May 10, 2008
Legal Department
A Good Idea For the Courthouse
Norm Pattis is annoyed with a proposal to change a rule of the courthouse:
Here's prima facie proof that Connecticut Supreme Court Justice Chase Rogers has lost her mind: She wants to permit folks to bring camera phones into the courthouse.
What is she thinking? The courts are a human zoo. We don't need more distractions in the halls of justice. Not to mention the fact that the marshalls already appear to have trouble enough maintaining any sense of decorum.
I think Norm's the one who's crazy, and I left a comment on his blog saying so, but I decided to say it here as well.
It's almost impossible to get a mobile phone these days without a camera in it, so the rule against camera phones amounts to a rule against all mobile phones. It puts us out of touch with our friends, family, and coworkers for the whole time we're at the courthouse.
Maybe lawyers like Norm regard this as just one more incovenience, or maybe they're careful to choose courthouse-compatible phones, after all, they're there to do an important job.
But most of us who visit the courthouse don't do so on a regular basis, and little that happens in the courthouse is a defining part of our lives, as it is for lawyers and a few of their clients. We're there for traffic tickets, or civil nonsense, or jury duty. Why the heck should we suffer this inconvenience?
For that matter, while I can understand not photographing the proceedings or the jurors, for the other 80% of the time we're there, the court has no business preventing us from taking pictures. It's public property.
In a way, Norm agrees with this, but doesn't think it's important:
In fairness, the chief is only calling for permission to have the camera phones brought into the courthouse. It would be impermissible to use them in the courtroom during an acutal proceeding. But that really is an invitation to disaster: another rule to enforce in a forum that is already wild enough for my tastes...
This is another gesture on the part of the chief to inspire public confidence in the courts. She's created something called the Public Services and Trust Commission. If she really wants public trust to improve, she should let judges spend their time moving cases along, and not policing the galleries to make sure no one is shooting a prohibited picture.
That puzzles me. Why would the judge be looking out for photographers? Don't Connecticut courtooms have deputies?
Hunting for photographers may be extra work for the court staff, but so what? Is it right to inconvenience hundreds of thousands of citizens to make the jobs of public servants easier?
I have a compromise plan: Relax the rules against chewing gum, wearing hats, and reading magazines in court and use the time saved to watch out for people taking pictures. Or would that be too wild and crazy?
.
Leave a comment