Cameras in the Courts
By BEVERLY POPPELL
|
|
The New York Press Club is a leader in the
battle for cameras in the courts. |
|
NEW YORK, April 13, 2001 - - The battle over cameras in the courts
is far from over but the move to return cameras to New York State
courtrooms is gaining momentum, according to Bayside Democratic Assemblyman Mark Weprin. |
Long a proponent of open courts, Weprin has faced stiff opposition
on a bill he authored, A.4568, to permit court
proceedings to be photographed. He told the New York Press Club
recently, "The landscape has changed," and cameras
may yet find a permanent place in the court rooms throughout
the state.
One reason is Sullivan County Judge Frank J. LaBuda's ruling
March 30, 2001, declaring unconstitutional Section 52 of the
Civil Rights Law (CRL). Another reason is a special report by
the New York
State Bar Association (NYSBA) calling for a two-year experiment
with audio-visual equipment.
Lawmakers' Position
Except for a ten-year experiment
in which the Court of Appeals allowed recordings of trial court
proceedings, CRL Section 52 has prohibited the use of audio-visual
equipment in court rooms for 49 years. Legislation authorizing
the decade-long experiment lapsed four years ago.
Weprin said Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver has told
him he would be "happy" to shepherd a bill through
the lower house in Albany "if there's a serious push to
do it." Weprin said a majority of the members of the Democratic
Conference support it but the cause would benefit from more active
support.
Court Inroads
As judges across the state permit
cameras in their trial courts, Weprin predicted, attention will
turn to legislators in those districts who will then see it as
an issue relevant to their constituency.
LaBuda's ruling in People v. Schroedel will permit Kingston's
WRNN (cable) TV to record and air "sound bites" of
the capital murder trial set to begin soon.
"The citizens of Sullivan County have a right to know under
what circumstances a person may or may not receive the death
penalty," LaBuda said, adding, "Openness of the judiciary
should always be favored when the knowledge of society can be
enlarged and the rights of all safeguarded."
Early last year in New York Supreme Court in Albany, Justice
Joseph C. Teresi declared the same section of the law unconstitutional
in People v. Boss, the so-called "Diallo case," in
which four New York City Police Officers were charged but ultimately
acquitted of killing Amadou Diallo. Teresi allowed audio-visual
coverage of the case.
His ruling was not appealed by prosecutors. Weprin credits the
coverage with defusing tension in the non-white community following
that verdict.
Even with an appeal of the LaBuda ruling, Weprin said, "It
would be better if the Legislature came up with a law" spelling
out the parameters of audio-visual equipment usage.
State Bar Support
Despite the Legislature's preoccupation
with budget matters, Weprin said the issuance of the NYSBA report
also helps move the debate "from the back of the shelf closer
to the front." The reason, he said, is that his colleagues
have been looking for a cue from the community at large that
this issue is important enough to address. Now that NYSBA has
"so firmly embraced" the idea, he said, "that
will hold a lot of weight" in the effort to build momentum.
A significant aspect of the NYSBA report is that it reflects
a decision by the Bar Association's ruling body to drop an earlier
recommendation that consent be required of opposing parties in
a lawsuit before coverage was allowed.
The NYSBA report found that in states which require consent of
the parties for TV coverage, such coverage is rare or non-existent.
It also found, "There is no pattern of specific harm in
specific cases and no substantial evidence that cameras adversely
affect the outcome of trials."
Although the State Bar report did not consider the constitutionality
question, it made a number of findings about cameras in trial
court proceedings and proposed safeguards to protect the rights
of parties, witnesses and jurors.
Call for Action
Weprin urged editorial boards
to call for passage of his bill and for citizens to write their
Assemblyman. "As legislators," he said, "we're
obligated to respond to constituents."
NYPC member Beverly Poppell is both
an attorney and a journalist. |