Texas high court hears debate over taping jury deliberations
By The Associated Press
01.16.03
AUSTIN — The argument over letting a television show record deliberations in a capital murder trial reached the state’s highest criminal court yesterday, with prosecutors saying it would destroy the tradition of jury confidentiality.
One judge questioned whether it would turn the process into “reality TV, like ‘Survivor.’ ”
The argument before the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is just the latest round in the debate over capital punishment in Texas, the nation’s No. 1 death penalty state.
The appeals court must decide whether a trial court judge has the authority to permit the videotaping and broadcast of jury deliberations in the capital murder case of 17-year-old Cedric Harrison, accused of killing a man during a carjacking in June. He faces the death penalty or life in prison if convicted.
State District Judge Ted Poe of Houston last November agreed to allow the PBS documentary series “Frontline” to tape jury deliberations in the trial.
Harris County prosecutors appealed Poe’s decision as a violation of jury confidentiality.
Poe’s attorneys argued that cameras could shed valuable light on the death penalty process.
“We have in this country and this world a huge debate over the propriety of putting people to death, and Texas and Harris County are right in the middle of it,” said Poe’s attorney, Chip Babcock.
“We are better off as a society if we can see our citizens perform a duty that is literally life and death,” he said.
But the Harris County District Attorney’s Office argued that state and common law have long protected deliberations as confidential. Texas law since 1879 has prohibited anyone from being present when a jury discusses a case.
Babcock said the law does not specifically bar cameras, however. A ruling to exclude cameras would be a policy decision that should be left to state lawmakers, he said.
A bill to prohibit recording jury deliberations is now before the Legislature, which opened its session on Jan. 14.
Assistant District Attorney Bill Delmore argued that cameras would corrupt deliberations.
Aggressive jurors could use the cameras to “grandstand” on the death penalty, he said, while shy jurors may be reluctant to say anything out of fear of potential retaliation and ridicule.
“We’re putting equipment that will allow thousands or millions to watch and listen,” Delmore said. “It’s a bully pulpit of sorts.”
Judge Tom Price questioned whether the cameras would make a mockery of the jury process.
“What I fear is we’re going reduce jury deliberations to reality TV, like ‘Survivor,’ ” Price said. “We’ve seen what happened with O.J. Simpson when everyone became a star.”
Babcock noted that juries are allowed to talk to news reporters after a verdict is reached and that a juror could release his notes to the public. A juror who knew shorthand could practically release a verbatim transcript of the proceedings, he said.
Judge Mike Keasler, however, noted that jurors can refuse to talk to the news media, an option they wouldn’t have if jury deliberations were taped.
Judge Barbara Hervey asked the prosecutors if it makes any difference if the jury agrees to be taped. Delmore said no. Poe has said only 14 of the 110 jurors who filled out jury questionnaires in the case voiced a concern about taping the trial.
“They ought to be able to say what they want to say without worrying about public disapproval, retaliation or being corrected by a TV editor when the show is broadcast down the road,” Delmore said.
The court did not indicate when it would rule.
Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal said the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals will have the final say on the issue. He said the issue is not open to review by federal courts.