Bryan Kohberger Trial | Decision on Cameras in Court 

MORE HERE: www.courttv.com/news/judge-reserves-decision-on-cameras-in-courtroom-for-bryan-kohberger-trial/?

I agree with the families- there should be cameras. Transparency!

The public is paying for his defense and we have the right to see it

I am a retired courtroom clerk in a small jurisdiction. We had one camera in court that all media could hook into too. It works great. Courts need to hold the transparency rule. Let the camera in!

I think cameras in the courtroom should be mandatory. It helps to keep everyone honest and held accountable and would ensure that the accused gets a fair trial, especially since the whole world will be watching.

Cameras should always be in a court room.

The Public isn't looking for a spectacle - they're looking for answers

Cameras should be allowed to let us see the same way we can see if we are sitting in a court room seat. No close ups are necessary.

If the jury has instructions not to follow media, etc. Why not have the cameras for the public?

And let's be honest... we all want to know what the hell is going on here. Time to cut the secrecy and get on with this trial... just like O.J., just like Casey Anthony, just like Murdaugh, just like Bundy. Bundy actually made an effort to restrict cameras and it was denied.

Just what a defense attorney should say but no, closing courtrooms to cameras should be in violation of all Freedom of Information lawsuit, it would be a serious public VIOLATION if cameras were banned....the public has a RIGHT to observe these proceedings.

Court cases covering school shootings showed graphic images, they were televised. The local news shows, car accidents, shootouts etc on tv daily. Any crime documentaries on streaming services show graphic images. But some televise the trials but don’t show the images. This case is sensationalized because it was 4 young people in the same house with survivors unharmed, an 8 hr delay in police being called. A further 4 hr delay before lead investigator arrived, another couple hrs before coroner ( at least what we have been told ) and a shroud of secrecy on every level! That makes me want to see this trial unfold for myself. Cameras should be in the court room.

Why is Idaho SO against transparency in court proceedings? It mystifies me. The public has the right to see their government in action, see the judges, see the attorneys, see the defendants, see the witnesses, etc. This is of great public interest. I think the attorneys and judges don't like it because they're afraid of how they'll appear on camera or be judged by other attorneys and judges based on their performances while doing their jobs.

I always get the impression that the judge is the one who doesn't want cameras in the courtroom. I thought that the defense and prosecution did not give strong enough arguments to keep the cameras out. The truth is what is important.

This is the judge that will be presiding over the quadruple murder case? Dear God. CLEARLY JUDGE HAVING CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM IS NOT "CONSTITUTIONAL"... THE CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN IN 1787 WHEN THERE WERE NO SUCH THINGS AS VIDEO CAMERAS, OR TELEVISION. Do you think the council who is representing the media is in grade two? Clearly the Constitution was written in a different time with different standards applying, if you were to take a statute, such as free access to the public in a courtroom, and apply that statute in 2023, I bet you there is no doubt in anyone's mind that the framers would have indeed allowed cameras in the courtroom so that it would be truly a public venue instead of being closed off in a certain area of the country. GIVE ME A BREAK! CARS AREN'T IN THE CONSTITUTION. DOES THAT MEAN THAT THEY'RE ILLLEGAL TOO?

Ok, for the judge to try to compare this trial to that of OJ Simpson is kind of ridiculous. In no way does Bryan freaken Koberger have the infamy that OJ Simpson did, nor was he a professional sports player or actor. This is also not a trial occuring in Los Angeles. Honestly, the public (those who pay their hard earned tax dollars so that public courthouses can exist) wish to see justice brought for the families of those who were killed.....nobody gives a crap if that justice is served to B.K. or whatever other person might be guilty.

All Court's and All Trials should have Camera's Period.

Whatever it takes to get true justice for those young people is the most important thing.

If cops have to be video taped constantly, why shouldn’t the other leg of our criminal justice system (courts) be video taped? It isn’t only for transparency, it’s continuity.

Bryan should have educated himself further. The trial will be broadcast.

Could you Imagine if we did not have cameras in the courtroom of OJ, the evidence was overwhelming of his guilt and the video showed it and people can review it and see for themselves and come to a conclusion of thier own instead of being fed lies by either party Defense or Prosecution..

So far, the gag order has kept info away from the public. Once the jury and alternates are chosen, with daily admonishments, the public should be able to watch the trial. It will take the mystique away and the rumor mill will subside. This case is no different than any other case. Let there be transparency.

The OJ trial wasn't a circus because of Court TV! I watched the whole damn OJ trial at work! My boss had it on. It was a circus because of who and what was involved.

People used to be killed in the streets in other countries for breaking the law...it was considered a deterrent. It seems that cameras record the legal process as well as the consequences of breaking the law. Cameras should definitely be in the court room.

We, the people, have a right to see what is going on in a court . It's our tax money keeping the court rooms up and and this judge is an elected official, which we are paying for.. this judge does have the right to do something different, but why not let them have cameras in court?? Judge should do the right thing two families want the cameras in court I believe they should have more say abt this instead of this judge.. JMO

I believe the judge is going to end up allowing cameras but he’s doing this to make it clear to the media that they gotta follow the rules

The Judge has a very good point. One or two cameras that shows the courtroom without the jury and without movement. Whoever is controlling this camera needs to quit zooming all over the courtroom. Also find a different mic set up where we are not listening to people breathing and typing.

The public is very interested in these four victims. It affected millions of people. We have daughters, granddaughters, sisters and want to know all details how this could happen. We have the right to listen to make sure nothing is hidden from public . Please allow cameras for victims sake.

If the judge doesn’t allow cameras that honestly sketches me out.. this case as effected that entire community where the horrific act happened and they should be able to see this all go down and see the true evidence behind it

Doesn't matter if cameras are there or not - social media will still report on it - lame excuse from the defence! Surely in this day and age they shouldn't even be questioned. I hope this judge makes the right decision and allows cameras and transparency to avoid lack of trust in the judge and the system.

Transparency is everything! This and other cases get out of control when people can’t see it in its entirety. It creates speculation!

Courts - Like Police - Should have "Body Cams" when anything is on the "Record". At no point in time should there EVER be a proceeding that is NOT reviewable by the public. If its an issue of identity, etc - The courts can move the camera so they are not seen - But cameras SHOULD be there! That being said - This judges is misusing the OJ trial... Without the Court TV... We wouldn't have been able to see the "Glove"...

The judge is short-sighted. There is going to be speculation and editorialization regardless if he allows cameras or not, and there will be much more of it, much more wrong information released if cameras are not allowed than if there is complete transparency.

I completely agree that cameras should be allowed in the courtroom for the press. The public has a right to see and hear what happens during this trial. Transparency is crucial, especially in high-profile cases like this one. Allowing cameras would ensure that the public has access to the information they need to make informed decisions about the case.

People are going to think what they want, no matter if the trial is televised or not. If the trial is not broadcasted, it leaves far to much room for speculation. If the judge wants a more true story to be out there and talked about, he should allow for broadcasting. It's common sense.

Hope they do show the trial ...this case has gone worldwide. So many of us want justice for the 4 and their families. Ive followed from the start and dont live in the US. Really hope they allow a camera.

Hopefully they work on the audio because it sucks

Transparency is the most important thing during any trial, especially a death penalty case. It keeps the justice system accountable. It ensures that we have the right person in custody, and the wrong person is not put to death. We the people pay for this system, and we deserve to make sure that the system is being held to the highest standards. The only way to do that is through transparency. That doesn't mean that they have to have a circus of people there. Put a camera in the courtroom that is placed in a way that doesn't compromise the outcome. Close the courtroom to everyone, but the immediate people involved. Let everyone else view from home. You have a better chance of not having insane amount of people flooding the courtroom if they can stay in their homes and watch it live. Like with any other high profile case, you will always have people outside. You can't get away from that. I'm sure it might be less by closing the courtroom and live streaming to the people. That's just my opinion.

What is that horrible flashing red number thing on the judge's desk? That is horrible.

Even the judge's time clock is screaming for cameras in the court room!😂

Is it possible the lawyers on both sides don't want to be critiqued much like the lawyers at the Depp v Heard and the Murdoch murder trial?

Public is paying for his defence, we have a right to see it!!!

8:13 The journalist or whoever she is, is absolutely right: What is the point of stating in the Constitution that criminal trials are public if in practice only half a dozen of people can attend them? An interpretation according to the Constitution is not that people can physically watch the trials, but rather that the trials reach the PUBLIC OPINION, be public knowledge, the more public the better, and what best transmits this knowledge to public is the transmition via camera. With all due respect, this judge is overly literal...

Thanks for your coverage today 😊

Anyone think he's embarrassed..and thats why, no cameras? now EVERYONE will see he's not as smart as he thought he was?

Cameras provide transparency and integrity. Very needed! Specially in this case with all the twists turns and backpedaling. The public is very vested in this case as well, however that's the smallest reason for cameras in the courtroom. Even if they only allow one camera feed that all media can join, it's needed

I hope nothing happens to create a mistrial

I thought the courtroom was a public venue . What was the argument back in the day about newspaper people being in courtrooms and reporting ?Juror could read that account and be swayed .

Too late. There's at least 20 podcasts on this case already. Transparency in our judicial system.

Cameras and live video coverage of this very high profile trial absolutely should be allowed as the “public” foots the bill for for these proceedings!! The judge HAS the authority to censor and prohibit the filming of any graphic material that’s to be presented in court, and this SHOULD be done to protect the loved ones of the victims. Procedures are already in place that must be followed to protect the identity and filming of jurors. Jurors are required by LAW to strictly avoid ANY media coverage of the case being tried and they can be prosecuted for violations. This judge expressed concerns about “accurate” MSM and social media coverage of this case as he does not want any “outside influence” over this trial, and while he can’t control media “commentary” about what goes on in the court proceedings, the ONLY way to ensure absolute accuracy is SUNLIGHT, or live coverage of the actual court proceedings!!"

Expose him to the world so he doesn’t get to keep deciding how this courtroom runs. Sick of his directions. He should stand up and tell the truth. Answer to why he was driving around. Stalking and how his DNA got under one of victims.

We want cameras

Let the public see what happens for truth and justice.

Good evening everyone 🌞

Voting for cameras... we public want to know what's going on-- why would you hide the proceedings?

Cameras should be allowed in the public eye if he didn’t do the crime he’s got nothing to hide but he did the crime so exposing him shouldn’t be a problem hey

As for witnesses put a screen around them. I've never seen in the latest case cameras showing any sensitive or graphic pictures again there reasons are ridiculous

Banning cameras will only cause more problems. All the secrecy in this case is only causing heavy suspension and wild speculation.

The defense attorney was talking over the judge which was disrespectful.

Public right to watch . Judge will allow cameras.

Who was man in black Uniform walking towards 1122 King Rd ar 3;15 am from 1336 Linda Ln house direction ? then a girl' s loud VOICE at 3;17am: : "GET OUT" Then a thud, Then the "security guard" from Linda Ln House came back inside 1336 Linda Ln House cleaning himself and saying "hoover' ...:

Public access to court hearings to protect and provide transparency to both sides. “The media” what about the people!

The only way to avoid "media spin" is to allow cameras in the courtroom so people if they are interested can watch for themselves. Don't underestimate the intelligence of the public to be honest adjudicators if they are allowed access to the actual proceedings.

What’s to stop the public from filling the court house and having a line of people surrounding the building trying to get their chance in the court room… if there are no cameras everyone is going to rush down there and camp out to try to get in.

I just hope they do not please that narcisista...and make him feel like he is in charge

Tax dollars are paying for his defense and therefore have full right to see it all. Media did not have a very good attorney. Her argument just didn’t seem to great. I feel like I had a better argument and not even an attorney

With only a handful of media in the courtroom, all we will see is what they want us to know

we better get access to the court! evidence is evidence!! let us see for ourselves

Decision? This isn't the decision....ya'll need to fix the title of this video to "judge still has not ruled on cameras in court"

The officers seem very relaxed with Kohberger imo. We don’t want this guy out.

Cameras are everywhere in our lives today. Aren’t courts open for the public to attend anyway? (Unless it’s high profile cases).

So why not sequester the jury? This case has been hush hush from the beginning why is question??? Is there something to hide? I haven't seen a gag order put on a case and I don't know how long I can't even remember the last time I saw that. And again is there a reason for that what do they have to hide? There's going to be questions and people are going to start demanding answers one way or the other

The public has every right to see what's going on in a courtroom. If the judge says no the media will fight it and they will win. It's happened before.

We need camera

Never seen a murder suspect so protected, why ? What are they trying to hide? Don’t they think this is important for people to see about evil in the world.Let the victims have a voice. Why isn’t the prosecution fighting for the victims more ?This is a DP case and the world should see if he is innocent/ guilty.

payne said in his affidavit THAT THERE ere SEVERAL cars leaving entering the area at that time frame.

If I was a lawyer, I would show the scene from To Kill a Mockingbird, court balcony, filled court. This old film depicts the norm of early days. Room for all and many to see a court proceeding. Today, we do not have courts with balconies and lots of room. Today we have cameras to let ‘we the people’, see what is happening with a case. I ask, who in the legal world would side against Atticus Finch, and time honored acceptable tradition of public court viewing?

What are those numbers flashing on the judges desk? Its very distracting.

Ty

Unlimited IGNORANCE (POWER), money, the ability to be ABOVE any laws, bzc they are the "LAW" : and the IMMUNITY to do ANY CRIMES, makes Idaho Judges/ cops to be CORRUPT!

Secret trials should never be acceptable, except under certain circumstances (like a child victim).

The public has the right to know. We are paying for it as taxpayers.

Jurors are admonished every day not to read about the case! Judge, are you assuming that the jurors are twelve people too stupid to get out of jury duty? Come on Judge, let the camera's in!

Do you know why Dylan did not call 911 during 8 hours? Bcz why to call cops if cops are killers. She called to her uncle < he called state cops at 7 am, so state cops arrived from Boise to Moscow at 12 pm... 5 hours to travel from Boise to Moscow

Media blew it; people think they have the "right" to not follow the guidelines of the privilege, then scream their "rights" are violated. Hoping the judge will allow for one stationary camera and wish someone would enlighten me of who the camera violators are. Have a few choice words for them.

The public is paying for all of this and therefore should be able to view the court proceedings. I agree that the jurors should not watch the news or share information on-line. I would not want to be a juror on this trial as, for sure, it will be a long drawn-out process.

Cameras are vital in the courtroom to protect the right of the public to attend a trial. It’s really up to the court to set and maintain decorum. My only real concern is about having too much exposure of any vulnerable witnesses. This part would have to rely on media having a heart and not indulging in any sensationalism. This is a serious, serious matter. Cameras being allowed in Idaho may be one of the first opportunities for the public to see a serious trial. That alone might help with degrading the sensationalism.

Kohberger smiling with his attorneys in court is unseemly and a slap to the victims

She made a good argument. The media is gonna cover this no matter what why not have the facts come out instead of just guessing on what’s going on.

He walks like Frankenstein... He is put in a Suit, to make him look more Human....

Need camera's!!!

They should let the cameras stand , maybe move them some place else .. they don’t want the narratives floating around then let the public decide for themselves.. this is a DP case .. they shoulda done this in the beginning of the coverage was an issue .. Carole said Bk was a cannibal so 🤷‍♀️ only on NN

I think Judge will allow a stationary type if video recording Live

Why is the word "decision" in the title of this video? Thanks for posting it though.

What the heck is this court hiding? Why not make this public . I'm sure the families and the people concerned want to see this.

Removing cameras and access to information just causes more distrust of courts and justice in general between the court and the public. We don’t know if what happened really happened or if the judge is vetting what’s coming out of the court. If he removes the cameras he’s just another trash judge. Public opinion gunna public opinion 🤷🏽‍♂️

You should be allowed to see what goes on in every courtroom, keeping the public in the dark is what courts and government does best though, and then they say justice was served even though we didn’t get to see it be served😂

Well damn, sounds like he['s already decided Cameras wont be allowed

So where will the actual trial be and when??

If he’s innocent, he should want the cameras there.