Oh, I agree that I don't think any appeal on this issue will be successful, due to the convict's constant courting of the media for her self-aggrandizement (love that term), but you just know they will try because she gave them a reason to do so. The witnesses could have asked to have their identity masked while on the stand, just like they did with Darryl Brewer in the guilt phase. (Although, his concern should have been with his hands being visible, not his face, lol. :blushing
. However, that still didn't stop him from immediately going straight to the media to give an exclusive interview. :gaah: I'm just so sick of the convict and her defense team constantly playing these games.
I agree the judge helped to give them a reason by not being consistent with her decision about allowing TV cameras. She should have stayed consistent with the 1st phase and allowed them.
By being inconsistent, she has provided an argument for the defense to say that the judge must have realized that cameras really can impact the trial which is why they were disallowed this time around.
I think it was a really bad move to not stay consistent. I am concerned about an appeal for this sort of thing.
This is the sort of thing that kind of goes back to things I have brought up before about the judge favoring JA so much that she could be causing some possible appeal issues herself. And I think the defense is purposely trying to cause these types of things. Kind of a like a self-fulfilling prophecy. The defense hammers the judge for favors and then the judge thinks by giving the defense what they want she will prevent any appeal issues, but rather, it has the opposite effect of creating one.
Here is an extreme ridiculous example of what I mean so its more plain to see what I am meaning....
Defense: Judge, can we go over to a jury member and discuss something since its very important to us?
Judge: Well, just to be nice and avoid any appeal issues, I suppose just this 1 time it will be OK.
After the trial, the defense then files an appeal saying that one of the attorneys (themselves) talked with a jury member in private during the trial before the jury even deliberated.
We all realize that is a ridiculous example and the judge would deny this request, but its the exact same thing as the Video "thing". The defense is being very calculated and sneaky in trying to ask for things so that once granted they can go back at end of trial and appeal the case based on something they themselves caused and was granted by the judge.
This is why it is so important the judge stays firm and should not be afraid to make tough decisions so long as there is legal basis to do so.