Criminal Trials
Criminal Trials: Should they be Televised or not?
Faith R. Warner
Rasmussen College
This research is being submitted on December 7, 2010, for Rose Pogatshnik’s CCJ 1000 course at Rasmussen College by Faith R. Warner.
Cochran, B. President, & radio-television news directors association & f. (n.d). (2005, November 9). Cameras in the courtroom. pp 1-5. Retrieved October 19, 2010, from Points of view reference center database. “Ms. Bergman is President of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (“NACDL”)”. She is representing the Committee in this article. In criminal cases, Ms. Bergman believes the price of televised court actions “must be weighed against the accused constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial” (Bergman, 2005). In some cases, televised trials may help restore the reputation of a criminal defendant when charges are dismissed or they receive a not guilty verdict. On the other hand, “One primary concern regarding cameras in the courtroom is that they will affect the participants’ behavior in ways that would undermine the fair administration of justice” (Bergman, 2005). In addition, “If jurors are filmed and their verdict publicized, concern about how their verdict will be accepted by the mass television audience may invade the deliberations process” (Bergman, 2005). Once more, “Televised proceedings can adversely affect witness behavior in many ways” (Bergman, 2005). Witnesses may not want to testify if they now their testimony will be publicized. I agree with Ms. Bergman in the fact that televised court proceedings must be viewed carefully. However, I do not agree that a televised criminal case would help restore a defendant if acquitted. The public has already formed their opinions of a defendant before the trial ever started. I do agree that televising criminal trials will put an effect on how people act or react in the courtroom. I also agree that televising a criminal trial would very
Faith R. Warner
Rasmussen College
This research is being submitted on December 7, 2010, for Rose Pogatshnik’s CCJ 1000 course at Rasmussen College by Faith R. Warner.
Cochran, B. President, & radio-television news directors association & f. (n.d). (2005, November 9). Cameras in the courtroom. pp 1-5. Retrieved October 19, 2010, from Points of view reference center database. “Ms. Bergman is President of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (“NACDL”)”. She is representing the Committee in this article. In criminal cases, Ms. Bergman believes the price of televised court actions “must be weighed against the accused constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial” (Bergman, 2005). In some cases, televised trials may help restore the reputation of a criminal defendant when charges are dismissed or they receive a not guilty verdict. On the other hand, “One primary concern regarding cameras in the courtroom is that they will affect the participants’ behavior in ways that would undermine the fair administration of justice” (Bergman, 2005). In addition, “If jurors are filmed and their verdict publicized, concern about how their verdict will be accepted by the mass television audience may invade the deliberations process” (Bergman, 2005). Once more, “Televised proceedings can adversely affect witness behavior in many ways” (Bergman, 2005). Witnesses may not want to testify if they now their testimony will be publicized. I agree with Ms. Bergman in the fact that televised court proceedings must be viewed carefully. However, I do not agree that a televised criminal case would help restore a defendant if acquitted. The public has already formed their opinions of a defendant before the trial ever started. I do agree that televising criminal trials will put an effect on how people act or react in the courtroom. I also agree that televising a criminal trial would very