New York state prohibits audio and video recording in court, but this regulation is controversial because it prevents the public from closely following Trump’s trial.
America is in a historic moment, when Donald Trump became the first former president to be indicted and tried. The trial process began on April 15 at Manhattan criminal court, New York, is expected to last until June and attracted great attention from the media and the American public.
However, the trials were not broadcast live on the media and only a few reporters were allowed to attend the trials but were not allowed to film or take photos. After each trial, they will recount what they witnessed to the New York public in particular and the American public in general. The reason for this is that the state of New York imposes one of the strictest restrictions on live court coverage.
The law restricting audio and video recordings in New York courts stems from a regulation nearly 100 years ago, according to a 2022 report by the Fund for Modern Courts, an independent organization dedicated to reforming court regulations. New York headquarters.
Sketch of Trump inside Manhattan criminal court, New York City on April 15. Image: Reuters
New York began to tighten regulations on the media in court after the trial of Bruno Richard Hauptmann on charges of kidnapping and murdering Charles Lindbergh’s 20-month-old son in 1935. The trial took place publicly at the Hunterdon County courthouse, New Jersey state, with about 700 reporters and 132 cameramen participating.
However, the court then became chaotic, with bright lights from camera flashes, and cameras stood up on the witness table to capture impressive moments. The presiding judge was forced to issue a ban on photography before the trial ended.
The incident raises concerns about the integrity of the trial process, when the media is present. Two years later, the American Bar Association (ABA) announced the Code of Judicial Ethics, prohibiting live recording and broadcasting during court proceedings.
According to the ABA, “taking photos in the courtroom and reporting while the court is working makes the court lose its dignity and can cause misunderstandings with the public.” In 1952, to keep up with technological developments, the rules included a ban on live television news coverage.
The New York State Assembly took similar action, passing Section 52 of the New York Civil Rights Act the same year. Section 52 emphasizes that no individual, company, association or organization is allowed to record video, audio, or take photos during court proceedings in the state. Those who violate this law will be considered a misdemeanor.
The New York Parliament believes that cameras can change the behavior of parties in criminal trials, from witnesses and lawyers to jurors and judges, affecting the defendant’s right to a fair trial. fox.
Over time, ABA regulations were gradually relaxed in many states in the US, and cameras began to be allowed to be used in court, often at the discretion of the judge presiding over each case. Since 1987, New York has also added Section 218 with similar content to the Judiciary Law.
A commission was established in 1995 to evaluate the effectiveness of Section 218 and recommended that the state of New York continue to allow greater media participation in trials to ensure openness and transparency.
However, because the defense lobby still dominated at that time, New York officials decided not to renew Section 218 when it expired in June 1997.
Staff from media channels work outside Manhattan criminal court, New York City on April 16. Image: AFP
With this move, New York and Louisiana become the two remaining states in the US that continue to ban cameras in court proceedings. This has caused a lot of controversy in New York public opinion, when supporters of public trials believe that New York’s regulations are excessive.
“We consider ourselves the media capital of the world and banning cameras from one of the three branches of state power is unacceptable,” said Brad Hoylman-Sigal, a New York state senator. .
He once supported a bill that would allow judges in New York to decide on audio and video recording, and limit the number of cameras and photojournalists, but it has not been passed.
“This is one of the most influential trials in modern history,” Hoylman-Sigal said, referring to Trump’s hush money case. “I think the public has the right to see what happens in the courtroom.”
Some reporters at the court said Mr. Trump sometimes fell asleep while attending the trial, but the former president’s campaign denied it. Because there are no cameras in the courtroom, the American public cannot know what the truth is.
Presiding judge Juan Merchan on April 15 allowed some photographers to take pictures of the former president in the courtroom before the court started working. When the trial began, the courtroom only had artists drawing some of the events. In fact, there are still some images of the trial shown on the screen in the operations room next to the courtroom. This room on April 15 was filled with reporters, court security staff and some people.
Former President Donald Trump at Manhattan criminal court, New York City on April 15, before the judge started the trial. Image: AFP
In the hallway outside the courtroom, a limited number of reporters are allowed to work so that the parties involved in the case can speak if they wish. Because there is no live image from the courtroom, the frequency with which Mr. Trump speaks to the media and how news outlets convey the former president’s message will significantly affect public perception of the lawsuit.
Commentators and experts expressed their opinions to media channels at the scene or in the studio. Analyst Jonathan Turley’s Fox News said “most cities, at least outside of New York”, would consider Mr. Trump’s trial a weaponization of criminal justice.
In addition to New York, the former president was also indicted on charges of plotting to overturn the election results leading to riots on Capitol Hill in 2021, meddling in the Georgia state election and illegally keeping confidential documents after leaving the White House. .
In Georgia, the judge has the power to decide whether to allow video recording of the trial or not. Presiding Judge Scott McAfee said he would allow related hearings and trials to be broadcast. The remaining two prosecutions are federal in Washington and Florida. US federal courts do not allow videotaping of criminal trials.