1989-03-24 Comments of Star Tribune.pdf - Minnesota Judicial Branch
1989-03-24 Comments of Star Tribune.pdf - Minnesota Judicial Branch
1989-03-24 Comments of Star Tribune.pdf - Minnesota Judicial Branch
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
0 The media's predominant interest is in criminal<br />
cases. Civil cases attract less than half the<br />
interest <strong>of</strong> criminal cases and very few requests<br />
are submitted for appellate level or juvenile cases.<br />
l EMC.events took place twice as <strong>of</strong>ten in Superior<br />
Court as in lower courts.<br />
0 Electronic and photographic media covered all pro-<br />
ceeding stages <strong>of</strong> litigation (evenly distributed)<br />
from arraignments to motions to trials.<br />
0 Television camera presence at court proceedings<br />
was somewhat more frequent than still camera pres-<br />
ence and both were considerably more common than<br />
radio. .<br />
l The predominant purpose <strong>of</strong>.EMC was for daily news<br />
stories on the particular case being covered.<br />
Relatively few "feature stories" or purely educa-<br />
tional applications <strong>of</strong> EMC occurred.<br />
a In over a dozen cases, judges exercised their dis-<br />
cretion in EMC decision-making by restricting cov-<br />
erage beyond the criteria in the California Rules<br />
<strong>of</strong> Court governing the experiment.<br />
0 In several cases, "violations" or relaxations <strong>of</strong><br />
the rules occurred but in no instance was EMC so<br />
obtrusive as to disrupt or seriously disturb the<br />
proceeding.<br />
l The experimental year was highlighted by about a<br />
half dozen extremely high media events having<br />
"cameras in the courts". These events include<br />
sensational crime cases, public figure trials<br />
(politicians), a social issue case, and a libel<br />
suit between a celebrity and a newspaper.<br />
In all it was an active and interesting experimental year.<br />
At this writing, the experiment continues and even more<br />
experience with EMC <strong>of</strong> court proceedings is being accumu-<br />
lated. In early September, 1981, cameras (one television<br />
camer2,and one still camera) were permitted for the first<br />
time in California's history to cover oral arguments at<br />
the Supreme Court. Its active experiment places California<br />
-220-