Do you think people should be able to watch the testimony of a murder trial live on the internet?

Question

This is referring to the Stephen Avery case in Wisconsin. They are running a live feed of the testimony on the internet.
Does anyone else think that is weird/wrong/inappropriate...?

Answer 1

People watched OJ's double-murder trial live on TV, so it's not un-heard-of. But, I think people learned from the OJ trial that this is not necessarily in the best interests of justice. The whole court is performing for the national audience as well as trying a case. It becomes "a circus."
I understand why this Steven Avery's case is of interest to the public, but I don't know about the advisability of feeding it live to the internet.

Answer 2

With rare exception, a trial is a public event. Most commonly people would have to go to the courthouse and actually sit in the courtroom to hear the testimony. In our electronic age, however, it does not seem inappropriate to broadcast the trial on the internet. Apparently someone thinks there is a large public interest in it.

Answer 3

Yes the internet is another form of making the trial open to the public.

Answer 4

it is bad enough that those trial lawyers have a court room audience, don't give them the whole world to perform for.

Answer 5

Good idea!!