It’s a crowd bedecked with Bluetooth toys, festooned with BlackBerry holsters, and accustomed to courtroom computing here at the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference in Honolulu.
For the past three days, there’s been much ducking out by lawyers attending to urgent e-mails; at least one judge here has set up a functional office (complete with a fax machine shipped from the mainland) to work from his hotel room; and Ninth Circuit Judge Richard Tallman was shown in a slide show on Tuesday hearing a case while looking at the laptop he always brings to the dais.
| NINTH CIRCUIT in HAWAII Reporter Justin Scheck blogs from the appeals court’s annual conference in Honolulu. |
So it seemed appropriate that Wednesday’s post-breakfast discussion — entitled “Confidentiality in the Courts” — focused largely on how to deal with the camera phones, laptops and other devices that find their way into courtrooms.
Conveniently, Ninth Circuit staff had set up an electronic system for audience members to express their opinions via remote control.
Some of the lessons that may affect those of us who spend significant time in federal courtrooms:
1) When it comes to BlackBerrys, about 36 percent of Article III judges here said the devices shouldn’t be used in their courtrooms at all. Speakers cited several reasons, including concern about distracting jurors. “The jury may be annoyed that you’re using a BlackBerry,” said San Francisco U.S. District Judge William Alsup in an effort to spark discussion. They may think you’re Googling them.”
L.A. District Judge A. Howard Matz raised a more abstract concern when he said that using BlackBerrys inhibited his efforts to “preserve something akin to the majesty of the law.” But 35 percent were OK with the devices, with no restrictions. The rest were more reserved, saying it’s OK to use a BlackBerry provided it’s for courtroom business, such as calling in a witness. One volunteer who relayed feedback from audience members to the rest of the room made a point worth noting, though: “I asked the judges, ‘Do you check your e-mail from the bench,’ and I got some yeses.”
| ALSO at the CONFERENCE Debra Yang blames the wrong people for her office’s embarrassment during her U.S. Attorney tenure. Ha ha, the nice man from the White House mocks people who think federal drug policy is a mess. Silly, silly majority of the judiciary. Judge Stephen Trott’s original Highwaymen played a gig. Big-time plaintiff lawyer and vinter Frederick Furth takes his Great Dane on the longest walk ever. Oh, and the judges suggest a pay raise — at least in line with the cost of living — would not be entirely out of order. |
2) Overall, most judges didn’t have too much of a problem with lawyers using laptops as long as the keyboard doesn't sound like a Selectric. “I was too worried about the noises, the clacking," said Western District of Washington Chief Judge Robert Lasnik, who has prohibited them in the past.
3) Most of the judges are fine with camera phones in their courtrooms.
4) About 57 percent of judges said journalists should be afforded priority seating.
But the greatest debate was saved for the hoariest of judicial technology questions: Once the breakfast program was over, a suggestion by lawyers that the circuit urge a rethinking of the ban on cameras in trial courts provoked the same, well-practiced conflict it’s created for decades: Some say cameras are necessary to ensure the public's belief in the integrity of the court system; others say cameras cause lawyers to grandstand and serve as a distraction to jurors (though it’s unclear why a person sitting in the same courtroom for days on end would pay more attention to a stationary A/V setup than to a wildly gesticulating attorney).
Of all the opinions thrown onto the floor, though, only Senior L.A. District Judge Terry Hatter came up with one that seemed to address everyone’s problems while at the same time satisfying neither the media advocates seeking access nor the judges wanting to keep the equipment out: Record trials in their entirety on the condition they be viewed only after they’re finished
— Justin Scheck
Comments