Camera bans, sketches need to go
Archaic courtroom camera bans are fueling distrust in the judicial system and preventing the public from getting an accurate view of what’s happening in Donald Trump’s hush money trial.
The camera ban is a relic of the past and needs to be abolished — like those ridiculous courtroom sketches that allow artists to use their bias in portraying the defendant as cartoonish.
It’s more equivalent to a military tribunal than a public court proceeding.
Trump looked clownish and hideous in the sketches released to the public this week, and a New York Times pool reporter who has criticized Trump in the past said the former president fell asleep during the proceedings and later stared at her.
Let the cameras in and allow the voters to decide what they’re seeing — not some biased reporter or antiquated sketch artist who wants to add their spin.
It’s ridiculous that a trial of this importance — an actual former president faces charges for the first time in history — is not televised or streamed so the public can see it whenever they want.
It’s old-school thinking in a digital age when every court appearance should be readily available to the public.
In fact, the public is strongly in favor of televising the Trump trial. A Quinnipiac University poll found that more than 70% of Americans support televising or streaming the election interference case.
But there are more images coming out of Russian courts than in Trump’s courtroom in Manhattan.
People can’t watch or draw any conclusions about the judge’s fairness or Stormy Daniels or Michael Cohen’s credibility.
Many states frequently broadcast court cases but New York generally doesn’t allow it.
Trump’s Georgia election interference trial would be televised if it takes place.
The courtroom sketches are the only window to the trial that most people have had.
One of the sketches during a preliminary appearance went viral because it portrayed an angry Trump glaring at prosecutors.
“He had that pissed off look — ‘I”m mad. I can’t believe they’re doing this, how could they’ and I think I caught it,” sketch artist Jane Rosenberg said.
In the sketch of Trump during jury selection, he looked creepy as he smiled at jurors.
“I like the way his eyes have a kind of cat-like slant,” another sketch artist, Christine Cornell, said. “I like his bushy eyebrows that are like caterpillars. I like that little pouty thing he does.”
Such subjective characterizations are all that most people will see during the trial, except for pool reporters who are assigned to cover it.
New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman claimed Trump stared at her this week because she reported he fell asleep during jury selection.
“His head keeps dropping down and his mouth goes slack,” Haberman reported. Later she wrote that “Trump has apparently jolted back awake, noticing the notes his lawyer passed him several minutes ago.”
Haberman has a long history with Trump, so shouldn’t they assign a more unbiased reporter to be on the pool?