Trial by Videotape - Can Justice Be Seen to Be Done
![handle is hein.journals/temple47 and id is 232 raw text is: [Vol. 47
TRIAL BY VIDEOTAPE-CAN JUSTICE
BE SEEN TO BE DONE?
David M. Doret *
I. INTRODUCTION
Over thirty recent articles attest to a growing interest in the
possibilities of applying videotape technology, in various ways, to the
trial proceeding.' Some of these articles have examined the use of
* B.A. Yale College (1968); J.D. Harvard University (1971) ; Associated with
Wolf, Block, Schorr & Solis-Cohen, Philadelphia, Pa. The author is grateful to
Leonard J. Bucki, Esq., of the Philadelphia Bar for his many perceptive comments
and suggestions.
1. MADDEN, Interim Report to the Supreme Court of Illinois-Experimental
Videotaping of Court Room Proceedings (1968) [hereinafter MADDEN I]; NATIONAL
BUREAU OF STANDARDS, UNITED STATES DEPT. OF COMMERCE, Potential Uses of Court-
Related Video Recordings (1972); OHIO LEGAL CENTER INSTITUTE, Videotape as a
Medium for Recording Evidence, pamphlet issued May 19, 1972 [hereinafter OHIO
LEGAL CENTER]; Blews and Patterson, On Trial: Videotape, 46 FLA. B.J. 159 (1972)
[hereinafter BLEWS] ; Brennan, Videotape-The Michigan Experience, 24 HAST. L.J.
1 (1972) [hereinafter BRENNAN]; deVries, The Use of Video Tape in Depositions,
11 F.T.D. 113 (1970) ; Houston, Holland and Beck, Instant Replay for Appellate
Courts, 59 A.B.A.J. 153 (1973); Kennelley, The Practical Uses of Trialvision and
Depovision, 16 TRIAL L. GUIDE 183 (1972) [hereinafter KENNELLEY] ; Kornblum and
Rush, Video Technology Serves the Legal Profession: Courtroom and Classroom Uses
of Television, 58 A.B.A.J. 1207 (1972) ; Kornblum, Videotape in Civil Cases, 24 HAST.
L.J. 9 (1972) [hereinafter KORNBLUM]; Kornblum, The Oral Civil Deposition:
Preparation and Examination of Witnesses, 17 PRAC. LAW. 11 (May, 1971) ; Lester,
Heifner and Manning, Aspects of Claims Handling by Videotape Recordings, 20 FED.
INS. COUNSEL Q. 14 (1970); Madden, Illinois Pioneers Videotaping of Trials, 55
A.B.A.J. 457 (1969) [hereinafter MADDEN II]; McCrystal and Young, Pre-Recorded
Videotape Trials-An Ohio Innovation, 39 BROOKLYN L, REV. 560 (1973) [hereinafter
MCCRYSTAL I]; McCrystal, Videotape Trials: Relief for Our Congested Courts, 49
DENY. L.J. 463 (1973) [hereinafter McCRYSTAL II]; McCrystal, Ohio's First Video
Tape Trial: The Judge's Critique, 45 OHIO B. 1 (1972) [hereinafter McCRYSTAL
III]; McCrystal, Video Tape Trials, 44 OHIO B. 639 (1971) [hereinafter McCRYSTAL
IV]; Merlo and Sorenson, Video Tape: The Coming Courtroom Tool, 7 TRIAL 57
(Nov., 1971) [hereinafter MERLO] ; Miller, Videotaping the Oral Deposition, 18 PRAC.
LAW. 45 (Feb., 1972); Morrill, Enter-The Video Tape Trial, 3 J. MARSH. J. PRAc.
& PROC. 237 (1970) [hereinafter MORRILL]; Murray, Comments on a Video Tape
Trial-from Counsel for the Plaintiff, 45 OHIO B. 25 (1972) [hereinafter MURRAY];
Ryan and Cassan, Television Evidence in Court, 122 AM. J. PSYCHIATRY 655 (1965);
Stewart, Videotape: Use in Demonstrative Evidence, 21 DEF. L.J. 253 (1972) [here-
inafter STEWART] ; Stone, Use of Videotape in the Legal Profession, 45 OHIO B. 1213
(1972) [hereinafter STONE] ; Sullivan, Court Record by Videotape Experiment-A
Success, 50 CHI. B. REC. 336 (1969), 41 N.Y.S.B.J. 695 (1969) [hereinafter SULLI-
VAN]; Watts, Comments on a Video Tape Trial-from Counsel for the Defense, 45
OHIO B. 51 (1972) [hereinafter WATTS] ; Symposium, First Videotape Trial: Experi-
ment in Ohio, 21 DEF. L.J. 267 (1972) [hereinafter SYMPOSIUM] ; Comment, Video-
tape Trials: Legal and Practical Implications, 9 CoL. J. OF L. AND SOC. PRoB. 363
(1973) [hereinafter COMMENT I]; Comment, Nebraska Faces Videotape: The New
Technology in Perspective, 6 CREIGHTON L. REV. 214 (1972) [hereinafter COMMENT
III; Comment, Judicial Administration-Technological Advances-Use of Videotape
in the Courtroom and the Stationhouse, 20 DEPAUL L. REV. 924 (1971) [hereinafter
COMMENT III]; Comment, Video Tape: Its Admissibility in Evidence and Other
Uses, 5 GA. S.B.J. 393 (1969) [hereinafter COMMENT IV]; Comment, Videotape:
A New Horizon in Evidence, 4 J. MARSH. J. PRAC. & PROC. 339 (1971) [hereinafter
Comment V].
(228)](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/temple47&div=17&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Trial by Videotape - Can Justice Be Seen to Be Done
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most