Criminal who break apart families should be watched when they are being sentenced to prison. In the Florida shooting everyone in America saw what happened and the families of those who were in the school want to watch the shooter be sentenced. They lost their privacy when they did something terrible to other.
They be ugly bro...Like fr they not cool bro. KMS bro.They be on T.V. like im not even lyon. My boy Joe Brown be serving dishes of justice and washes criminals out. You dont know my boi bro. Post up if u report me. Im chillin watching Judge Judy and it be lit
Yes, all the way. Let America see what happens in the daily courtroom. The Constitution states clearly that trials should be public and for a very good reason. We need to see what happens behind closed doors at any trial in America. I wish Court TV would restart. I really enjoyed it.
If these criminals are being accused of rape or murder, the whole entire world would watch the trial. Even when he gets out of jail and back to his normal life, people will always know him as a criminal. Therefore ppl would fear the society judging them and rethink their actions.
If we have cameras in a courtroom, the judiciary branch is faced to be honest. You never know who might be watching that televised trial. And hence, you will feel more obligated to be honest. In example, if you were on trial defending your case and the opposing criminal told a lie, a witness could be watching the trial and defend your case!
It is our right to have a public trial. I find it to be very important because the general population must hav acccss to all parts of the trial process to be sure that laws are followed and the highest standards are kept Televised trials give access to everyone especially the handicapped. I think it will lower the crime rate because people will be fearful of having their faces shown on TV I feel that it will also reduce the amount of waste that goes into a trial and will keep all the lawyers and judges to high standards.
The judicial branch is very serious and weighty function in which judges exercise an important principle inside the community. Judges, who are responsible to control trails, are exposed to change the shape of the trail to which they may place innocent people in jail or they might free criminals to our society. As a result, when the courtroom being recorded and shown to the public, it contributes to achieve fair and impartial trial. When judge are aware that they are televised, they apply serious attention and consideration in their obligation. Therefore, it is significant to learn how courtrooms being operated, and to show how justice being applied. Mos almatrafy
In every city there is a police blotter which list crimes that occur within the city. At the court house, there is a notification section which lists the proceedings of the day. Unless it is a highly publicized case, any citizen can walk in and observe the trial in progress. It is our right as citizens within this society to know what is happening and how it is being handled by our elected officials. Ironically, we go to the polls to elect judges that we know nothing about in regards to their history of judgment and how they will best assist our community with the issues within it.
Being able to see a real trial instead of the fake trials on all of the television shows would be a very educational thing for everybody. Now if that was the only reason then I would say that may not be enough, but taking what the 6th Amendment has to say makes it not only something that is interesting to watch but something that the men who wrote the Constitution wanted people to be able to see.
I believe that the defendant is the one that is the most important person when it comes to who's rights to protect the most in a trial. For that reason the defendant should be able to rely on the camera in the courtroom. If the defendant does not want that then his lawyer can make a motion before the start of the trial asking the judge not to allow it.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Eric Wilson and Bud Gaugh were childhood friends. Having grown up in the same Long Beach neighborhood, Eric's father, Billy Wilson taught Gaugh how to read music and play the drums. Gaugh and Wilson together with future Sublime manager, Michael Happoldt, formed a three-piece punk band called The Juice Bros during their high school years. About this time, Bradley Nowell, who had recently dropped out of University of California, Santa Cruz, joined the band. Nowell helped introduce Gaugh and Wilson to reggae and ska, who at the time listened exclusively to punk rock.
Sublime played its first gig on the Fourth of July, 1988 in a small club. Music venues were skeptical of the band's eclectic musical fusion and many refused to book the band. In response, the band created their own music label, Skunk Records, and told venues that they were "Skunk Records recording artists", which helped the band seem more accomplished and subsequently book more shows. For the next several years, the group focused primarily on playing at parties and small clubs throughout Southern California with local ska bands such as Smokestacks, No Doubt and Skeletones. The trio recorded a few songs and put forth a number of short demos.
In February 1990, Nowell adopted an abused dalmatian puppy from a shelter and named him "Louie" after his grandfather. Louie Nowell, King Louie, or "Lou Dog" as he was called, became something of a mascot for the band. Lou Dog was often allowed to wander around the stage during the band's concert performances. One of Sublime's early club venues in 1990 was at a downtown club in Long Beach called Toe Jam. This Club was owned and operated by David Rice, James Walker, Jason Burch and Jeff King. A private party was held in February 1991 at Toe Jam for one of the owners. Special thanks can be found for Toe Jam and the owners on the back of the later produced album, 40oz. To Freedom. In late 1990, music student Michael "Miguel" Happoldt approached the band, offering to let the band record in the studio at the school where Happoldt was studying. The band enthusiastically agreed and trespassed into the school at night, where they recorded from midnight to seven in the morning. The recording session resulted in the popular cassette tape called Jah Won't Pay the Bills, which was released in 1991 and featured songs that would later appear on the band's future albums. The tape helped the band gain a grassroots following throughout Southern California
My research into poop has reveled that poop is nasty and shouldn't be consumed. People who eat poop should go get help because that is one strange addiction my man... Help someone out and don't eat poop..... Its just nasty and weird and normal as going to the bathroom its self.
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!!