I agree with “The Legal Reformer” on this:
Cameras in the Courtroom!
“Transparency and accountability – two essential outcomes that are attainable if every courtroom across the country had cameras. Filming court proceedings, including the judges presiding and the lawyers arguing, and posting the videos online would reveal each judge’s and many lawyers’ behavior and competence. Legal consumers could go online and view potential lawyers in action, see how their judge treats litigants, observe any biases, and so much more.”
http://thelegalreformer.com/2013/04/12/cameras-in-the-courtroom/
Perhaps if the judge who was unkind and grumbled when the prospective juror I wrote about in yesterday’s post knew a camera was recording his conduct, he might treat jurors and prospective jurors who are performing their civic duty with more respect.
One exception to universal courtroom-camera coverage might be Kim Kardashian’s divorce trial. Why give her any more attention, already. Oh, she DOESN’T want cameras there? Because, according to Perez Hilton http://perezhilton.com/2013-04-15-kim-kardashian-no-cameras-kris-humphries-divorce-trial#.UWy8c7U3src, she doesn’t want her dirty — and perhaps fraudulent — laundry aired on TV. That might be a good reason to allow camera coverage.
Anatomy of a Trial blog 