RECENT  POSTS:  » Report: US District judge won't deny justice to gay Coloradans; might delay it, though » AFA to POTUS: End your 'love affair with homosexuality,' give anti-gay Christians entitlement instead » Congressional right wing's right-side-of-history whip count: 8–271 » NOM, Manhattan Declaration turn Unitarian's anti-slavery, anti-war into pro-discrimination anthem » Matt Barber and Peter LaBarbera tease America's coming anti-gay street revolts » FRC writer: We're not all the same, 'gay agenda' is 'dangerous for the wellbeing of this nation' » NBC analyst Tony Dungy says he wouldn't have drafted Michael Sam » NOM becomes even more of a generalized anti-LGBT animus organization » Sure, NOM—I'll play your game!! » Bryan Fischer: POTUS 'stood on the graves' of Malaysia Air victims 'to promote the legitimacy of sexual deviancy'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

01/06/2010

The revolting amendment trial will [kinda, sorta] be televised

by Jeremy Hooper

A mixed bag for those hoping to watch live proceedings of the federal Prop 8 trial (which starts next Monday). Judge Vaughn Walker has declined a live telecast of the shindig. However, there will most likely be a day-old webcast:

Despite thousands of people responding to a request for comments on allowing a live TV pool camera in the courtroom for the federal Prop 8 trial starting next Monday, Judge Vaughn Walker just declined that offer by a Media Coalition and In Session TV.

However, Judge Walker ordered a TV recording of the proceedings for delayed web distribution on YouTube the next day – pending approval by the 9th Circuit.

Breaking: Judge Walker says no ‘live’ TV for federal Prop 8 trial [LGBT POV]

Hmm. We'd surely watch it online anyway. But a day old? What, other than pizza, is as satisfying on a 24 hour delay?!

**UPDATE: NBC Bay Area has more on the partial allowance, including a snippet of what it will look like, a mention that the live proceedings will be piped in "to a nearby overflow room as well as facilities in Seattle, Portland, Pasadena and Chicago," and the revelation that witnesses not wanting to be videotaped will have the option of turning off the camera: Prop. 8 Judge Says Yes to Cameras [NBC Bay Area]

**UPDATE: Courage Campaign is still hoping the 9th Circuit will take the next step. And they want you to join the more than 80,000 who have already signed their petition seeking full disclosure:

"This precedent-setting ruling is an important first step and it is halfway to a fair hearing," said Courage Campaign Institute Chair Rick Jacobs.

"We now ask the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit to take the next step toward transparent jurisprudence by allowing a press camera in the courtroom so all Americans can see and hear as a fundamental issue of civil rights is litigated," Jacobs said. "Overruling this halfway measure would be a travesty for openness and accountability."
http://www.couragecampaign.org/page/s/TeleviseTheTrial

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

I'm okay with this, though I don't see the problem with live TV. Maybe they don't want another OJ trial. (I'll sacrifice a live feed if it means no dancing judges on Jay Leno.)

I do wonder if there will be requests to censor all the ascared defense witnesses.

Posted by: Matt Algren | Jan 6, 2010 3:54:55 PM

I would have preferred live TV, and I signed the petition saying so, but this is still leagues above having it happen in secret.

Posted by: RainbowPhoenix | Jan 6, 2010 4:43:32 PM

While the testimony of those witnesses who are in opposition to our civil rights will be published, eventually, I am of the opinion that if anyone wants to take the stand in an attempt to sway the decision in a way that harms the LGBT community, then they should have no right to turn the camera off. We should have the right to look them in the face as their evil(est) side comes out. We should be able to see them eviscerated publicly. And, one would think that they should have absolutely nothing to hide.

Posted by: Dick Mills | Jan 6, 2010 5:12:39 PM

So what the hell is Maggie "The Loathsome" Gallagher worried about? They'll turn off the camera for the bigots.

I sent her a nice email, told her that all the things that the Heritage Foundation and she were saying we did to them, we've had the same and more done to us.

The more, while they may get death threats (And rightfully so!) we've seen friends and loved ones murdered because they were gay. Who is the bigger bigot Maggie? Me who won't tolerate religious bovine effluent disguised as civil rights or you whose constant vitriol fans the flame against we gay people?

Posted by: Tony P | Jan 6, 2010 6:13:07 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails