Cameras banned from Keene Court again?

[Coconut]

Has the court "revoked" our "right" to freedom of the press in the Keene Courthouse?

http://freekeene.com/2008/10/23/cameras-banned-from-keene-courthouse/

[Dave Ridley]

OK we have six days to prepare, that is just barely enough...

But I think I can do a repeat of last month and face arrest to get in there with a camera if they don't let the other guy in.
I'll start building another note for Judge Burke...

Not all hills are good ones to die on..

but this one is.

I am already committed to being arrested anyway as part of this campaign against bad state laws.

I'm shocked they did this; I thought we were all getting along so well.  my guess is some other bureaucrat pressured Burke.   

[Coconut]

Dave,

I would suggest calling the court so we have first hand confirmation of the ban before planning anything. Don't want you to waste your time with a misunderstanding.

If you don't do it, I will tell them I'm setting up my camera in the usual place and they will have to forcibly remove me.

[FTL_Ian]

Dave,

I would suggest calling the court so we have first hand confirmation of the ban before planning anything. Don't want you to waste your time with a misunderstanding.

If you don't do it, I will tell them I'm setting up my camera in the usual place and they will have to forcibly remove me.

I will call them tomorrow morning and record the call.

[Coconut]

Dave,

I would suggest calling the court so we have first hand confirmation of the ban before planning anything. Don't want you to waste your time with a misunderstanding.

If you don't do it, I will tell them I'm setting up my camera in the usual place and they will have to forcibly remove me.

I will call them tomorrow morning and record the call.

Very good

[FTL_Ian]

These allegations do come from a reliable source, Tom at candid-world.  Here's some excerpts from his emails:

The only snag is I finally tracked down the court clerk and he says the judge is not allowing cameras in the court room, apparently because of the previous events.  I'm trying to get an exception as "a member of the press" but I'm not sure how far it will get me.

I said, "The court guy is bullshitting you because you're from out of town.  Previous events show they now allow everyone to bring in recording devices:
http://freekeene.com/2008/09/26/triple-civil-disobedience-success/

Just show up with your camera and you'll be fine.  If not, it will make for interesting footage as all of us back you up."

He wrote back:

He's not bullshitting - I'm very aware that cameras were allowed and I told him as much.  I tried to sound aware, but objective - he basically told me that the no camera rule is because "there's a group of people trying to make an issue out of 'having a right to film in the court'" and that they're revoking it because "the judge has been very lenient up until now and it's been abused".

[Russell Kanning]

I love the "group of people" phrase.
They really don't want people to see what happens in there ... they want people scared

[Tom Sawyer]

I'm shocked they did this; I thought we were all getting along so well.  my guess is some other bureaucrat pressured Burke.   

They don't want to let go of the feeling they are our masters.

Burke is not a good guy, I've seen him operate... he is a professional bully.

[AntonLee]

I'm shocked they did this; I thought we were all getting along so well.  my guess is some other bureaucrat pressured Burke.   

They don't want to let go of the feeling they are our masters.

Burke is not a good guy, I've seen him operate... he is a professional bully.

oh but I thought he was doing the right thing lately.

[Coconut]

They must be mad. I can't get to freekeene.com

[FTL_Ian]

My admin is trying to determine what is going on.  Sorry. 

Anyway call is in to the "court" to clarify what is going on.  I have elected to not record the call so as not to spook them.  I want an answer.

[Dave Ridley]

one question:  Should we battle for the continued ability to bring multiple cameras in, or pick the more defensible position of fighting to maintain the traditional ability of a lone pool photographer to be there?

[FTL_Ian]

Why cede ground?  That said, I will enter the court if at least one camera and my audio recorder is allowed.  Otherwise, I'm walking out.

[margomaps]

Why cede ground?  That said, I will enter the court if at least one camera and my audio recorder is allowed.  Otherwise, I'm walking out.

Then I hope at least one camera and your audio recorder is allowed, otherwise you won't be walking far.  I'm not sure what the charge will be (probably contempt of court if you walk out in front of the judge), but you will certainly end up in a cage.   

I wonder what bail would be set for a contempt of court jailing?   

I'd hate to see you in jail over this, but the headline is delectable: "Keene judge jails man rather than allowing camera into public trial."

What happens to FTL if you're jailed?  Will Mark go it alone, or can you bring in a substitute (G. Goldsmith maybe)?

[Mike Barskey]

I had trouble posting the following comment under the blogpost at FreeKeene.com, so I'll post it here:

Wow! One way to proceed might be to ask to see the rule. Actually, a "rule" in a courthouse is baloney; ask to see the law or statute or whatever legal prohibition on cameras in the courthouse they claim exists. Then, we could continue by refuting the validity of restricting cameras - e.g., the public, the media - from recording public trials/arraignments/etc.

Another angle would be to point out that if cameras in the courtroom are indeed illegal, the judge himself has disobeyed the law by allowing them in the past (and, of course, there is video evidence of this ).

I'm also curious what's wrong with "a group of people trying to make an issue out of 'having a right to film in the court.'" Is the judge saying that people who make an issue of keeping their rights is a bad thing? Does he think that all people who make an issue about their constitutionally guaranteed rights are abusing those rights? Does the judge think that he needs to revoke all rights of all people who exercise their rights? Or is the judge merely targeting Ian?