header-logo header-logo

A candid camera

10 December 2010 / Paul Lambert
Issue: 7445 / Categories: Opinion , Profession
printer mail-detail

Television courtroom broadcasting remains controversial...

Eye tracking technology could transform courtroom broadcasting, says Paul Lambert

Television courtroom broadcasting remains controversial. There have been attempts to expand it to federal courts and indeed the US Supreme Court. An initial federal pilot programme was discontinued in 1994, partly because only brief snippets were used on television. There are already calls in the UK for the expansion of the camera experiment in the new Supreme Court to other courts.

Effects

Yet, what do we know about the effects of such broadcasting? Still relatively little. The US Supreme Court challenge for a sustained body of empirical effects research has not been properly addressed. This challenge occurred in the seminal cases of Estes, Chandler and more recently this year in Hollingsworth.

The recent announcement by Judge Sentelle that the US federal courts are planning a second experimental period is fortuitous. If properly planned, it will allow for sustained empirical research to begin addressing the US Supreme Court challenge. Admittedly, while there have been studies, the vast majority are inadequate

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll