[go: up one dir, main page]
Jump to content

Courtroom sketch: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
expanded section
expanded section, renamed
Line 12: Line 12:
A courtroom sketch artist must work quickly, particularly during [[arraignment]] hearings where a witness may appear in court for only a few minutes. A television-ready sketch can be produced in that time, and viewed on television immediately after a court proceeding is finished.
A courtroom sketch artist must work quickly, particularly during [[arraignment]] hearings where a witness may appear in court for only a few minutes. A television-ready sketch can be produced in that time, and viewed on television immediately after a court proceeding is finished.


==In the United States==
==History==
[[File:Katy Metz cross examined.jpg|thumb|An 1889 courtroom sketch from the trial of ex-[[Alderman]] Thomas Cleary, which was published in the [[New York Times]].]]
[[File:Katy Metz cross examined.jpg|thumb|An 1889 courtroom sketch from the trial of ex-[[Alderman]] Thomas Cleary, which was published in the [[New York Times]].]]
Courtroom sketches in the [[United States]] date back as far as the [[Salem Witch Trials]] during the 17th century. Courtroom sketch artists were present for the trial of [[Abolitionism in the United States|abolitionist]] [[John Brown (abolitionist)|John Brown]]. By the mid-19th century, there were well-known court artists and [[printmaker]]s such as [[George Caleb Bingham]] and [[David G. Blyth]]. These sketches were reproduced as [[engraving]]s in the print publications of the era, long before photography was a practical option for courtroom news coverage.


Mass-publication of news photographs became more widespread in the 1950s, but courts were reluctant to allow either cameras or sketch artists in courtrooms since they were viewed as a distraction. Artist Ida Libby Dengrove protested these restrictions, and gradually courtrooms began allowing sketch artists to work during trials whilst seated in the public gallery.<ref>{{cite book|last=Robert H. Giles, Robert W. Snyder|title=Covering the courts: free press, fair trials & journalistic performance|year=1999|publisher=Transaction Publishers|isbn=978-0-7658-0462-4}}</ref> Cameras were first permitted in American courtrooms in the mid-1980s.<ref>{{cite web|last=Sakai|first=Mike|title=Courtroom sketch artist in Loughner case says eyes tell the story|url=http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/arizona/article_6bb05b78-202c-11e0-b4df-001cc4c03286.html|publisher=East Valley Tribune|accessdate=7 September 2011}}</ref> Since then, demand for courtroom sketches has declined, and are used when cameras are banned from specific trials, such as the [[United States v. Bradley Manning|trial of Chelsea Manning]].<ref>{{citeweb|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/30/jeremy-scahill-bradley-manning_n_3678476.html|title=Jeremy Scahill: Bradley Manning Media Coverage 'Shameful'|last=Mirkinson|first=Jack|date=30 July 2013|publisher=Huffington Post|accessdate=28 July 2014}}</ref>
Courtroom sketches in the [[United States]] date back as far as the [[Salem Witch Trials]] during the 17th century. Courtroom sketch artists were present for the trial of [[Abolitionism in the United States|abolitionist]] [[John Brown (abolitionist)|John Brown]] and the impeachment of [[Andrew Jackson]].<ref name=coveringcourts>{{cite book |last1=Giles |first1=Robert H. |last2=Snyder |last2=Robert W |title=Covering the courts: free press, fair trials & journalistic performance |year=1999 |publisher=Transaction Publishers |isbn=978-0-7658-0462-4}}</ref><ref name=syracuse>{{cite web |title=Contemporary Courtroom Artists |publisher=Syracuse University |url=http://suart.syr.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/1976-Contemporary-Courtroom-Artists.pdf |accessdate=July 28, 2014}}</ref> By the mid-19th century, there were well-known court artists and [[printmaker]]s such as [[George Caleb Bingham]] and David G. Blyth. Sketches during this era were reproduced as engravings in print publications, because photography was not a practical option for courtroom news coverage.<ref name=coveringcourts />

As mass media technology advanced in the early twentieth century, courts began experimenting with allowing photography and radio broadcasts of court proceedings. Following the media “circus” surrounding the trial of [[Richard Hauptmann|Richard Bruno Hauptmann]] for the [[Lindbergh kidnapping]], broadcasts from federal courtrooms were were banned by Rule 53 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.<ref name=setonhall>{{cite journal |last=Sarner |first=Joshua |date=Summer 2000 |title=COMMENT: JUSTICE, TAKE TWO: THE CONTINUING DEBATE OVER CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM |journal=Seton Hall Constitutional Law Journal |publisher=Seton Hall University |volume=10 |issue= |pages=1053-1083}}</ref> Additionally, the [[American Bar Association]] adopted Judicial Cannon 35, which prohibited the use of motion or still cameras in the courtroom and was codified into law by the majority of states.<ref name=setonhall /> On the other hand, no state or federal court prohibited the publication of courtroom sketches and courtroom sketch artistry continued.<ref name=usvcbs>{{cite court |litigants=United States of America v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. |vol=497 |reporter=F.2d |opinion=102 |pinpoint= |court=United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit |date=July 11, 1974 |accessdate=July 28, 2014}}</ref>

In 1973, courtroom artist Aggie Whelan (Kenny) was hired by [[CBS]] to illustrate the [[Gainesville Eight]] trial.<ref name=usvcbs /> The judge presiding over the trial, [[Winston E. Arnow]], ordered that no sketches were to be made in the courtroom and that no sketches of the trial be published, even if those sketches were made outside of the court from memory.<ref name=usvcbs /> In the United States v. Columbia Broadcasting System (1974), the [[Untied States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit|Fifth Circuit of Appeals]] overrulled the trail judge’s order and protected Aggie Whelan’s right to create sketches and CBS’s right to broadcast courtroom sketches.<ref name=newengland>{{cite journal |last=Cohen |first=Mark C. |date=1974 |title=United States v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.: Courtroom Sketching and the Right to Fair Trial |journal=New England Law Review |publisher=New England School of Law |volume=10 |issue= |pages=541-559}}</ref> The restrictions were too broad and violated both CBS and Whelan's [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]] rights.<ref name=usvcbs />

Television networks began using sketches to illustrate courtroom events during news broadcasts in the 1960s.<ref name=illustratedcourtroom /><ref name=newengland /> As long as the artist arrived on time, and did not disturb the proceedings by making unnecessary noise, their presence was rarely challenged in most jurisdictions.<ref name=newengland /> In jurisdictions where artists were restricted from sketching inside the courtroom, they created sketches from memory.<ref name=coveringcourts /> Courtroom artists including Ida Libby Dengrove protested these restrictions, and gradually courtrooms began allowing sketch artists to work during trials whilst seated in the public gallery.<ref name=coveringcourts />

The reintroduction of camera into courtrooms has been credited with a decline in courtroom sketch artists.<ref name=nytimes>{{cite news |title=Artists Brace for Entry Of Cameras Into Courts |date=November 29, 1987 |publisher=New York Times |url=http://www.nytimes.com/1987/11/29/nyregion/artists-brace-for-entry-of-cameras-into-courts.html |accessdate=July 28, 2014}}</ref><ref name=boston>{{cite news |title=Need for courtroom artists fade as cameras move in |author=Michael Tarm |date=January 28, 2012 |publisher=Associated Press |url=http://www.boston.com/yourtown/salem/articles/2012/01/28/need_for_courtroom_artists_fade_as_cameras_move_in/ |accessdate=July 28, 2014}}</ref> By 1987, courtroom photography was allowed in 44 states.<ref name=nytimes /> While the creation of [[Court_tv#As_Court_TV|Court TV]] and the [[O.J. Simpson muder case]] did cause renewed debate on whether or not courtroom photography should be allowed,<ref name=ohiostate>{{cite journal |last=Paul |first=Angelique M. |date=1997 |title=Turning the Camera on TV: Does Televising Trials Teach Us |journal=Ohio State Law Journal |publisher=Ohio State University |volume=58 |issue= |pages=655-694}}</ref><ref name=loyla>{{cite journal |last=Pugsley |first Robert A. |title=THIS COURTROOM IS NOT A TELEVISION STUDIO: WHY JUDGE FUJISAKI MADE THE CORRECT CALL IN GAGGING THE LAWYERS AND PARTIES, AND BANNING THE CAMERAS FROM THE O.J. SIMPSON CIVIL CASE |journal=Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Journal |publisher=Loyola Marymount University |volume=17 |pages=269-381}}</ref> all 50 states allowed the use of courtroom photography by 2014.<ref name=illustratedcourtroom />


==See also==
==See also==

Revision as of 20:50, 28 July 2014

A courtroom sketch of an accused person flanked by two attorneys, drawn in about eight minutes.

A courtroom sketch is an artistic depiction of the proceedings in a court of law. In many jurisdictions, cameras are not allowed in courtrooms in order to prevent distractions and preserve privacy.[1] This requires news media to rely on sketch artists for illustrations of the proceedings.

Creating courtroom sketches

Courtroom sketch artists attend judicial proceedings as members of the public or as credentialed media depending on the venue and jurisdiction. Judges may require artists to sit in a designated area or they may sit in general public seating. In some jurisdictions, including United Kingdom[2][3] and Hong Kong,[4] courtroom artists are not permitted to sketch proceedings while in court and must create sketches from memry or notes after leaving the courtroom.[3]

Courtroom artists can quickly capture a moment on paper and then sell their work to media outlets who would otherwise be denied a visual record of the trial. They may be paid per sketch or on a per diem commission. Sketches are often sold to television stations, newswire services, newspapers, or the subjects of a sketch.[5] Courtroom sketches may also be acquired by institutional archives. The entire set of courtroom sketches related to the Lindy Chamberlain trial were purchased by the National Museum of Australia from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.[6] Selected works of American court artists Richard Tomlinson and Elizabeth Williams are held at the Lloyd Sealy Library at the John Jay College of Criminal Law.[7] Other collections of courtroom art include the works of Howard Brodie held in the Library of Congress[8] and the Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States, which holds selected court artwork from artist Aggie Kenny.[9]

A courtroom artist must work quickly, particularly during arraignment hearings where a witness may appear in court for only a few minutes. A television-ready illustration can be produced in that time, and viewed on television after a court proceeding is finished.[10] Courtroom artists can be barred from drawing alleged victims of sexual abuse, minors, and jurors or some witnesses in high-profile trials.[9]

A courtroom sketch artist must work quickly, particularly during arraignment hearings where a witness may appear in court for only a few minutes. A television-ready sketch can be produced in that time, and viewed on television immediately after a court proceeding is finished.

In the United States

An 1889 courtroom sketch from the trial of ex-Alderman Thomas Cleary, which was published in the New York Times.

Courtroom sketches in the United States date back as far as the Salem Witch Trials during the 17th century. Courtroom sketch artists were present for the trial of abolitionist John Brown and the impeachment of Andrew Jackson.[11][12] By the mid-19th century, there were well-known court artists and printmakers such as George Caleb Bingham and David G. Blyth. Sketches during this era were reproduced as engravings in print publications, because photography was not a practical option for courtroom news coverage.[11]

As mass media technology advanced in the early twentieth century, courts began experimenting with allowing photography and radio broadcasts of court proceedings. Following the media “circus” surrounding the trial of Richard Bruno Hauptmann for the Lindbergh kidnapping, broadcasts from federal courtrooms were were banned by Rule 53 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.[13] Additionally, the American Bar Association adopted Judicial Cannon 35, which prohibited the use of motion or still cameras in the courtroom and was codified into law by the majority of states.[13] On the other hand, no state or federal court prohibited the publication of courtroom sketches and courtroom sketch artistry continued.[14]

In 1973, courtroom artist Aggie Whelan (Kenny) was hired by CBS to illustrate the Gainesville Eight trial.[14] The judge presiding over the trial, Winston E. Arnow, ordered that no sketches were to be made in the courtroom and that no sketches of the trial be published, even if those sketches were made outside of the court from memory.[14] In the United States v. Columbia Broadcasting System (1974), the Fifth Circuit of Appeals overrulled the trail judge’s order and protected Aggie Whelan’s right to create sketches and CBS’s right to broadcast courtroom sketches.[15] The restrictions were too broad and violated both CBS and Whelan's First Amendment rights.[14]

Television networks began using sketches to illustrate courtroom events during news broadcasts in the 1960s.[9][15] As long as the artist arrived on time, and did not disturb the proceedings by making unnecessary noise, their presence was rarely challenged in most jurisdictions.[15] In jurisdictions where artists were restricted from sketching inside the courtroom, they created sketches from memory.[11] Courtroom artists including Ida Libby Dengrove protested these restrictions, and gradually courtrooms began allowing sketch artists to work during trials whilst seated in the public gallery.[11]

The reintroduction of camera into courtrooms has been credited with a decline in courtroom sketch artists.[16][17] By 1987, courtroom photography was allowed in 44 states.[16] While the creation of Court TV and the O.J. Simpson muder case did cause renewed debate on whether or not courtroom photography should be allowed,[18][19] all 50 states allowed the use of courtroom photography by 2014.[9]

See also

References

  1. ^ "History of Cameras in the Federal Courts". US Courts. Retrieved 28 July 2014.
  2. ^ "Contempt of Court". Crown Prosecution Service. Retrieved 28 July 2014.
  3. ^ a b Guy Dammann (14 November 2006). "A sketchy future for courtroom artists". The Guardian. Retrieved 28 July 2014.
  4. ^ "Chapter 228, Section 7 – Summary Offences Ordinance". Retrieved 28 July 2014.
  5. ^ "As courtroom sketch artist, she's the people's witness". New York Daily News. 23 February 2009. Retrieved 28 July 2014.
  6. ^ Anna Morozow (25 July 2011). "Courtroom drawings sketch Chamberlain's history". Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved 28 July 2014.
  7. ^ "Classified Information the Lloyd Sealy Library Newsletter" (PDF). Spring 2012. Retrieved 28 July 2014.
  8. ^ "Search Results: "Brodie, Howard 1915-2010"". Library of Congress. Retrieved 28 July 2014.
  9. ^ a b c d Russell, Sue; Williams, Elizabeth (2014). The Illustrated Courtroom: 50 Years of Court Art. CUNY Journalism Press. ISBN 1939293529.
  10. ^ Sakai, Mike (16 January 2011). "Courtroom sketch artist in Loughner case says eyes tell the story". East Valley Tribune. Retrieved 28 July 2014.
  11. ^ a b c d Giles, Robert H.; Robert W (1999). Covering the courts: free press, fair trials & journalistic performance. Transaction Publishers. ISBN 978-0-7658-0462-4.
  12. ^ "Contemporary Courtroom Artists" (PDF). Syracuse University. Retrieved 28 July 2014.
  13. ^ a b Sarner, Joshua (Summer 2000). "COMMENT: JUSTICE, TAKE TWO: THE CONTINUING DEBATE OVER CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM". Seton Hall Constitutional Law Journal. 10. Seton Hall University: 1053–1083.
  14. ^ a b c d United States of America v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., 497 F.2d 102 (United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit July 11, 1974).
  15. ^ a b c Cohen, Mark C. (1974). "United States v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.: Courtroom Sketching and the Right to Fair Trial". New England Law Review. 10. New England School of Law: 541–559.
  16. ^ a b "Artists Brace for Entry Of Cameras Into Courts". New York Times. 29 November 1987. Retrieved 28 July 2014.
  17. ^ Michael Tarm (28 January 2012). "Need for courtroom artists fade as cameras move in". Associated Press. Retrieved 28 July 2014.
  18. ^ Paul, Angelique M. (1997). "Turning the Camera on TV: Does Televising Trials Teach Us". Ohio State Law Journal. 58. Ohio State University: 655–694.
  19. ^ Pugsley. "THIS COURTROOM IS NOT A TELEVISION STUDIO: WHY JUDGE FUJISAKI MADE THE CORRECT CALL IN GAGGING THE LAWYERS AND PARTIES, AND BANNING THE CAMERAS FROM THE O.J. SIMPSON CIVIL CASE". Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Journal. 17. Loyola Marymount University: 269–381. {{cite journal}}: Text "first Robert A." ignored (help)
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Courtroom drawings.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Courtroom_sketch&oldid=618870311"