Courtroom Trials

[ll_billym]

What are the rules governing what can and can't be shown on TV with regards to courtroom trials? And why is this so? My points in question:

1) Why don't they allow cameras (still or moving) or at least sound recorders to relay what's happening? What harm can it do, at the moment the press just write it down and print it word for word anyway.

2) Defendants seem to be depicted in relatively poor drawings, why do they even bother seeing as it's all from memory anyway?

3) Barristers etc are depicted in that silly pseudo 3D thing, what's the problem with at least taking pictures of them?

4) If it must be daft psuedo 3D, why not use archive pictures of the defendants and show them at the same time?

It all seems a bit "Gerry Adams in the 80's" to me......

[ll_billym]

Must be just me then.

[maxi29]

No cameras or audio recording of any sort are allowed in courts - there are very strict rules about this. There has been some debate in recent years whether this should be changed and cameras allowed in but the consensus still seems to be against it. There are certainly many barristers who feel that cameras have turned trials in the US into media circuses and the process of justice hasn't be served by their presence (there are also many barristers and judges who would revel in the extra publicity too).

I don't think the drawings of defendants are from memory, I think that official artists are allowed in court - but I've never been present at a big enough trial to check.