CONCORD - Pan Am Systems president contends Rep. Peter Leishman used his influence to extend Milford rail lease.
NH bids to make courts current with technology
By DAN TUOHY
New Hampshire Union Leader
Monday, Jan. 14, 2008
MANCHESTER – The use of cameras in the courtroom has been a hot legal issue for decades. But cell phone cameras? And multi-media bloggers?
Seeking to get ahead of potential issues, or at least keep pace with technology, the New Hampshire Supreme Court issued an order last week establishing a uniform policy on media access.
The new policy is designed to improve media access to, and the public understanding of, court proceedings. It covers the use of electronic devices in courtrooms statewide.
The Supreme Court, as administrator of the courts, issued the order on the recommendation of the Judicial Branch Administrative Council. It is the result of numerous meetings attended by court leaders, attorneys and journalists.
Electronic devices have been common in New Hampshire courts for years, used by members of the press and members of the public. The updated policy, as a uniform guideline, states that laptop computers, personal digital assistants, cell phones and related electronic devices are allowed in the courtroom unless a presiding justice finds the use of a particular device will disrupt a particular proceeding. Cell phones must be in "silent mode" in court.
Audio recorders, video cameras, and still cameras are also permitted, including cell phone cameras.
The court rule on media access provides that, with prior notice to the clerk, members of the media may broadcast, record and photograph proceedings. The rule requires that such activities do no impair or interrupt the orderly procedures of the court.
Attorney Gregory Sullivan, counsel to the New Hampshire Union Leader who attended the committee meetings, said the court's rules are being clarified and made uniform to meet the proliferation of electronic devices.
Laura Kiernan, communications director for the New Hampshire Judicial Branch, said the goal was to come up with a policy that protected the openness of the courts while respecting the need for order. "It's a big step forward," she said.
.jpg)




Reader comments