1989-03-24 Comments of Star Tribune.pdf - Minnesota Judicial Branch

More documents

Recommendations

Info

8, 8; I 8, I 8 8 a&-. DEC 7 1988 Michigan Supreme Court ichigan Courts In The News KALAMAZOO. MI ._. .-. . HOV-23-88 JUDY DAUB- , ASWCIATEO PRES WRrnR LANSING - Counnmms in all 83 Michigan counries should be opened to journalists’ cam- .tbem. Only 63 of the 174 requests for the expanded media coverage were approved under those guidelines. according 10 a report presented to get a bold of and sell papers,” she said. But Sullivan said ample evidence existed in other states that cameras in the counrooms don’t disrupt proceedings in those types of eras and tape record- a committee Michigan Supreme Court recommends. of tbe the committee. On June 20, tbc court changed lhc guidelines cases. He said that only six stales donl allow any type of expanded media coverage The Camerai in ‘the Mntrwm Cummittee in live counties. making access to ~rtrootns voted 9-l Tuaday lo W the lugh court to make permaneot an aperimwtthatbasoperated in five Michigan countks since June ‘“he public has a right to kr~~ and the public’s right to know is fulfilled only in part by the newspapers . . . We feel that this would open the coverage of court mat* to Ihe genera1 public.” said Michigan Court of Appeals Judge Joseph B. Sullivan, committce chainnan of tbe Sullivan said that wbea the orperiment b gan aume feared courtmoms would be disrupt- ed. “Actually, in the workings of it things have gone rather calmly and smo~thly,~ be said. The high court began its experiment state wide on Feb. 1 but petmittted defense auor- neys prosecutors or judges to block the use of cameras or tape recorders if they didn’t want automatic unless a judge determined that such coverage would make the trial or court prP ceding unfair. Ofthe144reque&&ivd;i’inGrand~ wne. ,lngham Mnrquetle. oak&ad and wexford counties, 138 were approved, the report said Sullivan said comments from judges involved in those cases tumed up few problems. The lone dissenter on tbe commjttee was Detroit F&corders’ Court Judge Vera hIassey Jones, who argued that.the use of camems and tape nxvnkrs abould’~ an experiment for another year but be expanded statewide Jones said the iivccounty qeriment dii not provide enough ocperience with the type of violent felony caJg beard in Detroit Record- ers’ Court “it’s tbe kind of thing most papers want to Ml. CLPMEKS. Ml MACOMB DAILY NOV-23-38 _--._-..- . ..-. Panel backs . c%iiiieraS in courtrootis IANSING (UPI) q;bkcom- mendations lo 0pd".p11 WrUr- momsinthestote~~eRs~d recording equipment,, but @nt I judges wide discretion to linut or : deny cove.mgt, were adopted , TM&~ by ?.apecial eommikt.e% The 14-member committee’s recommendations follow a five- month pilot study in five counties that e&owed broadcsat media greater ace-ass to coumcmm pm CeediAp. 1 Tbe ?d.ichiean Surrreme Ch which must amuwve tbe reci2 mendations &fore they become official court guidelines, ap pointed the committee to conaidv the atate’s hmg-atanding ban on amens and recording equipment in coluvooms. Under the proposed guidelines, judges could permit broad- e .ponem and news photomphers to . record proceedings, tire2 days written notice. gz ever, a judge could waive that notice requirement if necemary. A jiadgc also could allow coverage of a trid generally while btui- ning asxne~ during cennin sensitive potions of tbe proceed- %& example, filming and up ing could be tied in cases in- volving sex offenses, child offenders, parental rights, undcr- cover Offlcera, RlocALcd la: nesses and others,.. at tbe discretion of a judge. Fiiming or taping of jlnan and jnrv would be fiatly prohibited uder the guideline& A judge’s decision to limit or deny weas could not k appcpled bv the media, although ponies to de cmc would be allowed to ehd- lenp the de&ion. under the pm posda. Tne fear was that media would frequently become part of tbe cow ease wh;a-queu~~ rlceesmcounT6o ‘I don’t want to we the me& AS a poaaible litigant in every ain- gie bwsuit,” aaid Detroit Record- en Court thdge Vern Jones, a member of the commitlee. Committee members, ranging from judges and attorneys to a hfkhie;v State University. jour.‘. n&am professor, expressed con- cemsoverbahcingtheri~ts0f defandents, victim and tir.nm aith tbe public’s right to know. It waa decided, by and large, to leave most authority in tbe hands of’tbe judge nther than mandat- ing eemin Actions. -AuofttlishjngWontbediE- a&ion of tbe judge,” said Michi- gan Appeak’Co~t Judge J-ph Sullivan, chairmsn of the committee. The judge must control the counroom pmperiy.” On June 20, the Surpeme Court decided tb sar up the pilot project in lngham, Msuquette, OnWmd, hand ‘haveme and Wexford counties. Over the following five months, circuit, district ana pm bare coum received at least 144 requests to allow -eras or recorders innwms. During the hvwunty crperiment. news or- ganizations wanting to use television or still :.cameras .m tape recorders had to request per- mission from the judge thrte days in advance. but ‘the judge could approve a request that came in hlff. A judge’s decision to terminate. suspend or ban the coverage could not be appealed under the experiment ’ The committee recommended those guide lines be continued. but suggested the guidelines ‘spell out that judges are free to exclude coverage of certain witneses such as victims of sex crimes and their families, police informant& undercover agents and relocated witnesses. Cow-age of jurors already was excluded. Supreme Coun spokesman Tom Farrell said tbc bgh court would take up the recommend;l+ bon early in 1989. WADING SERVJCE 126 s. Pwmm. wlumnBmn ucn aa95 DOiAGlAC, MI DAILY NEWS L61,OOO ._.
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 TV kicked out of irraignment EAST LANSING, MI TOWN COURIER w-13.500 . HOV-23-88 . Fine ! 1 :, points surface, camera issue flares in E.L, court :. BY SHARON SCHLIEF &all WCIQ *pdkyemccniyywm- inthccouruhubeen&ri~adin the wake d a wdrontuial M- -mbwldifoictwurt~ mdDtr.beTblon-cTew. ,A WILX Chenncl ‘IO phowmpha-~~ uoo IUmnf Nov. ‘I u hc l temo. lcdtorec&dLheemi@nnwntk MSU track star DeBTicK col- mm, who was char@ wttb selling coceine. J-c J&s He&ovsky uid hewunotinlomnddUrste- lien’8imentiootohingacemnr into the -H-B Disfricl ‘Court buulilng J”d look awWon Lo’ the utempt to phetwnph the defendeat’r .erreignment in Mm@urate Jee Sebmi&‘r emall 0lflce. SeurcIs cuffs” Whit actually happened during fhe wntmlm- tim. wd many d lhe thoee directly involved In the b&dent simply aren’t talking. Hamhww- rky seid cvayonc w- ny polite end thBt ke ‘*e&l em- iota to hen the met&P dimmv- cd. BoroIherwure6 uld tkre was at lwst me rtil ceatrak tauenbuderlol@ltobehsvdby Chnnel 10 reponbr Brrd Gad l grind them was -a IloJUe cm- IrnnuUon” but uid It vu dficc policytotuKlaUcommentover i0 tiluganmt. New8 Direcmr Dan 'TJITI~~~~ areed them was a iodmnlllion.-it ckIii te-thefpeclfii. ‘77lejudgewdILTe;pc*Ln rbwt thii whole nuaer. I nude my pefsmal point,d view and the point of view d this new fkartmentou.itcek4rlohim.” T;mLdUni s&d. "I WAsMnSFlEDWIMmI ln the weke d the incident ever the Co)cmen arraignment. Iimlw~ky hss iswed a witta IIWC&W ttd aI1 wmm re ipuls m-t be ehccked unrgh bbwurt-swdYBoum. Nothingis new. Ibmb-kyuid. irr )urt m wrung ‘IN THE COLEMAN AR- MIGNMENT. mdia did mt ue l)w ma&stmte in byis to be kind to them. ~. . *‘knew. didn’t rmnt lo dfend the pmu.“‘nmmlwlky seid. UIhc pbkm b that when Urywentinto&ionlhEyweR not in IJw wutreom (but) in en eight-by-ten room tlhe migistxita ofriwb, wd they were bbckim ur doorrrnY.” -. he S&&h codd not eornment l ddcd. - l wut the iurr. “Ike beoa “It’s not uke l trial.” Iimrwbv. e&red not lo say e abar sky uid d the l mignment. 90 L&” hs apldmd. lhm’snobendlttolhepmI Jme Zurita. Cobfmn’~ at- Irun thnl point d viol. DUbmy, rduad wnuna& cd- Dcuha rarld l riae to the &law elomey4ieat confldentlallty dallL..” B&da. H4mkMky l d- nib. b&‘Yheddewe~Uorncyh8d nmrhovaky #wed tbl lhe ebjectd.” cemthd&eeev~itrn lbmkwkyuidhehppned ruppaed b for c0rnplbm dlh-:tn be peniq by on a bra& from kr put in the mtmte’s pibt a l nothercrimindmatterwhenhc ~monwmerubtheawi. YY the photopapher in the lnghmm wuntim c--y in l is m of Il*c test ,pqtrmm thmt ckmmmy max. dlwuag the Jrniglb allwIcunawsinlhemIrtrlL only the judp JU‘tdtYtOdeay-. bring the The jo&ge aid the wpher ! he qvproeched said said “It FLINT. MI FLINT JOURNAL t 111,000 - s 108.500 HOV-23-88 weubl’t be l ppropMle for him to continue to take their pcluw.” “HI WK phoeqrmpharl wu QtliteelPprLedlUkedMmlo stop m the middled il... He step ill&n which 1 “U not wkt d. but I dwamd It With hi whtnhesteppedbnck.” nDrkwIh ChfBClcrirrd Ihe the medii &we quite coomrative. Asked if thW Shw* ed 7wy ruirtence to i&ins., tbwbnlcy wpbd wt m my fwolk*im.” other repoa d the incldad wreulylhi~bld~lne.nsiw’ eepmratc & rho asked ml &beamedlaIardmtrtbu- ttoa nid Hecr)aky wu bate and danmded fhe wmemmmn’f film. Sources said the llh-Iu-phCIaDd-- mmined dm. bat rdiwed te IV- mdmtheNm. MES& SOURCES SAID THE ~rwtmuon Yaf tape wd bud l nd cMned that a ctosed4oor mC*lswilhItdfBrhorttilw later Bencrated l nougll --iI@ and yelung” tkut it could be aslly heard outMe the dfii. Kcvbn Bowling. with the fjupreme M Admintstretor’s disce. rLiB’)ie was unable to . _ wmnienl on the events at dumrt camt uut &Y. but rlmled Phocqplphsr rSq- Jnd wercmnolwedm-loco]- emmn’s ’ +eUm~ exam in 54-B; iromwlly. UK amm wu wived hy the &fume. READING SERVICE ‘1206Fumwn. - Mh 48895 USA TODAY DAILY - 500,OW Panel .“, urges . opening all courts to cameras, tape recorders ties since Junr 7he public has l right to know end the pon presented to the committee. public’s nghhr to know is fulfilkd only in On June 20. the earn than@ the ~orequevtpermirrion fromthejudgethra d pur by the nmpapefs. . . . We feel thu thii guidelInes in fwe auntie% making awes tiysh~tithej~OUM~ suw=cavlWfomF~-
Page 1 and 2:
Patricia Hirl Longstaff Associate G
Page 3 and 4:
In Re Modification of Canon 3A(7) o
Page 5 and 6:
In Michigan, as in the overwhelming
Page 7 and 8:
supervisory responsibility. (See pa
Page 9:
The report also emphasizes the pivo
Page 12 and 13:
-v 32. CYJ 33.45 8.5% . 3.2% 2.85 2
Page 14 and 15:
I 1 I I a I 8 a a I 1 a 8 I a a I a
Page 16 and 17:
d a. Artorsey . 93 .39 . 3s .a9
Page 18 and 19:
--On most such occasions, the news
Page 20 and 21:
like judjclal decisions, jury verdi
Page 22 and 23:
of this pxpcbrience, I nm lOOX in f
Page 24 and 25:
APPENDIX SURVET SUMARY TABLE OF CA?
Page 26 and 27:
Result D: The presence of the elect
Page 28 and 29:
Table 3 To what extend did the pres
Page 30 and 31:
Not at All Slightly Moderately Very
Page 32 and 33:
1. Too much pretrial publicity. Tab
Page 34 and 35:
Table 12 To what extent did the pre
Page 36 and 37:
C. Attorney Only: Questions and Com
Page 38 and 39:
4. The presence personnel, persons
Page 40 and 41:
Table 9 TO what extent were court p
Page 42 and 43:
12. Believe it to be benficial. 13.
Page 44 and 45:
5. The positioning of the cameras i
Page 46 and 47:
3. The page Commission 3, Rule 7, r
Page 48 and 49:
L L Mailinq: SUMMARY OF EVALUATION
Page 50 and 51:
PHYSICAL DISRUPTION CLASSIFICATION
Page 52 and 53:
L.. I i. k. PREJUDICIAL PUBLICITY A
Page 54 and 55:
: I : . SELECTIVE COVERAGE Accordin
Page 56 and 57:
-. PSYCHOLOGICAL IMPACT The evaluat
Page 58 and 59:
-. I i-. 13. 82% of the judges and
Page 60 and 61:
-. ] i- I I L- 7. 55% of the judges
Page 62 and 63:
VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Page 64 and 65:
0 The media's predominant interest
Page 66 and 67:
at the forefront of the "cameras in
Page 68 and 69:
Clearly, the number of "uneventful"
Page 70 and 71:
. It is possible that when measured
Page 72 and 73:
The issues involved in the decision
Page 74 and 75:
‘an 306 Townsend Street Lansing,
Page 76 and 77:
1. Still Camera Shutter Noise Obser
Page 78 and 79:
jurors are more negative towards EM
Page 80 and 81:
._.,. proceeding and the number of
Page 82 and 83: permanent basis, it is the opinion
Page 84 and 85: Media coverage of judicial proceedi
Page 86 and 87: . tunity to negotiate with the medi
Page 88 and 89: The first group is a vocal minority
Page 90 and 91: function of jurors and demonstrate
Page 92 and 93: The judicial system plays a Special
Page 94 and 95: Minnesota State Bar Association; th
Page 96 and 97: Nancy Reid, reporter, KDLH-TV, Dulu
Page 98 and 99: Commission Rule 3.03 provides that
Page 100 and 101: e effective. 5. Court rules or stan
Page 102 and 103: for reports of important news event
Page 104 and 105: the difficulty in impaneling a jury
Page 106 and 107: witness was very firm in asserting
Page 108 and 109: conducted for the purpose of explor
Page 110 and 111: maintain constraints on the media r
Page 112 and 113: 12. The Petitioners have failed to
Page 114 and 115: and that there be no modification o
Page 116 and 117: inding 010 a verdict and 'he passag
Page 118 and 119: The charge to the jury was somewhat
Page 120 and 121: Chapter 7 CAMERAS IN COURT I. INTRO
Page 122 and 123: 19% REPORT TO THE GOVERNOR AND THE
Page 124 and 125: t i I I i I , ’ _ .b I 1985 REPOR
Page 126 and 127: I- _. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT
Page 128 and 129: Order Entcrrd: January 13, -1989 87
Page 130 and 131: (d) Media agency representatives sh
Page 134 and 135: \ ANN AROGR. MI NEWS H 0 V-23-88 Co
Page 136 and 137: JVlemoranaur chief JusncT Dorothy c
Page 138 and 139: I I, I I I r- -.. (b) A judge may t
Page 140 and 141: 7. Conferences. There shall be no a
Page 142 and 143: Accordingly, the enclosed bill woul
Page 144 and 145: DICIAL PROCEED?NGS AUDIO-VISUAL COV
Page 146 and 147: 1. Definitions. For purposes of thi
Page 148 and 149: coverage in the time and manner des
Page 150 and 151: would have an undesirable impact qu
Page 152 and 153: . ’ . I- proceedings. The chief a
Page 154 and 155: I I I I I I I I -. I I I I I I I I
show all

1989-03-24 Comments of Star Tribune.pdf - Minnesota Judicial Branch

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?