3 ms·

No it won't since it's illegal. "At no time at any location within the courthouse may any electronic device be used to make a photograph or recording in any fa

No it won't since it's illegal. "At no time at any location within the courthouse may any electronic device be used to make a photograph or recording in any fashion, whether audio, video or otherwise." https://www.lawd.uscourts.gov/possession-and-use-electronic-devices-courthouse https://www.lawd.uscourts.gov/possession-and-use-electronic-...

zone411 4y ago
This is covered in the article, and they apparently think that it could be legal in two out of 300 courtrooms. You've linked to just one specific court's webpage.
danuker 4y ago
Would running a speech recognition engine on-device and saving only the text constitute "recording"? And why is it illegal anyway? If media can attend and report about a case, why can't they record? I see Chandler v. Florida established that "a state could allow" photos and broadcast for criminal trials. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandler_v._Florida https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandler_v._Florida
- threeseed 4y ago
  a) Yes it would constitute a recording. b) It is illegal because it would result in leaks to the media which would destroy the entire fabric of the judicial system.
  - danuker 4y ago
    How would it destroy the judicial system? If anything, it would strengthen it, and expose injustices in either the justice system itself or in law. Does media coverage on criminal cases destroy the fabric of criminal proceedings?
    - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 4y ago
      > Does media coverage on criminal cases destroy the fabric of criminal proceedings? From the perspectives of both sides (defense counsel and prosecution), I believe this is undesired as it primes potential jury members' opinions outside of court evidence.
DocTomoe 4y ago
I am fairly sure I saw live, in-courtroom coverage of both the Rittenhouse (as a prominent criminal case) as well as the Depp/Heart (a prominent civil) case.
- threeseed 4y ago
  That's allowed if all parties agree and is managed by the court.

zone411 4y ago

This is covered in the article, and they apparently think that it could be legal in two out of 300 courtrooms. You've linked to just one specific court's webpage.

danuker 4y ago

Would running a speech recognition engine on-device and saving only the text constitute "recording"? And why is it illegal anyway? If media can attend and report about a case, why can't they record? I see Chandler v. Florida established that "a state could allow" photos and broadcast for criminal trials. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandler_v._Florida https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandler_v._Florida

threeseed 4y ago
a) Yes it would constitute a recording. b) It is illegal because it would result in leaks to the media which would destroy the entire fabric of the judicial system.
- danuker 4y ago
  How would it destroy the judicial system? If anything, it would strengthen it, and expose injustices in either the justice system itself or in law. Does media coverage on criminal cases destroy the fabric of criminal proceedings?
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 4y ago
    > Does media coverage on criminal cases destroy the fabric of criminal proceedings? From the perspectives of both sides (defense counsel and prosecution), I believe this is undesired as it primes potential jury members' opinions outside of court evidence.

DocTomoe 4y ago

I am fairly sure I saw live, in-courtroom coverage of both the Rittenhouse (as a prominent criminal case) as well as the Depp/Heart (a prominent civil) case.

threeseed 4y ago
That's allowed if all parties agree and is managed by the court.