Tuesday, 23 October 2012

Post #5: Are Cameras in the Courtroom a Good Idea?


There are two sides to every issue and the debate over cameras in the courtroom is a good example of this. I found a youtube video that examines this issue by giving reasons as to why they should be allowed and why they shouldn’t. The video is from the television show titled The Agenda with Steve Paikin.
If you have the time, watch the whole video because it is helpful in understanding what deeper issues are involved. If you just want to skim through it, I recommend that you watch the first seven minutes of the clip because it outlines the opinions of the individuals who are from the legal community.
 
The debate (from the above video clip) included: Ray Wyant, Jamie Chaffe, William Trudell, May Moran and Jean Cumming (Paikin, 2011 March).
Wyant is a retired provincial judge who is for the idea of cameras in the courtroom. He feels that it can be used to help educate the public on the legal processes. He says that if they are used there need to be rules implemented so it does not become chaotic (Paikin, 2011 March).
Jamie Chaffe is a crown counsel and is against the idea of cameras in the courtroom. He feels that it would put added pressure on the witnesses who are required to testify and complicate the legal proceedings further (Paikin, 2011 March).
William Trudell is a defense counsel and is also against the idea of cameras in the courtroom. Not using cameras protects the accused, who if found not guilty, will need to reintegrate back into the community. Televising such trials would shed a negative light on the accused and therefore reintegration would be difficult for him or her. Not using cameras in the courtroom is also for the protection of the jurors who are doing their civic duty and do not need to be exposed in any way (Paikin, 2011 March).
Mayo Moran is the dean of the University of Toronto law school and is against the idea of cameras in the courtroom when dealing with trials. She feels that in some appellate cases they can be allowed as a teaching tool, but not for criminal matters or complex and emotional cases (Paikin, 2011 March).
Jean Cumming is an editor in chief for Lexpert magazine and she feels that cameras should be allowed because that is what the public and media want (Paikin, 2011 March).
I agree with Ray, Jamie, William and Mayo that cameras should not be allowed in the courtroom. In my opinion, it would become too chaotic and trials would lose their main purpose which is to punish the individual for wrongdoing. I also feel that Canada is not ready for such an advancement and that we should not implement such technology just because the United States already has.
I have to disagree with Jean when she said that cameras in the courtroom is what the public wants. In my opinion, the public is not the media and we should not be generalized as such. I think the overall opinion of the public is that they want the law in general to function well. This means that the right individuals are punished for the right reasons.

The media on the other hand, would love to see cameras in the courtroom because criminal trials will increase their ratings.

Reference 
 
Paikin, S. (2011, March 24). Cameras in the Courtroom. [Video file]. Retrieved from

1 comment:

  1. It is my first visit to your blog, and I am very impressed with the articles that you serve. Give me adequate knowledge to me. Thank you for sharing useful material. I will be back for a more great post. If you want Courtroom video exhibits, you can check out As Good As It Can Be Digital online store.

    ReplyDelete