llamatron Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 The only televised cases I can think of that I've seen were Phil Spector and OJ Simpson. I can't say I'd be interested in seedy courtroom tales and stories, but there is (or was) a demand for them. ISTR a "at the courts" page in the Sunday Sport where they described in sickening detail the sexual cases of that week. but why does it matter whether there is a demand for them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 I would imagine rule number 1 in producing and showing a television programme would be to make one that people would want to watch. I'm sure the ITV / Channel 5 audience would lap it up with any other reality TV junk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 I would imagine rule number 1 in producing and showing a television programme would be to make one that people would want to watch. I'm sure the ITV / Channel 5 audience would lap it up with any other reality TV junk. yes but just because people want it doesn't mean we have to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 looks like the government may be toying with the idea of having some court cases televised like they do in america, i think under certain cases such as kiddy fiddlers and serial killers it would be great, for someone who is a shop lifter then it would be pointless, does anyone else agree I have children. I can't for the life of me think why I would want to hear the details of how a child has suffered. Would it be pay per view? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plopqwerty Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 looks like the government may be toying with the idea of having some court cases televised like they do in america, i think under certain cases such as kiddy fiddlers and serial killers it would be great, for someone who is a shop lifter then it would be pointless, does anyone else agree All criminal court cases should be available on tv, unless there is a valid reason for it not to be. Justice needs to be seen to be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Womerry2 Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Justice needs to be seen to be done. And if it's not on TV, it is unseen? Do you require reality to be validated by Broadcast? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukstudent Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 From what I have seen it is the judgement only that may be televised, can't see a problem with it, as a lot of debates we hear at the moment are "why did the judge do that" - well if his reasoning is televised then we will know. Not necessarily as the you will not hear what the barrister for each party has said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loubbe Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 From what I have seen it is the judgement only that may be televised, can't see a problem with it, as a lot of debates we hear at the moment are "why did the judge do that" - well if his reasoning is televised then we will know. This information is usually reported though... the Judges summary before sentence. This is just a Cameron gimmick, along with police officers wearing their uniforms to and from work "look how many police officers are on the streets" "look at how tough our justice system is on convicted criminals". Load of tosh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightlight59 Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 probably end up like some grotty reality show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.