Should Trump's trial be televised?
By: By Scott Neuman npr
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Should Trump's trial be televised?
Former President Donald Trump gestures as he enters the Erie Insurance Arena in Erie, Pa., for a political rally while campaigning for the GOP nomination on July 29. Jeff Swensen/Getty Images
The trial of former President Donald Trump on charges related to his alleged attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election would likely prove among the biggest television events in history.
But a federal rule forbids "the taking of photographs in the courtroom during judicial proceedings or the broadcasting of judicial proceedings from the courtroom."
House Democrats, led by Rep. Adam Schiff of California, are hoping to change that.
A letter on Thursday signed by Schiff and 37 other congressional Democrats, calls on the Judicial Conference — the national policymaking body for the federal courts, which is led by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts — to "explicitly authorize the broadcasting of court proceedings in the cases of United States of America v. Donald J. Trump."
A path through the Judiciary Conference is one way to get a televised trial. Another is for Congress to pass legislation to that effect.
Although Trump's own attorney, John Lauro, has also called for a televised trial , getting permission to broadcast the proceedings "would be pretty cumbersome to do," says Gabe Roth, executive director of the advocacy group Fix the Court. "But it's not impossible."
How many people would actually watch? Andrew Weissmann, a professor at NYU School of Law and a former lead prosecutor for Special Counsel Robert Mueller, recalls the summer of 1973. He spent it inside, glued to the television watching the Senate Watergate hearings .
But not everyone, he admits, is likely to be as engaged with the Trump trial. "There's always a bell curve of people, and so the issue is whether it's significantly important to a significant portion of the populace," he says.
Cameras could "prove irresistible" for Trump
Televising Trump's trial would theoretically benefit one side more than the other — inside the courtroom (legally) and outside (politically). But both sides appear to believe they would gain the upper hand, says Jordan Singer, a law professor at New England Law Boston.
They are "very confident that the nature of the trial will vindicate their view," he says.
For Trump, cameras in the courtroom could "prove irresistible," Singer says.
"I don't know if, in the absence of cameras, he would still take the stand in his own defense," he says. "But he is a man who's very, very confident in his ability to say things and have the cameras rolling in a way that will benefit him."
That may well be exactly what congressional Democrats are counting on. They are likely betting that "whatever will come out will be sufficiently bad for Mr. Trump that it will kill any presidential aspirations," Singer says.
Cristina Tilley, a law professor at the University of Iowa College of Law, agrees that Trump's calculus might have little to do with legal considerations. "This is sort of a unicorn case in a lot of ways," she says.
The arguments for and against allowing the public to watch
Schiff and his fellow Democratic lawmakers argued in their letter to the Judicial Conference that, "If the public is to fully accept the outcome, it will be vitally important for it to witness, as directly as possible, how the trials are conducted, the strength of the evidence adduced and the credibility of witnesses."
Singer says there's some evidence to back up the Democrats' claim. When people are able to sit down and watch court proceedings, it builds public confidence in the process and the final outcome, he says.
Misinformation surrounding the case is already rife, says Fix the Court's Roth. "So you know if that's happening before the trial is even started, you can only imagine a lot more of that will happen when you're only getting snippets" from a trial that isn't being televised, he says.
However, Tilley of the University of Iowa, isn't convinced that putting the proceedings on TV is a such a good idea.
People watching at home are likely to focus on the dramatic and emotionally charged moments of the trial as opposed to the less interesting — but more important — legal minutiae that the real jurors are required to consider, she says. "I think the nature of human psychology is such that we're always going to privilege the emotional and the visual over boring conceptual information."
"Let's be realistic," she says. "When the judge is instructing the real jurors ... about what a conspiracy is and here's how you have to prove it, I suspect that's exactly when our armchair jurors are going to go get a snack."
The administrator of this group reserves the right, along with the site moderators, to moderate all and any postings to this group, including the right to enforce the ToS, the CoC, and also including anything that the administrator deems within his sole discretion to be offensive, including and not limited to off topic comments, with the power to delete in exercising those rights.
It would be best, therefore, to be civil in posting on this group.
By now it should be well known that I am unable to open certain sources, videos and pictures. If I cannot, I will ask that they be described and explained. If the poster refuses to comply, their comment will be deleted. Instagrams are banned.
The topic is about and the pros and cons of televising Trump's trial. Any comments otherwise are off topic and will be deleted.
Article is LOCKED by moderator [Buzz of the Orient]
Tags
Who is online
26 visitors
I'm sure that a pretty vast amount of people would love to see the trial televised. I know I would, but then I enjoy courtroom dramas anyway. What do you all think? (Asks me, hoping that more than two or three people bother to even open this seed.)
Evening...ohhhh gawddd noooo!!!.the bloody elections are bad enough without this as well... just shoot me now...
As I said, I enjoy courtroom dramas, and this one is going to eclipse And Justice For All...
More like days of our lives...🤢🤢
LOL. These ARE the days of our lives...
I want to see the trial televised. I think most people do.
There's too great a risk of Trump turning the trial into a circus. I understand that the Democrats would like to put the former President's clownery in front of undecided voters, but for the health of our democracy, this trial must be exemplary.
Good point.
4 cameras 3 fixed; 1 on the witness to record testimony. 1 on the judge to record any judgements/comments from the bench. 1 on 45 to record his reaction. Plus1 to record any physical evidence.
Please explain "1 on 45".
One camera on the former 'president'.
Thanks Tess. I didn't know that he was known as 45.
That's because he was the 45th 'president' - some don't like to refer to him by name - kind of like Voldemort. LOL.
God forbid he should also be the 47th.
Thank you. Personally I refuse to use the name of a "person" who's family is ashamed of their ancestral name Drumpf.
I respect your principles, and anyways Tess answered my question, so, borrowing a line from Schindler's List: "I pardon you." (and I won't shoot you anyway like Amon Goeth did).
My favorite line from the arraignment was when the judge called 45 "Mister" instead of president. I think it should have been "Citizen."
A lot less silly and narrow minded than calling Biden "Brandon".
You mean like "Citizen Kane"?
Think the French revolution.
Au contraire mon ami. Both are calling the subject a name other than their own, which is not a different thing at all. The only difference is that "45" could be, as explained to me by Tess, considered an actual identification, but "Brandon" certainly is not and is meant to be an insult.
Mais oui, now I understand.
Sure, there are differences, but I still say that calling a person other than their actual name is what my comment about comparison was about.
Okay, I understand your point, but then is it also lacking in logic to call him "45"? In all my years, (and I'm talking 86) I've never seen or heard of ANY leader of any nation called by the number of their leadership until now right here.
Understood and respected. The problem is that there are different strokes for different folks.
Drumpf in German is pronounced Trump, my ancestral name in German had a D instead of the T it is now, but was still pronounced as if it was a T in German, when my Great Great Grandparents immigrated the English spelling was used to avoid confusion.
I'm torn, if televised it would limit (not avoid) spin by both parties. It would show expressions/tone of voice/physical movements, which can be informative.
On the other hand, it would be difficult to watch the lack of shame, possibly even lack of intellect, of Trump's legal team.
His lawyers have to be in it for the money, but they better be paid in advance. Any lawyer with integrity would refuse to defend him even if that is contrary to legal ethics. A public defender could always be appointed - maybe some kid just out of law school. LOL
... would limit Trump?? Ummmmm......
Well, so far he seems to have behaved himself in court - at least I haven't seen anything in the news to the contrary. But who knows what he will do if he knows he's being televised and watched by a record audience.
My comment was "both parties", no mention of Trump.
Well, technically true, but you were specific about Trump's legal team.
Exactly
Spin occurs in the media, not in the courtroom, where theatrics are commonplace. Smith and theatrics is unlikely. Trump and theatrics are synonyms.
My apologies to all, but I'm going to sleep now and will unlock this seed in about 9 hours from now. I believe that the present time in New York City is about 10 a.m. so it will be unlocked at around 7 p.m. New York City time. I have to do this with this seed because I'm obligated to moderate the articles on this group.
It is approaching 7 a.m. here and this seed is now unlocked for civil commentary. Thank you for your patience.
Morning..🐨🐨
And good morning to you too.
I’d watch every second of it. I just wish that it would make a difference to the people it needs to make a difference to the most. Nothing matters to the Q obsessed Trumptard.
I think those people might think they're watching The Apprentice and waiting for Trump to fire the judge. Having noted how popular Trump has become the more criminal charges are brought against him I have to deduce that those people are just too fucking stupid to vote for anyone other than that clown.
Sorry everyone, but it's almost 10 p.m. here and I'm going to sleep now but I will unlock this seed in about 9 hours from now as I did today. I believe that the present time in New York City is about 10 a.m. so it will be unlocked at around 7 p.m. New York City time. I have to do this with this seed because I'm obligated to moderate the articles on this group.
Ooops! Slept in. Sorry. Now open for civil commentary.
I think recording will give cover to the judge and jury for any later alleged mis-deeds and preserve a perfect record for the historical significance.
Good thought.
The answer is right there in the 3rd paragraph.
But then again, the left and the Democrat's are much for following rules.
On a side note, I'm not sure it would be a good idea to broadcast it. In the event of an acquittal, this opens the jury up to harassment.
Was that shot REALLY necessary?
Actually it was. IF there is an acquittal certain people will lose their collective minds (again). A quick glimpse at reality and history is all it takes to see this.
In the event of any ruling it opens the jury up to harassment, but by allowing camera it preserves a record. Even if it's not broadcast the record is historically important.
Yeah, I think there is going to be historical value to such a recording. It could become a teaching tool in History or Civics classes.
Wow. I made it almost to 11 p.m. tonight. I'll try to remember this time to unlock the article around 8 hours from now.
Unlocked and open for business.
10:30 p.m. and I'm going to sleep. Will unlock this again in the morning.
Unlocked for the last chance to comment. I intend to lock this permanently when I go to sleep tonight.
No comments at all today. This seed in now locked permanently.