Description:
Previously untouchable mob boss Buff Tony was recently arrested by the @@DENONYM@@ police following a sting operation. Buff Tony has been charged with numerous offences including extortion, racketeering, and money laundering, and there has been debate as to whether the media should be allowed to film the proceedings.
Validity: Must not have the ‘no judiciary’ policy
Option 1:
"Buff Tony is rumoured to have a long arm, and there are legitimate concerns that the trial will be corrupted" states television producer @@RANDOMNAME_1@@. "The judiciary is only just where it is held accountable by the people, but it's impractical for most @@DENONYMPLURAL@@ to attend court in person. The media is a powerful conduit to the public and should be allowed to film in court to promote fairness in the judicial system."
Effect: @@DENONYMPLURAL@@ are disappointed that court isn’t as exciting as the movies make it out to be
Option 2:
"Allowing the media to film in court will be making a circus out of a serious process" counters courtroom sketch artist @@RANDOMNAME_2@@. "The parties will inevitably be grandstanding to the TV cameras instead of making a proper case. While I agree that it is in the public interest to allow @@DENONYMPLURAL@@ to witness and report on court proceedings, filming devices should not be permitted in court."
Effect: @@DENONYMPLURAL@@ are remarkably distraught that they can’t bring phones in court
Option 3:
"And what about the rights of my client to privacy?" exclaims the lawyer for Buff Tony, while surreptitiously sliding a bulging envelope towards you. "Being on trial is distressing enough and it shouldn’t be compounded by parasitic journalists publicizing often embarrassing and intimate details about the defendants. For the sake of decency, the public shouldn’t be allowed to witness, let alone report on, court proceedings."
Effect: What happens in court stays in court