Amazon.com Widgets
  • It is simple yes we should!!!!!!!!!!!

    Learn from others mistakes" is a very common and simple saying, however we should act all upon it. One of the rights we are guaranteed in the Constitution is that of a public trial. What type of trial can be more public than on television? By having trials televised, we are opening up the justice process for the world to see. With the knowledge that people are watching, all participants will be encouraged to play their parts in the most responsible manner. And, should there be a breach of justice, the world will be there to see and report. A recent study by the UCSF shows that teens are 33% more likely to learn from others mistakes. That is 1 out of 3 people. Imagine all the teens we could save. There are 29 million teens in the U.S, we could save a third or almost 10 million teens. We should broadcast it since it shows kids not to be bad, and how your life could be messed up if you do bad things like a murder or something. By allowing the televising of the court cases, efficient and fair trials will be ensured. Televising means that many people will be able to access the court cases and also that they will be able to criticize the judges for engaging in a trial insincerely. There is a need of eliminating dictator judges from the court. Currently, according to the Korean ministry of law, 73 of 1500 monitors noticed the judges dozing off while the court case was going on. Also, 4% of the judges were noticed of frivolities. Also, Judge Alex Cozinsky of US court a graduate of Harvard University with a PHD in Law mentioned that judges are less likely to doze off from the presence of cameras, and the fact that it is being televised to the whole world causes them to make more cautious decisions. Most of the time court cases are enjoyable to see. Many soaps and dramas are just as "violent" and inappropriate as court cases. Judge Judy was the #1 most watched show out of any TV series in 2013. More then Big Bang theory, the Simpson's, and Family Guy COMBINED. This shows people enjoy watching thousands of people would still enjoy it if it was broadcaster. Once a trial has begun there is no reason that it should not be televised. Some may have concern info would reach the jury, but if we operated as we should all juries would be sequestered to prevent them from seeing news of the trial. Additionally, if we aren't able to view what occurs in a court room, how do we feel secure in it being a fair.

  • It is simple yes we should!!!!!!!!!!!

    Learn from others mistakes" is a very common and simple saying, however we should act all upon it. One of the rights we are guaranteed in the Constitution is that of a public trial. What type of trial can be more public than on television? By having trials televised, we are opening up the justice process for the world to see. With the knowledge that people are watching, all participants will be encouraged to play their parts in the most responsible manner. And, should there be a breach of justice, the world will be there to see and report. A recent study by the UCSF shows that teens are 33% more likely to learn from others mistakes. That is 1 out of 3 people. Imagine all the teens we could save. There are 29 million teens in the U.S, we could save a third or almost 10 million teens. We should broadcast it since it shows kids not to be bad, and how your life could be messed up if you do bad things like a murder or something. By allowing the televising of the court cases, efficient and fair trials will be ensured. Televising means that many people will be able to access the court cases and also that they will be able to criticize the judges for engaging in a trial insincerely. There is a need of eliminating dictator judges from the court. Currently, according to the Korean ministry of law, 73 of 1500 monitors noticed the judges dozing off while the court case was going on. Also, 4% of the judges were noticed of frivolities. Also, Judge Alex Cozinsky of US court a graduate of Harvard University with a PHD in Law mentioned that judges are less likely to doze off from the presence of cameras, and the fact that it is being televised to the whole world causes them to make more cautious decisions. Most of the time court cases are enjoyable to see. Many soaps and dramas are just as "violent" and inappropriate as court cases. Judge Judy was the #1 most watched show out of any TV series in 2013. More then Big Bang theory, the Simpson's, and Family Guy COMBINED. This shows people enjoy watching thousands of people would still enjoy it if it was broadcaster. Once a trial has begun there is no reason that it should not be televised. Some may have concern info would reach the jury, but if we operated as we should all juries would be sequestered to prevent them from seeing news of the trial. Additionally, if we aren't able to view what occurs in a court room, how do we feel secure in it being a fair.

  • Gets people to think

    We should be knowing why there are people are getting in trials. As people who can make a difference in the world can see if that person actually broke any laws or even the constitution. It should also serve some people as an extracurricular activity, for example debate club or government classes.

  • Gets people to think

    We should be knowing why there are people are getting in trials. As people who can make a difference in the world can see if that person actually broke any laws or even the constitution. It should also serve some people as an extracurricular activity, for example debate club or government classes.

  • Yes, criminals trials should be televised. It could act as a deterrent. It could be very beneficial in many aspects.

    This could teach young adults about the law and what the consequences could be if they break the law. It would be a very educational experience as well because it would give the people a better understanding of the judiciary system and it could very well ensure that the judge makes morally right and cautious decisions. It would keep us all informed of criminal activity better and this could teach us how to notice the potential crime and how to protect ourselves from being victimized.

  • "pistorius watches porn"

    Here is a quite apt headline from a News paper. What it shows is that the way we are shown criminal trials is often irrelevant to the actual case. As such televising trials, in particular high profile white collar cases as opposed to murder trials will allow the public to see how jury's actually reach their decisions without media swaying public opinion as earlier said headline was clearly intended to do. Additionally as a counter argument to sensationalising the court cases we could always model 'court T.V.' after parliament T.V. which if someone tells me is extremely interesting I'm just going to laugh. Thus general public is able to understand what's happening better in the justice systems as information is available. And the problem of sensationalising is easily dealt with.

  • Role Models OR Murderers

    The public need to know what's going on with one of our fellow citizens. WE the public make up the Jury, WE the public ARE important, WE the public need the knowledge. OUR role models, the people that we all try to belike are the people that are EVIL... Eg: Oscar & OJ, kids & elders looked up to them, and were proud to say THAT GUY IS FROM MY COUNTRY... The BEST basket ball player, the BEST blade runner... I left out that they are the BEST murderers.. This IS HARD for me to say as I Am a OSCAR fan, but this is a school project

  • I believe court cases should be televised.

    This would be great because it could be used as an extra tool for judges.
    I think it would give the public a better knowledge of what goes into court.The public will have a better confidence in the judging system.This overall would make the the judging system a lot more efficient.

  • Loved TRU tv

    Watched in session everyday and miss it very much. It was one of my favorite shows. I was very interested in our judicial system and I did learn a great deal from all the judges, defense attorneys and especially the the prosecutors. Best reality show on tv. I have really felt the loss of watching current trials.

  • News covering of crime does not corrupt a child's mind

    When we think of crime we hope your kids don't do such activities.If you think that crime is bad for the child's mind then you are wrong. Cartoons and soaps also have violence. Animated movies and hollywood movies are no less corrupting. It will also show children what one wrong action can lead to in the future. Like if u agree

  • Criminal trials should not be televised because although we are guaranteed the right to a speedy trial, there is nothing in the constitution saying the trials must be made public.

    Criminal trials should not be televised because although we are guaranteed the right to a speedy trial, there is nothing in the constitution saying the trials must be made public. Any of the participants in a trial which is being broadcast are aware they're being watched. Being aware you're being watched very well could alter the behaviour of those involved. Lawyers could be more concerned with celebrity, and so could judges. Televised trials can be turned into a free-for-all with people wanting to get attention, and it takes away from the purpose of the trial which is to find a person guilty or innocent.

    Posted by: JeffP4ri5
  • I do not believe trials should be televised.

    Criminal trials are a very serious matter and not something to be slapped on TV as entertainment for the masses. People can hear the outcomes of trials, and I think can gain access to records of trials and that should be enough. Broadcasting a trial on TV could endanger certain people who may prefer that their identities remain secret. For example if a high profile 'criminal' was found not guilty, the jury members may fear for themselves if their identity is shown to the public.

    Posted by: emililuyx2
  • People have a basic right to privacy.

    As a general rule cameras and video recording devices aren't allowed inside court rooms during court proceedings for the basic reason that peoples rights still need to be respected even if they broke the law. People have a right to privacy. Just because you broke a rule does not take that away. There are trials that are open to the public and if someone is truly interested in a case they should go to the court and watch it. It is wrong to televise a trial with out the consensus for those involved.

    Posted by: FithBoosh
  • Criminal trials should not be televised, because they bring the public into a controlled social situation.

    The reason that jurors are not supposed to know the facts of a case is so that personal judgment will not affect their job as a juror, to judge the facts. Televising a trial cheapens the entire judicial system by making it a spectacle, and will open up the media to scrutinizing the defendant, the plaintiff/prosecutor and the facts of the case. A trial is a controlled social situation to allow for fairness and justice, and if it becomes a TV show, there is no point in even doing it.

    Posted by: R053Neddy
  • I don't think criminal trials should be televised.

    I don't think criminal trials should be televised because everyone is presumed innocent initially and it is up to the prosecutor to prove guilt, so these people are not criminals at the point of the trial though a lot of people will assume so just because they are on trial. Also, when people see these people on TV, they will all think they are guilty.

    Posted by: MycCra2ii
  • Televising criminal trials makes the system unjust.

    Televising criminal trials makes the system unjust by corrupting what should be an objective review of facts. Judges, jurors and attorneys end up playing for the camera when they should be concentrating on the case. Televising trials is not justified by keeping the process transparent. The downside of corrupting the process offsets the benefits of keeping the people informed of the process.

    Posted by: R43Shep
  • One more step in reality television and the promotion of violence? no.

    People have a right to privacy. Media has a way of swaying public opinion one way or another, and the only result would be masses of uninformed people voicing their opinions on matters about which they have no expertise. Lives of innocent people would be ruined if public opinion decided they were guilty even though a jury found them innocent due to lack of evidence. This should absolutely be prevented from happening.

  • Just one judge

    If trials were televised then jury's would not be allowed as the jury maybe influenced by things said out of oath. The jury would be influenced by people with opinions formed around the televised trial. This would leave the verdict completely in the hands of the judge.This is too much of a risk. An example of this is the ocar pestaurious trial in which he only received 5years despite not having a leg to stand on!!

  • Witness identification and danger placement

    If a witness is called to the stand to testify it makes no problems for them but if the trial is televised and the defendant is found not guilty then the witnesses life is under danger. As well as if the witness is recognised by the defendants friends or family the life is in danger. That goes for any witness or judge or lawyer.

  • Witness identification and danger placement

    If a witness is called to the stand to testify it makes no problems for them but if the trial is televised and the defendant is found not guilty then the witnesses life is under danger. As well as if the witness is recognised by the defendants friends or family the life is in danger. That goes for any witness or judge or lawyer.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.