NCJ Number
58431
Journal
Judicature Volume: 63 Issue: 1 Dated: (JUNE/JULY 1979) Pages: 14-23
Date Published
1979
Length
10 pages
Annotation
THIS 1979 ARTICLE, DEALING WITH THE BANNING OF CAMERAS FROM TRIALS, STATES THAT THE BAN WAS AN OVERREACTION TO THE GENERALLY GOOD CONDUCT OF PHOTOJOURNALISTS DURING THE LINDBERGH KIDNAPING TRIAL.
Abstract
STILL AND NEWSREEL CAMERAS ENJOYED INCREASED USE IN COURT COVERAGE IN THE EARLY 1900'S AS JOURNALISTS SOUGHT TO EMPLOY ALL THE LATEST TECHNIQUES OF THEIR CRAFT. AS EARLY AS 1917, LEGAL EXPERTS BEGAN TO RECOMMEND THAT CAMERAS INSIDE COURTROOMS BE BANNED. THEY FELT THE USE OF CAMERAS WAS BOTH DISRUPTIVE TO THE SMOOTH FLOW OF THE COURT PROCESS AND A HINDRANCE TO FAIR TRIAL. IN 1925, CHICAGO JUDGES AGREED TO A BAR ASSOCIATION REQUEST TO BAN CAMERAS IN COURT. THE NEXT 10 YEARS SAW SEVERAL DECISIONS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE, BUT LITTLE DECISIVENESS UNTIL 1935. THE BRUNO HAUPTMANN TRIAL FOR THE KIDNAPING AND MURDER OF LINDBERGH'S SON BROUGHT THE ISSUE TO A HEAD. THE PRESS HAD BEEN ARGUING IN FAVOR OF RESPONSIBLE USE OF CAMERAS IN THE COURT ROOM. PHOTOGRAPHERS HOUNDED THE LINDBERGHS DURING THE PERIOD OF INITIAL INVESTIGATION. LIMITATIONS WERE PLACED ON CAMERAS USE DURING THE ACTUAL TRIAL AND ANYTIME THAT THE JUDGE WAS ON THE BENCH. CAMERAMEN WERE FREE TO SHOOT OUTSIDE OF THE COURT, HOWEVER, WERE ALLOWED TO ASK WITNESSES TO REPEAT HIGHLIGHTS OF THEIR TESTIMONY FOR THE NEWSREELS. VIOLATIONS OF THE RULES DID OCCUR DURING THIS TRIAL, AND A PICTURE OF HAUPTMANN WAS TAKEN WHEN THE VERDICT WAS READ. MUCH OF THE CRITICISM OF THE PRESS COVERAGE CENTERED ON THE CONDUCT OF THE PRINT JOURNALISTS, AND AN AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION (ABA) INVESTIGATION LED TO THE CONCLUSION THAT CAMERAS SHOULD BE BANNED IN COURT. IN 1937, CANON 35 PROHIBITED CAMERAS IN COURT IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT NEW CAMERA TECHNOLOGY WOULD ALLOW THEIR USE IN COURT WITHOUT INTERFERING WITH THE TRIAL. THE ABA STILL OPPOSES CAMERAS IN THE COURT. THE ARTICLE INCLUDES FOOTNOTES AND PHOTOGRAPHS. (KCP)