skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 76953 Find in a Library
Title: Case Against Cameras in the Courtroom
Journal: Judges Journal  Volume:20  Issue:1  Dated:(Winter 1981)  Pages:18-21,51
Author(s): J G Day
Date Published: 1981
Page Count: 5
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: Despite the 1981 Supreme Court ruling in Chandler v. Florida, which allows States to experiment with television broadcast of trials, this article argues that such broadcasts disrupt courtroom proceedings and unduly and subtly influence jurors, witnesses, and courtroom personnel.
Abstract: The arguments used by the media for allowing television cameras in the courtroom are based on the assumption that such broadcasts would educate and inform the public about the criminal justice system. However, the media interest is mainly in good theatre, and a 2-minute televised news story cannot adequately impart the complexities in many cases. Furthermore, a fragmented version of a trial is apt to persuade the public to take sides on the basis of limited information, and distorted views may lead to unfounded public decisions about the judicial process. Moreover, television cameras in the courtroom would disrupt the proceedings. For example, the wide dissemination of the faces and testimony of witnesses would make them fair game for ridicule and pressure. The recognition that accompanies television exposure may also intrude on jurors' attentiveness and subject them to harassment or coercion. Also, the rule separating witnesses may be impaired when a trial is broadcast, and witnesses may become judges of their own and other witnesses' credibility. Grave constitutional issues may be opened if trials are allowed to be broadcast selectively. For example, disparate treatment may raise an equal protection problem. It would also have to be determined if the broadcast media have a right of access protected by the sixth amendment. The results of a survey taken in Cleveland, Ohio, in 1980 show that the presence of television cameras in the courtrooms have a substantial deleterious influence on participants in trial proceedings. For example, 50 percent of the jurors, 30 percent of the witnesses, and 54 percent of the lawyers have felt distracted by the cameras. Although an open trial is essential to a fair trial, that objective is served adequately by a full transcript, a public presence, and the presence of media representatives in the courtroom. Statistical data and footnotes are included.
Index Term(s): Attorneys; Courtroom proceedings broadcasting; Defendants; Judicial process; Jury decisionmaking; Right to Due Process; Witness protection
Note: *This document is currently unavailable from NCJRS.
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.