Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
While 45% say that televising Court's proceedings would be good "because the judges would consider public opinion more" in making decisions, 31% say TV would be bad because justices would consider public opinion too much. 25% say are not sure or say that televising the Court would have no effect on its legal decisions. [7]
There was no live televised coverage of Knox’s trial in 2009, but even then, the ravenous attention the proceedings received shaped perceptions, often inaccurately, in ways that endure.
The Supreme Court should accept that there is no data to justify prohibiting Trump’s trial from being televised, and immediately remove Rule 53 as an obstacle. Speculation is not enough reason ...
The High Court of Australia has started allowing video recordings of Full Court proceedings, since 1 October 2013. [26] In its press release explaining this step, the High Court made the point that "[its] decision to take these steps was made having regard to the nature of its jurisdiction and is not intended to set any precedent for other courts".
Prosecutors wrote in a filing last week that federal courts are expressly prohibited from allowing proceedings in a courtroom from being broadcast or even photographed and that although the public ...
A U.S. policy prohibits cameras in federal court. But House Democrats, legal experts and even one of the former president’s own lawyers want that to change. Will Trump's federal trials be televised?
In 2018, prior to the filming of Protection Court, the Florida Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee released an opinion that the decision as to 'Whether a judge may permit court cases to be filmed and televised' should be made by court administration, since it was not an ethical issue. [3]
Cameras are permitted in Georgia court proceedings with a judge’s approval. The Sept. 6 arraignment of defendants in the Georgia case, for example, will be televised.