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

The critics Of "cameras in the courts" point to this very
fact, the brevity of television news reports, as an argument
against allowing cameras coverage in judicial proceedings.
Some even suggest that the media should be forced to show
"all of it or none at all". Public education in light of
this highly selective editing cannot possibly take place,
say these critics.
This evaluation was not required to offer an opinion on the
quality of television news coverage of judicial proceedings.
Suffice it to say that highly selective editing does occur
and that this necessary practice is one of the most con-
troversial issues.associated with cameras in the courts.
Little scientific inquiry has been done to contribute
knowledge to the debate. This issue and other long range
effects on society at large represent the main frontier of
"cameras in the courts" research.
3. Inexperienced Jurors
Prior to their service in an EMC event, some jurors evidence
concern about their own abilities to remain free of EMC
influence. These prospective jurors believe that their own
functioning and that of the judicial system in general may be
somewhat impaired with the presence of EMC. Experience with
EMC changes this perception. If EMC becomes a permanent fixture
in the courts, the California judiciary may want to con-
sider hbw jurors who are assigned to EMC trials could come to
enter the experience with their confidence high, rather than
low. Jurors should be assured that their ability, role and
functioning, that of other trial participants and of the system
itself will not be diminished by the presence of EMC.
Methods exist today to orient and instruct jury pools in the
phenomena and issues associated with EMC. Video tape programs
could be developed and shown to prospective jurors.
These
tapes would present factual information relevant to the role ~4
-242-