Kirish 1

Makaela Kirish
Mrs. Philips
AP Language and Composition
22 March 2020
Through a Lens, to the Courtroom
What exactly happens in the court cases that are always on the news? Ever since the

creation of cameras, cameras and unauthorized recording equipment have been banned from

having a presence in the court room. At one time, this was not a problem, as many people

traveled to their local courtrooms to watch the trials. But as this is no longer a common practice,

the public has no way of accessing and viewing just what happens behind those courtroom doors.

Technology has evolved to the point where cameras are watching people everywhere they go; the

courtroom should be no different. Courtroom trials should be broadcast live because students,

those involved in the trial, and the general public will greatly benefit from viewing live trials and

court cases through the media and online.

Granted, as important as it is to have cameras in the courtroom, opponents argue that they

can sometimes negatively influence and affect witnesses, jury members, and the victims or

convicts. Many authors who write for news sources, such as The Washington Post, have avidly

pointed out the negative impacts of cameras in the courtroom, claiming that they cause a bigger

distraction to the participants than benefits to the watchers. Additionally, the Pacific Standard

claims that “witnesses will become camera shy…, jurors will be distracted…, and both will

worry about their own safety having their roles captured on screen.” (Pacific Standard). If the

witnesses become camera shy, then there is a strong chance that they will forget crucial

information in their testimony, and if the jury is distracted, then the prosecution and defense will

not receive a fair trial. Many times, the victims’ or convicts’ names are also kept secret for the
 Kirish 2

same reason, but with cameras, there would be nothing to hide, which could open doorways for

hatred and online attacks towards them.

However, if court cases are recorded, especially ones that are historically monumental,

then they will be able to be used as a visual teaching tool in the classroom for years to come.

First of all, by having a visual learning tool, students are sometimes able to grasp major historical

changes easier. Court cases (otherwise known as case studies) are commonly used in classrooms

to teach students “how to be great problem solvers so that they’ll be ready for anything”

(Schwartz). Additionally, by having access to view and listen to major court cases that are

commonly used in the classroom, students will be able to more easily grasp and build these

problem solving and debating skills, which will greatly benefit them as they further their

education. By being able to view the physical trial, students will have a better understanding, and

generally more interest in the event that they are learning about. Visual teaching tools are key in

classrooms as they “help learners grasp concepts easily by stimulating imagination and affecting

their cognitive capabilities.” (Jandhyala). Finally, being able to watch monumental court cases

like Brown V. Board of Education and watch the decision to end segregation in schools would

have a greater impact and guarantee more interest than reading about it in a text book. Case

studies and visual teaching are two prominent teaching tools in classrooms, by having cameras in

courtrooms, the two will be able to be combined and provide more learning opportunities for

students.

In addition, the judicial branch has been a reserved branch of the government, but with

live recordings becoming publically available, the veil of clandestine trials will be lifted. For

example, the only information or details of the trial and its proceedings that the public ever sees

are heavily controlled, censored, and monitored by the government, which can make the public
 Kirish 3

wary. The public is commonly shielded from many important and extreme court cases, with the

only footage and documentation “come(ing) from cameras controlled by the senate” (Cavna).

The heavily controlled and limited footage that is release makes the public feel like something is

being kept from them, that there is something that the government does not want the public to

see. Secondly, sometimes the only visual representation of the trials that the public can view are

the dramatized, cartoonish sketches of certain moments that are produced by the courtroom

artist(s). Although it is wonderful that the public is given insight into the courtroom in some way,

it is not ideal that only courtroom artists “serve as our artistic witnesses to history”(Cavna).

Courtroom artists dramatize their depictions of what is actually happening in front of them,

which makes their drawings an unreliable source of information. Lastly, during the time before

cameras, it was very common for people to watch trials in person. Because that is no longer the

case and the government will not allow broadcasting, people know very little about what actually

happens in the American legal system. Because not many people travel to the courthouse and

watch trials live, their only access to the proceedings is through recordings, forcing the media to

function “as a surrogate…as well as to engender a ‘perception of fairness’ in the judicial

process” (Tanick). It is up to the media to lift the clandestine veil, and let the public see.

Broadcasting trials would build a bridge between the government and the people it serves.

Most importantly, when people know that they are being watched, they tend to think

further upon their decisions and actions. Predominantly, if the judge knows that people outside

the court are watching them during the trial, judges will most likely be driven to deliver a fairer

and just sentence upon the defendant. With cameras having a presence in the courtroom, judges

will know that many people, and possibly those that they care about, will see the footage at some

point. In a study done by Axios, it became apparent that “the point of surveillance is to track and
 Kirish 4

influence people’s behavior…” (Snyder). Judges’ will unknowingly be controlled and pushed to

be more empathetic, but also stricter with the law than before, and wrongfully condemn people

less. Secondly, by using cameras to record trials in the courtroom, lawyers will become more

aware of their mannerisms, professionalism, and actions. During trials, in both their questioning

and speeches, lawyers tend to be overly aggressive towards each other and the witnesses.

Lawyers who are aggressive “let pride and anger cloud their judgement and that causes

mistakes” (Wolfe). The use of cameras and recordings will make lawyers think twice about the

attitude they are portraying, thus helping trials run smoother. Additionally, witnesses will feel

more protected and comfortable by having cameras present, and open up more during their

testimonies. By having their words recorded live, there is no speculation as to what witnesses

testified to, meaning that it is harder for lawyers to twist their words against them. Cameras in

the courtroom act much like security cameras do, and a “study found that cameras… do appear

to be associated with… feeling safer” (Kelly). With the added feeling of security, witnesses will

relax and be more open during questioning. Finally, cameras would most benefit the jurors who

play the biggest role in a trial, making the final verdict on the case. Many times, jury members

can find the trial boring and long and easily lose focus on the task at hand, which is deciding a

person or peoples’ fate. However, by adding cameras and the knowledge of being watched, the

jurors’ “unconscious drive to exist moves (them) toward the need for acceptance.” (Dr. Gross).

The jurors know that someone will judge them for their actions and decisions when being

watched, so they will be more alert and put more thought into their verdict in the end. Cameras in

the courtroom will overall benefit those in the trial by making them calmer, more cognizant, and

in general more involved in the trial at hand.

 Kirish 5

Therefore, although the use of cameras in the courtroom may have some drawbacks, the

impact and benefit on those in the trial, students, and the general public far outweighs any

negatives. The legal system has been shrouded in secrecy for far too long. There are many judges

across the United States who have begun to allow the presence of cameras. However, ALL

judges should grant news broadcasters and recorders a position of respect amongst the legal

system, and allowing them to bring the court to the public.

 Kirish 6

Works Cited
Cavna, Michael. “Sketch artists at the impeachment trial are capturing scenes that the cameras
Cannot”. Democracy Dies in Darkness, The Washington Post, 25 January 2020, 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2020/01/25/sketch-artist-
impeachment-trial/.

Wheeling, Kate. “Should there be cameras in courtrooms?”. Pacific Standard, 3 May 2017,
 https://www.psmag.com/news/should-there-be-cameras-in-courtrooms.

Tanick, Marshall H. “It’s time for cameras in the courtrooms”. Community Voices, Minnpost, 20
March 2019, https://www.minnpost.com/community-voices/2019/05/its-time-for-
cameras-in-the-courtrooms/.

Schwartz, Laurel. “Making Learning Relevant With Case Studies”. Teaching Strategies, George
Lucas Educational Foundation, 4 June 2019, https://www.edutopia.org/article/making-
learning-relevant-case-studies. 

Jandhyala, Dana. “Visual Learning: 6 Reasons Why Visuals Are The Most Powerful Aspect Of
eLearning”. eLearning Design and Development, eLearning Industry, 8 December 2017,
https://www.elearningindustry.com/visual-learning-6-reasons-visuals-powerful-aspect-
elearning.
Snyder, Alison. “How Surveillance Changes Behavior”. Axios, 7 September 2019,
https://www.axios.com/surveillance-changes-behavior-36cc1c06-bd2b-4994-8d30-
c1b7c274b961.html.

Wolfe, Zach. “Are ‘Aggressive’ Litigators More Effective?”. Lawyers, Performance, Five
Minute
Law, 18 October 2019, https://www.fiveminutelaw.com/2018/07/09/are-aggressive-
litigators-more-effective/.

Kelly, Jane. “Do Security Cameras In Public Make Students Feel Safer?”. UVAToday, 28
January
 2019, https://www.news.virginia.edu/content/do-security-cameras-public-schools-make-
students-feel-safer.

Gross, Gail. “Why Do We Care So Much About What Others Think?”. Thrive Global, 20
 Kirish 7

September 2018, https://www.thriveglobal.com/stories/why-do-you-care-what-other-

people-think/.