There are numerous drawbacks of allowing cameras to be present in the courtroom. The first, and most important, is the tainting of the jury pool. If cameras are allowed inside the courtroom, then the trial will be broadcast all over the country for anyone to see. In a trial the jury does not see everything that takes place; statements are ma

On the flipside of the argument there is an advantage to cameras being allowed inside the courtroom and that is the press’ right to inform the public. Freedom of the press and the public’s right to know is extremely valuable because it allows society to know what is occurring in our judicial system. The large benefit of society being able to witness court proceedings is that society has the ability to change them if they are not working correctly and thus create a system which is truly fair to all participants. Society is only able to use the media in this context if the media remains a third party and does not affect the outcome of the trial. Also, by televising the trial it helps gain notoriety for the judicial system, which causes public interest in perfecting the overall judicial system.

Third, witnesses themselves might be influenced due to the national coverage. If cameras are broadcasting the trial all over the country the witnesses involved are thrust into the spotlight which could cause them to change or shade their testimony. An example of this would be if the witness who first saw the woman after the incident reported seeing bruises on her neck when he really only saw red marks. This type of t

Some topics in this essay:
Kobe Bryant, County Police, OJ Simpson, Rodney King, Kobe Bryant’s, Scott Peterson, judicial system, kobe bryant, allowed inside courtroom, allowed inside, inside courtroom, oj simpson trial, cameras allowed inside, media courtroom, oj simpson, alter testimony, affect trial, courtroom trial, shown television,