« Court - Federal Judicial Conference develops juror instructions re electronic devices | Main | Ind. Law - More on: Who voted for and against the "defense of marriage" constitutional amendment? »
Wednesday, February 03, 2010
Courts - Prop. 8 trial, banned from broadcast, re-enacted
The SCOTUS prohibited a California federal district court from broadcasting the "Prop. 8" trial. See a number of earlier ILB entries here. Here are the details from Jan. 13th, 2010.
The trial continued without cameras, testimony concluded, and closing arguments are expected next month. Meanwhile, Bob Egelko of the San Francisco Chronicle reported yesterday in a story that begins:
The U.S. Supreme Court's camera blackout of the trial over same-sex marriage in California didn't faze two Los Angeles filmmakers, who - with the help of transcripts, bloggers and a corps of professional actors - have launched its re-enactment on YouTube.Watch the re-enacted trial here."We want all Americans to have a chance to judge for themselves, based on the evidence that was presented," John Ireland said Monday after the first of 12 scheduled "episodes," each covering a day of the trial, made its Internet debut.
The cast includes such Hollywood talents as Tess Harper and Adrienne Barbeau.
Testimony in the trial ended Wednesday in San Francisco before Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, who is expected to hear closing arguments next month. At stake is the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the November 2008 initiative that defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman.
The Supreme Court intervened Jan. 11 to block Walker's plan to have the trial telecast to other courthouses and have testimony uploaded to YouTube, both of which would have been unprecedented for a federal case in California. In a 5-4 ruling two days later, the court said the telecast might subject pro-Prop. 8 witnesses to harassment and intimidation.
"We were poised ... getting ready to watch it," when the court ruled, said Ireland's filmmaking colleague, John Ainsworth, who married his partner at San Francisco City Hall before Prop. 8 passed. "It frustrated me. Who were they to say that I can't watch this, especially when it's in a public courtroom?"
With no money to pay anyone, they put out a casting call to the Screen Actors Guild and got an enthusiastic turnout for the more than 40 available roles, Ireland said.
The No on 8 side relayed official trial transcripts, bloggers and a professor in the courtroom described the witnesses and the atmosphere, and David Cruz, a University of Southern California law professor, provided legal guidance.
Although both filmmakers opposed Prop. 8, they took pains to cast attractive performers on both sides, Ireland said. Their goal, he said, was "transparency, not swaying anybody.
The WSJ Law Blog has coverage here, headed "Prop. 8 Trial Caught On Tape (Sort Of)." So does the Law Librarian Blog, in an entry headed "Recreating a Trial Online: We Have the Technology."
Posted by Marcia Oddi on February 3, 2010 08:33 AM
Posted to Courts in general