Ricki
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2010
- Messages
- 7,422
- Reaction score
- 1,198
I really don't understand why media coverage will be limited this time around. Surely if the Judge finds this to be a sound decision then it should have been done for the guilt/innocence phase as well. Why only now? Furthermore, the defendant has thrown herself in front of the camera with interviews etc.
Really don't like this. Not only won't we get to see our Martinez go after his prey like a Bengal Tiger but it seems like an unreasonable motion to grant as well.
I agree with you. Why now? Is it because of the so called threats from the main trial? Who will be on the stand this time around?
http://www.azcourts.gov/mediaroom/camerasincourt.aspx
(i) The impact of coverage upon the right of any party to a fair trial;
(ii) The impact of coverage upon the right of privacy of any party or witness;
(iii) The impact of coverage upon the safety and well-being of any party, witness or juror;
(iv) The likelihood that coverage would distract participants or would detract from the dignity of the proceedings;
(v) The adequacy of the physical facilities of the court for coverage;
(vi) The timeliness of the request pursuant to subsection (f) of this Rule; and
(vii) Any other factor affecting the fair administration of justice.
(c) The judge may limit or prohibit electronic or still photographic coverage only after making specific, on-the-record findings that there is a likelihood of harm arising from one or more of the above factors that outweighs the benefit to the public of camera coverage.
More at above link