Cameron to allow filming in courtrooms, page 1

Cameron to allow filming in courtrooms, page

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times

Topic started on 5-9-2011 @ 04:33 PM by Swanfilters

Cameron to allow filming in courtrooms

news.sky.com

The Prime Minister is expected to announce that television cameras will be allowed to film some elements of court proceedings, according to Sky sources.

The breakthrough comes after the Head of Sky News, who has spearheaded a campaign to televise court cases, wrote an open letter to the Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke urging him to take action.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Related News Links:
www.guardian.co.uk

edit on 5-9-2011 by Swanfilters because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 04:33 PM by Swanfilters

This is a strange step to be taking. Why would they suddenly be allowing cameras in courts, and why is sky news campaigning so fervently to get this allowed?

Anyone have any idea why they are doing this? Do you like the idea? Do you Disagree with the plan? Let's discuss the matter here...

Personally, I think this is all to do with the money that can be generated, but it breaches privacy, and as we have seen in recent cases with the nurse accused of poisoning- the media are known to jump on bandwagons which can ruin peoples' careers and lives, giving them access would make it a whole lot worse.

news.sky.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 04:42 PM by Cobaltic1978

reply to post by Swanfilters

They're following the U.S model.

Come on, we are always a few years behind the U.S except for Music, where we are obviously world trendsetters.

It's a BIG ratings winner, therefore more advertising sold

Welcome to the judicial system, brought to you, after these important announcements!

reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 04:45 PM by Sherlock Holmes

This is a very bad move. The last thing we need is a dumbing down of our court system, turning high-profile cases into little more than reality TV entertainment for the plebeians.

Originally posted by Swanfilters
Why would they suddenly be allowing cameras in courts, and why is sky news campaigning so fervently to get this allowed?

£££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££.

You only need to look at how Americans are riveted to their TV sets when they televise prominent trials, such as that of OJ Simpson.

A lot of people seem to have little interest or care in differentiating between serious, fact-based matters and entertainment, so they just see these trials as yet another television show for their viewing delectation.

reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 04:57 PM by PW229

This is a good thing.

In my years looking at the UK judicial system I have seen many things that I find highly questionable. A judge directing the jury on a guilty or not guilty verdict, the Crown Prosecution Service acting in manners not befitting of their station and using roundabout methods to bring the accused into disrepute. Judges laying down sentences that are clearly excessive and indeed in some cases manifestly lenient.

There exists a basic rule in law, justice must be fair and must be seen to be fair. Having court proceedings recorded or played live will allow the public to see justice at work.

I'm all for it.

reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 05:06 PM by Cobaltic1978

reply to post by PW229

I would agree with you to a certain extent if it was a public service channel advocating this, but come on, it's Sky!!

They are not interested in justice being seen to be done, they are just interested in revenue from commericial opprotunities.

reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 05:13 PM by PW229

reply to post by Cobaltic1978

Granted. But we have to acknowledge the debate is now out there regardless of who's doing it. Personally I wouldn't watch Sky News if I was paid to watch it but I am intrigued by the idea of seeing justice for all its foibles.

reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 05:27 PM by Sherlock Holmes

reply to post by PW229

Couldn't you just go to the public gallery at your local Crown Court to view justice in action ?

I doubt that the televised court cases will be anything other than those of the ''human interest'' or voyeuristic variety. I imagine that most of the viewers will not be watching because of an interest in gaining knowledge about the workings of our justice system, but rather to watch emotion-filled scenes, sordid revelations and to see other people being disgraced and humilated, presumably because it will fill some gaping hole in the viewer's vacuous life.

reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 05:32 PM by CherryV

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes

This is my perspective of allowing filming of this too, why can't people just go and visit in a court. I don't think this is a good idea~ been a long time a-coming and inevitable too.

reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 05:37 PM by LunaStarr

Well now criminals will have extra 'bragging rights' for appearing on TV and having their crimes broadcast, potentially spurring on others.

Smooth move, Cameron, smooth move.

Next time actually concentrate on making tougher sentences and making 'life' mean life!

reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 05:47 PM by PW229

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
reply to post by PW229

Couldn't you just go to the public gallery at your local Crown Court to view justice in action ?

I doubt that the televised court cases will be anything other than those of the ''human interest'' or voyeuristic variety. I imagine that most of the viewers will not be watching because of an interest in gaining knowledge about the workings of our justice system, but rather to watch emotion-filled scenes, sordid revelations and to see other people being disgraced and humilated, presumably because it will fill some gaping hole in the viewer's vacuous life.

Yes, I have sat for hours in Ipswich and Norwich Crown Court and have been known in the public gallery of Bury St Edmunds and Thetford Magistrates. My experience of the judicial system would rival most lawyers and touch the experience of barristers. I've been on both sides as well, I have been accused and watched those accused in court.
What have I taken away from this experience? That our system isn't as transparent as it should be.

reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 06:50 PM by lifeissacred

In my opinion this is a bad move, things like this encourage show trials. There's nothing wrong with having transparency in court proceedings (i.e. releasing transcripts of prominent cases after the trial etc) but to turn our courts system into little more than reality TV is a bad idea.

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 04:30 AM by bussoboy

reply to post by Swanfilters

The public will be able to see judges sentencing defendants but not see judges sentencing vulnerable defendants. A nice subtle way of putting pressure on the judges to impose sentences that government and those members of the public baying for blood; want.

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 05:25 AM by woodwardjnr

Maybe we can have a judge panel like that of x factor and maybe we should have a little tv package about the defendant before they stand trial,with some Take That music, with clips explaining that the defendants grand mother has cancer. Then maybe we the public can phone in with a guilty or innocent verdict. Calls will cost more from your mobile.

reply posted on 6-9-2011 @ 05:36 AM by thoughtsfull

Really do not agree with this move.. if you want to see the Courts in action go down there.. turning our courts into a reality tv show is not something I would like to see and further proof in my mind this country is going to the dogs.

reply posted on 7-9-2011 @ 06:04 AM by Sherlock Holmes

Originally posted by PW229
Yes, I have sat for hours in Ipswich and Norwich Crown Court and have been known in the public gallery of Bury St Edmunds and Thetford Magistrates. My experience of the judicial system would rival most lawyers and touch the experience of barristers. I've been on both sides as well, I have been accused and watched those accused in court.
What have I taken away from this experience? That our system isn't as transparent as it should be.

Our judicial system may not be as transparent as it should be, but I fail to see how television cameras in courtrooms will be any cure for that, as it's not going to be standard procedure - and, even if it was, the courtroom footage would be just as inaccessible to the average member of the public as court records are at the moment.

I doubt that they'll be showing live coverage of some bloke who is up on charges of breaking and entering, and stealing £200 worth of electrical goods.

Just about every televised case which is shown will be one which is high-profile. Prominent trials already retain a certain degree of judicial transparency, due to the widespread media coverage and reporting which already takes place when these trials occur.

Pages: ^^TOP^^