said that the presence of cameras makes witnesses even more nervous not the stand, causing them to fidget, which could damage their credibility with the jury (Hetzel & Strickland, 2024). Many very high profile cases have had their trial judges ban all cameras from the courtroom. These trials include: Timothy McVeigh, Susan Smith, Richard Allen Davis, and Scott Peterson (Hetzel & Strickland, 2024). I understand the argument for transparency and the ability to see how justice is served for the public, however, in a criminal trial I am of the belief that the defendant's rights stand above the public's need to satisfy curiosity.
Reference:
Hetzel, Dennis, & Strickland, Ruth Ann. (2024). Cameras in the Courtroom. Free Speech Center. https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/cameras-in-the-courtroom/
In your response to your peers, consider how well they justified their positions, making use of available resources. Consider the following questions in your response posts:
- Did they support their position convincingly using appropriate resources?
- Which of their points make the most sense to you, even if you made a case for the opposing viewpoint?