Judicial decision expands Floyd courtroom access

Although Minnesota prosecutors are unhappy about the change, Minnesotans should applaud a recent judicial decision to allow cameras and audio in the courtroom during the George Floyd murder trial.

Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill issued the historic ruling, rightly arguing that the March trial should be livestreamed because of the national and international interest in the case.

State prosecutors filed a motion asking Cahill to reconsider his order, reiterating objections the attorney general’s office raised in July. At that time, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison’s team said that while his office supported a public trial, “… the State is concerned that live audio and visual coverage in the courtroom may create more problems than they will solve.”

They also argued that live audio and visual coverage could alter the way lawyers present evidence..

Cahill made the right call. It’s in the best interest of trial participants and the public for this high-profile trial to be as accessible as possible. As Cahill wrote, the “only way to vindicate the defendants’ constitutional right to a public trial and the media’s and public’s constitutional rights of access to criminal trials is to allow audio and video coverage of the trial.”

The trial for former police officers Derek Chauvin, J. Alexander Kueng, Thomas Lane and Tou Thao will be closely followed. Chauvin is charged with second-degree murder and manslaughter in connection with Floyd’s May 25 death while in police custody.

In making his decision, Cahill made the case that cameras can be allowed in such a way that protects the rights of trial participants (for example, by not showing the jury) and the ability of the news media to provide live coverage. He cited both the First Amendment guarantee of press and public access to trials as well as the Sixth Amendment guarantee that the public may see that defendants are “fairly dealt with and not unjustly condemned.”