I’m also curious why the jury entered through the main entrance. You’d expect it would be more private to protect their identities, for safety and so others wouldn’t try to persuade them.
Further thoughts on this.
Most courthouses simply weren't built for modern times. Elsewhere, new facilities have been built and future ones planned. These include things like underground, secure parkades for court staff, underground entrances for delivering prisoners from remand for trials, high-security courtrooms with bulletproof glass for organized crime trials, security checkpoints, upgraded security cameras, better audio systems, etc.
New arrest processing centres and remand centres have also been built that remove "perp walks" from the equation, also with underground entrances for police and sheriff vehicles.
Hopefully, future facilities will include CO2 monitors and HEPA air filtration.
In the meantime, older facilities outside major urban centres have to deal with whatever already exists. This leads to situations like an overcrowded courthouse near my home that has nowhere for the jury to go during breaks. A lawyer who went there told me that the jury, the friends and family of the accused and victim of a violent crime were all standing in the hallway during breaks with nowhere to sit and sharing the public washrooms. Not ideal.
A new coat of paint won't address these structural issues. It will take major investment in new facilities. Until this can happen, governments can do things like installing bollards, restricting parking, enforcing parking and creating no-protest zones near courthouse entrances. This is not the responsibility of judges. It takes investment by government.