Real Lawyer Reacts: Kohberger Update: Media Wants Cameras to Stay 

Or the judge too

Right!!! We don’t need their interpretation of it… we can understand it for ourselves! Don’t want their spoon fed lies any longe!! 😊

@@wotiluv Cameras should hopefully keep in check those occasional wilder judges who like to lose their temper and go off-map,

@@Bloodnok49 well this judge seems to be ok but the point is the public needs access to the trial. The state itself is widespread with most people living in remote communities so that alone should warrant a public trial.

Yes I’m so thankful that we could watch the Johnny Depp trial as media would have twisted everything. I don’t need their “opinions” and we the tax payers show see what we are paying for by watching it ourselves!

@@49ersfan834 I was not referring to the gag order, rather I’m speaking about the court’s warnings regarding how the media is acting. I had to correct my comment because there is no standing order, since it’s just been warnings. Hope that clarifies.

That's true but they were told to stop zooming in on Bryan's face the whole time which they still haven't done but now they're also aiming at his crotch which is pretty ridiculous.

Absolutely. Also you can’t fit the state of Idaho in that little court room anyway.

Nope. Mrs. Battlefield from hoax nation is a narcissist and shouldn't get that stage.

The media should be in the courtroom - but the footage should be public domain. If not, government should provide the footage with 4K recording quality that covers the court.

Well, if someone could follow the rules in the first place and NOT zoom into the defendant, maybe it wouldn’t be a big deal. So maybe letting the crime channel recording should get a lot of comments on how they were part of messing it up. People can’t just watch, they have to make videos on how he looks guilty because he was clenching his jaws. I did tell that so-called doctor know how horrible it is to even say such a thing with the man under so much pressure. It’s people like him screwing up our right to watch trials since they can’t use common sense themselves and not accuse someone of guilt. Michelle after dark stayed in her video, they car is Kohbergers and didn’t take that statement back! Blame those people and mainstream media.

There was so much traffic around that house between 2:45am and 3:15am. A video shows like 5 individuals running away from the house on a body cam. Quite a few other videos out there now Four or five students running away from the area of the house where the murders happened towards a frat house around the time of the murders. Also different vehicles in the area. Plus how did other kids know about these murders prior to the police. Happy it's innocent until proven guilty as well. I really believed from the beginning it was him now. I'm kinda in limbo, to be honest.

​​@@shaunmader7714The two survivors had friends over that a m. before one of them called LE around 11:50 a.m. They also called everyone in the other frat house, then they called dozens more... parents heard it from their kids, and on, and on. Brent Kopaka's parents' home shows a similar make and model Elantra, and a big white truck, which featured in a few videos of some of the victims walking home that night. Another white Elantra was also in the area, Linda Lane, around the same timeline w/odd behavior and a figure+?running toward it.

I watch that channel and the good pastor is more concerned w/the well-being of the victims' families; wholeheartedly behind them. So it's understandable he's rooting for the FBI and prosecution prematurely going w/the huge amount of evidence they proclaim to have against this guy. Seems the FBI is a little wobbly about that since they didn't wait a day before they showed up unannounced at night at a witness for the defense's house pressuring her to change her testimony and affidavit (by a devious, but transparent explanation that anyone over 35 would recognize). AT didn't believe their explanation for doing it, the judge is pondering it still, I believe.

What channel are you talking about?

Which pastor and what Utube channel are you referring to? I have not seen that. That sounds like an example of why cameras are so desperately needed in the courtroom!

Why is trump not getting shit over his no camera in his court appearance.

@@TomGibbons-ll2wywhat are you talking about?

People are treating this case and would treat the trial as a spectacle. They don’t care about being educated (there’s plenty of other examples to educate yourself with), they just want to be entertained.

@@michaelpower4372 I read yesterday that GA will be streamed on RU-vid

@@pappa_rodger everyone has an opinion! You have yours & I have the right to mine! No need to be salty!

No the idiots should not

I think that should be mandatory , it is OUR government after all.

We don’t have any camera in court in the U.K.

Well, we do but it is very limited in England and Wales. e.g. if you recall, cameras were allowed in for arguments in the Supreme Court concerning one of Johnson's misdemeanors. Correct me if I am wrong, but Scottish criminal trials can be televised. In medieval England and Wales, however, cameras are limited to the judge's sentencing and cannot show the defendant or any other court actors. Bizarrely, the only place where a trial (sic) might be fully televised is a public application for a liquor licence to the local licensing committee.

Stoopid comment by someone who obviously does not know how SCOTUS works. SCOTUS is recorded and you can listen to the cases. There is nothing to see unlike Federal Courts. Another sheep falling for the smokescreen.

@kenbash2951, I watched OJ’s trial. I remember like it was yesterday. That trial was a media circus. But at that time, it wasn’t about if he was guilty or innocent. At the time, there was so much racial tension going on out in California, NY/NJ (where I’m from), across the US and around the world. To many, it didn’t matter if he was innocent 😅 or guilty. What mattered was the color of his skin. That was the trial of the century, but it really wasn’t about guilt or innocence. If you remember the trial, I don’t need to tell you the encyclopedia of evidence they had on him. Didn’t matter how much evidence they had on him, it was racially motivated. For God’s sake, after the trial, he wrote his book, “If I Did It”. Only when he found out that the Goldman family would receive any proceeds from the book, did he stop the press. But the Goldman’s made sure it was still available for anyone to buy. You can still buy it on Amazon because of the Goldman’s. It’s quite the read. But anywho, that trial was extremely covered, and a murderer got off scott free. Who am I to judge? Nobody. If guilty, he will have to answer to a Higher Authority someday. There are many people who think Kohberger is innocent. For me, I’m just waiting for the evidence. So media or not, people are going to believe what they want and that means jurors as well. Cameras should be allowed in the courtroom. We should all be able to have access and see how our judicial system works. The good, bad, or ugly.

@@cindylewwho To me it was ALL about guilt or innocence and he was guilty- sorry.

Are you kidding. Anyone can make a leather glove not fit. That trial was a complete circus as everyone and his mate was acting up for the camera. The guy was guilty as hell. 🐝

Media should be banned because their biased coverage filled with fake news and misinformation has been abysmal.

Calm, cool, collected, and easy on the eyes. 😊

He might mess up a book deal afterall

I think having cameras in the courtroom are in the best interest of both the prosecution and the defense! Having cameras to ascertain transparency is desperately needed to prove our American justice system really works. Without transparency things begin to appear suspect which raises doubt amongst Americans and leads to lack of faith and trust in our entire American justice system! To not allow cameras makes not only the defense look suspect but makes one question whether our entire justice system is really still on the up and up or not. I just think cameras should be allowed!

People are treating this case and would treat the trial as a spectacle. They don’t care about being educated (there’s plenty of other examples to educate yourself with), they just want to be entertained. Why are people not demanding cameras for every case there is if transparency in justice system and right to information were the reasons? Because they don’t care, they just want to watch the specific ones that interest them. The public can attend the trial at the courthouse, they have no right to watch it on TV. And if it’s about transparency and fairness, why do people approve of secretive and one-sided grand jury practice?

@@angelasimpson4980 Well said. In England in the not-too-distant past,, I can recall a couple of cases going to appeal on the basis that the Judge fell asleep, It is difficult for a defence barrister to raise this, since they could blight their own future career. Cameras would help prevent such unintended abuse, which is probably one reason why the English judiciary opposes the widespread use of cameras.

The problem is that the media lies, and is trying to sell something, not deliver the truth. So far everything the media has said about BK early on has been nothing but false, misleading, and dangerous.

I agree, if defense tries shady tactics, like with the nonsense grand jury dismissal motions, we can see it all

Exactly, in Depp v Heard, the media was biased in her favor, but the trial showed she was an abuser.

Yes, especially since we cannot depend on the media for anyhing factual these days.

Kob needs to stop with his red herrings and defend his case. He still hasn't said he's innocent.

Yes we need cameras in the courtroom to see what happens . Also it benefits him for any possible appeals since there is video record of all the proceedings. It also protects the victims from his appeals because there is a video.

During a trial there will be people up on the stand for the cameras to focus on and a lot less time to focus on BK.

The public doesn’t have a right to see a trial on tv, that’s a privilege. The court is open, the public can attend a trial.

That’s exactly how they did it in the Leticia Stauch trial. ☑️

Glad it was helpful!

Judge Judge is a weak man and is under control of Idaho University.

Glad you enjoyed it!

Well.said

Thanks again!

They should be banned on the mere grounds of how prejudicial their coverage has been for months. And for all those fake rumours to drive up engagement and get views/clicks.

@@pappa_rodger Nice to know someone else agreed with this side of the coin 🪙👍