WICHITA, Kan. In a victory for news technology in U.S. courts, a judge is allowing a reporter to use the microblogging service Twitter to provide constant updates from a racketeering gang trial this week.
WICHITA, Kan. In a victory for news technology in U.S. courts, a judge is allowing a reporter to use the microblogging service Twitter to provide constant updates from a racketeering gang trial this week. It’s not the first time online streaming has been allowed in courtrooms, but the practice is still rare in the federal system, especially in criminal cases. A couple of lawyers voiced concern about the possibility that a juror might visit the online site to read the posts from Ron Sylvester, a reporter for the Wichita Eagle, but U.S. District Judge J. Thomas Marten said jurors are always told to avoid newspaper, broadcast and online reports. "You either trust your jurors to live with the admonishment or you don’t," he said. People use Twitter to update others on what they’re doing or observing. The postings, known as "tweets," are limited to 140 characters and can be sent and received on a mobile phone or computer. Sylvester has been using Twitter for a year to cover hearings and trials in state courts, but the racketeering trial of six Crips gang defendants that he’s covering online this week is his first in federal court. His courtroom "tweets" from his cell phone have recounted testimony and offered some courtroom color. Among them: — "Judge Marten is talking to reluctant witness in chambers with a court reporter transcribing the conversation." — "The witness who was yelling in the hallway earlier has not returned to the courthouse." — "Defendants are chatting and laughing among themselves." — "Exhibits are shown electronically. Every juror has a monitor in the box. There is a monitor at each lawyer’s table and one for the gallery." Sherry Chisenhall, executive editor of Sylvester’s newspaper, said Twitter is "another form of reporting news" that lends itself to courtroom coverage. "He certainly has not sacrificed accuracy, quality and standards," she said. "There is an immediacy that has been great for our audience." Among those who have signed up to follow Sylvester’s Twitter posts is the father of one of the defendants. He lives in Houston, Sylvester said, and can’t attend the trial. "It does improve public access to the courts," Sylvester said. Across the country, tech-savvy federal judges are becoming increasingly receptive to live courtroom media coverage using emerging technologies. Such coverage from journalists reporting from trials in state courts is already common. The federal judiciary has historically been more restrictive in criminal trials, with some justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, the country’s top court, adamantly opposed to cameras in their courts. Federal judges have wide discretion on how to run trials when it comes to emerging online technologies. "The more we can do to open the process to the public, the greater the public understanding — the more legitimacy the public system will have in the eyes of the public," Marten said in an interview with The Associated Press. "This is so far removed from cameras and, frankly, cameras are coming too," Marten said of the blogging. Recording devices and cameras are prohibited in all federal courtrooms during criminal trials. In some high-profile cases, the Supreme Court releases audio recordings of oral arguments. Both the House and Senate Judiciary committees have passed legislation in the past two years that would authorize, but not require, cameras in federal courts. But neither the full House nor the Senate has voted on the legislation. ______ Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
About Post Author
