From: R C Curry, Adel Grange Close, Leeds.
TOM Richmond comments on the televising of criminal trials (The Yorkshire Post, April 19), concluding that it is at the least unhelpful and unrepresentative of the real issues. He is so right in saying that little is learned about the facts in the case as the media centres on the dramatic and salacious bits, with the participants playing to the gallery; not the boring but very essential detailed evidence.
So, the public remain more or less totally unaware of the real facts and come to uninformed decisions as to who may be guilty or otherwise, based on what may be partial media commentary. Then. after it is all over, if the defendant has been found “not guilty”, the popular response is that he or she has “got off”.
Those people who are really interested can take themselves to the court where the case is being heard and no doubt be bored with the endless hours of detailed serious presentation of evidence, but at least they might appreciate the issues facing justices at all levels, and that there is more to trials than dramatic exchanges.
Televising of trials serves next to no purpose and could be misleading. In Britain the duty of the judge, jury and magistrates is to dispense justice based on all the evidence. Long may that continue.