Judges Group Takes Stand Against Television Trials

Judges from the court system that brought you the O.J. Simpson trial have a word of advice: Ban cameras in the courtroom.

“It is time for the judiciary to declare that we are not part of the entertainment industry,” Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mary Ann Murphy told a state task force considering a ban on cameras at criminal trials.

Speaking for an independent committee of Los Angeles judges who examined the issue, Murphy said television exposes potential jurors to inadmissible evidence and makes already fearful witnesses more reluctant to testify.

The review by the state Judicial Council was prompted by coverage of Simpson’s double-murder trial.

The council, the policymaking body of the state court system, ruled in 1984 that cameras could be allowed in courtrooms at the judge’s discretion.

Murphy called that rule “a bold experiment that failed.”

She said her group’s survey found that virtually every judge who had allowed television coverage reported that lawyers were playing to the cameras and that witnesses and other trial participants were distracted.

*

Still, the California Judges Assn. has not taken a position on the issue.

Media representatives told the Judicial Council task force that such a ban would infringe on the public’s right to know, and wouldn’t prevent courtroom histrionics.

“Flamboyant lawyers like Johnnie Cochran and F. Lee Bailey behave the same way with or without cameras,” said attorney William Bennett Turner, representing the Society of Professional Journalists.

Forty-seven states allow some form of camera coverage of trials. The federal court system does not.

The task force is expected to report back to the Judicial Council in early February.