Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy J
Because the presence of cameras makes actors out of those taking part in the proceedings.
At present the fact that the numbers viewing proceedings are small and probably partisan limits the 'playing to the gallery ' aspect that will be very much present when millions can watch.
Anyway I'm bored with this thread.I've said why I dislike the scheme,why I don't think it will serve justice but will cheapen the whole process by reducing it to the level of reality TV.
|
a guilty suspect will
always 'play to the gallery', or at least to the jury. they are trying not to get sent down!!! but come the end of the trial, regardless of how many people watch it, the evidence is still going to be there (or not). the number of people viewing a trial is unlikely to have any bearing on the result.
as for your reality TV comment - I'm not so sure I agree. Reality TV tends to be 'real' people in controlled and staged circumstances with no other agenda than entertainment, whereas the recording of a trial would, in my view, fall more into the category of documentary, in the respect that it is documenting the trial. and if one were faced with losing their freedom for many years, I doubt the fact that they are on TV would really be at the top of their concerns, would it?