Justice must be televised is how the Guardian put it – already on 5 December 2010.

Riots: Sky Wants Judges’ Remarks Televised – 9 April 2011 and September 05, 2011

The user survey points at 67% for TV and 33% against.

Cameras in court- Murder, she watched

These are the mini-headlines of The Economist’s article of 20 August 2011 that would have saved Norman Scarth‘s imprisonment, if it had become law already…

Supporters of reform say openness should be a democratic presumption, and that cameras in court will improve confidence in the legal system. Sceptics point out that due process requires discretion. Juries should be sheltered from political or sensationalised scrutiny, they say. Cameras might make witnesses cagey, or unduly humiliate defendants.

A study in America found that, on the contrary, witnesses are franker when being filmed. And American judges and lawyers deny (not always plausibly) that they act up for the camera. For the moment, limiting the footage to judges would avoid the thorniest problems. The robed and bewigged lords of the bench may soon be more of a media fixture than the rough courtroom sketch.

About these ads