Judge says YouTube not media, bars cameraman

[danceswithdingos]

Does a US judge really think he can rule on the English language? Media is a tool used to store and deliver information or data according to wikipedia. Youtube is a tool used to store and deliver information. It seems the judge has the power to decide which media he likes and dislikes. I would point out that the judges personal preferences is not why the law was written. It was written so that they would be accountable. Its a sad day when judges use the law to protect the facts from the public.

[nathan40000]

to get a camera into the courtroom, use secret camera's and slip in.

[canadastreetmedia]

Do your other stations broadcast in Vancouver B.C. CANADA ?

utube is international media with the numbers to make any regular media outlet envious...

[Baalthazaq]

Well... I'm not sure what to make of this.

First off. I somewhat agree that youtube is not media exactly. Video would be media, Internet would be media.

Youtube is a specific entity like "America's Funniest Home Movies".

Sure it's fair to call it media, but only barely. I think that's what the judge is trying to say.

[xdamousex]

Who cares if its media? Trials should be open to the public. It's guaranteed by the Constitution.

Not that anyone pays attention to that document anymore.

[Baalthazaq]

Close but not quite.

"Trials should be public" does not equate to "trials should be on youtube". As long as it is open to the public, it doesn't violate the constitution if he bans videotape.

Especially in cases where the defendant doesn't want it to be public, in which case videotaping him on trial for something in a case where he is innocent might ruin him.

It's the rights of the defendant being discussed in the constitution, not just any schmuck with a videocamera off the street.

[xdamousex]

You're arbitrarily adding exceptions to the open trials rule. And it's quite a conflict of interest for a judge to say who he thinks should be allowed to cover a trial. If the media should be allowed to cover a trial, everyone should be allowed to do it.

[EdMan2012]

I live in Miami, if I were to do that here, I would get dropped face first to the floor for disobeying.

You guys have it nice up there. You can't mess with the cops or judicial system over here.

[RP4409]

[T]he press and public have a qualified first amendment right to attend a criminial trial...We also have extended that right not only to the trial as such but also to the voir dire proceeding in which the jury is selected. -- Waller vs. Georgia

[bigdstocktrader]

Sounds like we need a court ruling in the state of NH or a law passed that says that cameras are allowed and that Youtube and internet are in fact media.

[HorrendousOne]

Why is there a need a ruling? We, the people, already know that youtube and the internet are in fact media. The 1st Amendment UNCONDITIONALLY guarantees that the freedom of the press shall not be abridged. No law can be made abridging the freedom of the press. If there's no law, and no law can be made, then the judiciary can't just make up the law. That's congress's power. The judiciary can only INTERPRET existing law..

[mlang52]

You need a ruling because this judge is over-riding you!

[HorrendousOne]

But here's the contradiction; if congress can't make any law regarding the freedom of the press, then there's no law to interpret and the judiciary doesn't have the power to make law. So then how can they rule on non-existent law (there's nothng to interpret or decide)?

This is the paradox we face.

[mlang52]

Well, tell me how you are going to get the judge to follow the law, then? Someone is going to have to call him down! That is what I am saying. And, not being a lawyer, I have not idea how we can get that done! This judge is being the maker of this law. But who judges the judge? Explain how it is to be accomplished. I have, absolutely, no idea, except one. And, murder, (assassination violence) is not the right answer!

[HorrendousOne]

"Well, tell me how you are going to get the judge to follow the law, then? "

That's the million dollar question. And is the problem in a nutshell. The judges haven't been following the law for a long time now. They're creating law where none should exist.

The only (non-violent) remedies that I can see are:

1) If he/she's elected, then iniate a recall vote.

2) Petition for redress through the legislature to have the offending judge removed.

3) Appeal an invalid decision/order.

[HorrendousOne]

The way I understand it is, that if you appeal a court's decision, then the appellate court must have jurisdiction over the matter. But if the "law" that the judge "decides" is non-existent, then it's not possible that the appeals court can have jurisdiction over the matter. So, you're back to square one with options 1 and 2. You can potentially sue the judge on Constitutional grounds (i.e. if you have a valid Constitutional tort). But that's very expensive and time-consuming and doesn't work.

[mlang52]

I would take it as needing a ruling in each of the cases you described. A ruling, as I suggested, is need because it will take legal action. I did not use it he term "ruling" as a lawyer would. But, actually in the context that someone has to make a decision about his actions. Thanks for your info. It was good!

[AmericanPatriot134]

No its a paradox in your feble mind, jeeesh.

[astone329]

I thought all court proceeding (except in special circumstance where children are victims) were public. If they are open to the public, why not cameras & camera phones? Perhaps you could try wearing a badge that says "citizen's press"

[tito2b2]

So what is Media? Spoon fed Fox Media and only MSM is "media"? Sounds like we need to create a "Peoples Free Media" company and give media credentials to anyone that wants one without any discrimination. I can hear it now:

"Hey, give a media pass to my dog too! He has a camera on his collar and it's card carring member of the PFM!"

An informed citizenry is the bulwark of a democracy"

-- Thomas Jefferson

[newyorkhc84]

These clowns go through youtube. becuase they are too ignorant and unorganized to have large groups and websites or receive funding or donations. They resort to the free and unorganized site of youtube,

[P3rf3ctStorm]

Glad to see that you recognize that Youtube represents the "free" press. Are you so ignorant that you fail to recognize the almost completely controlled nature of the main stream media (MSM)? Get your head of the sand! All you're demonstrating here is that you're the clown with your head up your ass.

The "free press" isn't constrained to any particular venue. And Youtube is a very powerful medium for broadcasting the news (note how all the MSM orgs are using it (like MSNBC, CNN, AP, etc.)

[BedsnHerts]

Media outlets generally tend to abide by a code of factual accuracy. Sure they put their own slant on things, but very few just make stuff up (even Fox News gets its facts right). YouTube on the other hand is just a repository for people's opinions. They are not obliged to stick to the facts of an issue (nor do they).

[P3rf3ctStorm]

"Media outlets generally tend to abide by a code of factual accuracy"

Say what? Yeah, right. Uh huh. I've got some swamp land I want to sell you.

"even Fox News gets its facts right"

You've really got to be kidding me now. Faux News gets it right? rofl-lmfao!

"YouTube on the other hand is just a repository for people's opinions"

Oh, I see. No facts or truth here, right? Come on. No matter what media venue you use, you always have to sift through the bullshit to get at the truth.

[BedsnHerts]

"No matter what media venue you use, you always have to sift through the bullshit to get at the truth."

Ha. Point taken. I'm not defending Fox News. My point is that you have to dig a lot deeper in YouTube to get past that bullshit. It certainly wouldn't be my first port of call in the search for the truth

[LumpyRevolution]

Dude, are you asleep still? Damn.

[newyorkhc84]

Rights are not written down, but LAWS Are. And LAW states the judge has the discretion to tell you whether you can or cannot bring firearms into his courtoom.

[P3rf3ctStorm]

"Rights are not written down..."

Oh yes they are. Refer to "The Bill of Rights" - which is a part of the U.S. Constitution. You'll find them listed as the first ten Amendments in the founding documents (the top 10 list). The Constitution is the LAW of the land that supercedes all other "laws". Statutes do not (nor cannot legally) override enumerated Rights. If they do, then they are un-Constitutional statutes that seek to subvert the law WRITTEN in the U.S. Constitution.

[travisbickkle]

When you get arrested who is going to produce new ridleos!?!

[RidleyReport]

you!

[intrascoobz]

So true. However, I've learned the opposite way of what is taught thought. I question self in most things. I tend to use the love connection by tapping into a conscience. It becomes as a super conscious highway called the heart & mind's eye when insynch=aha!. The ability to learn to discern comes when one wants to seek truths. It is as if a most universal tool of convenience we have within us. Who knew? We are thought thinking beings becoming better informed to choose as we learn lessons~

[mlang52]

Why was he yelling at the kid an had him cuffed?

Michael

[wyomingliberty]

This story has been Dugg. Click the Digg link and spread the word!

Judge says YouTube is not media, bars cameraman

[newyorkhc84]

A judge has the right to tell people he will or will NOT allow media or recording devices in his court room. SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS YOU ARE GIVEN THE RIGHT?

[Bound4NH]

You first: show me where the judge is "given" the right.

[Taors]

Wait, MY public servant has a right to tell me that I can't film his 'SERVICES' in a court room that the government used MY money to pay for?

The hubris, sir. The very nerve of you!

[TEBON]

rights are not written down, you have the right to do anything. . .the constitution only enumerates them. The constitution, furthermore, is only a document to control government. I know this is new to you being from New York where you're taught that you don't have rights

[mottoncouthUSA]

I think what TEBON means that the constitution only enumerate SOME of them.

[TEBON]

thanks for correcting my silly mistake

[newyorkhc84]

You have the right to do ANYTHING huh? Murder? Speed? not pay taxes?

I am from NY but do not live there, nor consider myself a NY'er, and am very much conservative or liberatarian most my views. I just can seperate reality from fiction. If you have the right to do ANYTHING, walk into a courthouse with a gun and scream "YOU ALL WILL DIE" while waiving it in the air. Make sure to record it with your cute little ipod camera and post it on youtube to show how "anti-establishment and free" you are.

[P3rf3ctStorm]

The U.S. Constitution enumerates the natural RIGHTS of citizens. Judges, when acting in their offical capacities, do not have RIGHTS, they have POWERS. No judge has the POWER to constrain an enumerated RIGHT of a citizen exercising that RIGHT when it is guaranteed, in writing, & IS the law. To wit:

Congress SHALL MAKE NO LAW...ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM...OF THE PRESS..."

If Congress is expressly prohibited from passing any LAWS governing the press, then there's NO LAW for judges to interpret.

[P3rf3ctStorm]

The 14th Amendment applies the so-called "equal protection clause" that provides that the 1st Amendment in the U.S. Constitution applies to ALL States in the union. There are NO EXCEPTIONS. No state or local judge can override that enumerated RIGHT, unless they act in direct violation of the supreme law of the land - which they often do - and that is a significant problem with our current (& very corrupt) judicial system.. It's a systemic problem and the people of NH are calling them out on it.

[BedsnHerts]

Bravo.  Nicely put.

[TEBON]

in a free country there would be no Government courthouses. It's okay New York, I used to consider myself conservative/libertarian too. You'll see someday and it'll be okay.

[newyorkhc84]

This clown Ridley, you and others like you are nothing more than "loud mouthed and empty filled threats and promises" You are clowns who make yourself look dumb without any assitance from outsiders.

[P3rf3ctStorm]

You should be glad to have people like Mr. Ridley reporting on these types of egregious actions on the part of the judiciary, law-enforcement practices, etc., that is, if you support the original intent of the Founders of this Country & support the concept of Liberty. The Founders intended for the press to be completely free to probe into government abuses without fear of retaliation or punishment. Your ignorance of their intentions is readily apparent by the scolding nature of your comments.

[TEBON]

do I amuse you?

[mlang52]

Loud mouth? Was it not the judge who was screaming like a banshee?!

The kid in the video kid not look like he was threatening anyone. I sure would like to know what was going on!

[hobpeeper]

Media doesn't necessarily mean "reporter."  As soon as you put it onto video it's media. Why? Because it's mediated. It isn't live, is it?

[RodneyHampton]

Love your videos.  Keep it up Ridley!

[marco114]

I'm sorry, you don't work for YouTube. You work for the Ridley Report. Whether or not you post it on youtube is another matter.

[abcmole]

Since the judge wishes no debates, fine.

If he is elected, start a recall campaign immediately, he has no right to be a judge.

And if he was simply appointed, do a recall on the politician who appointed him.

[jdouglasfisher]

I'm not sure how judges are seated in NH (either elected or nominated by elected officials) but it sounds to me like there are a couple who need to be thrown off the bench.

Where is the public outcry demanding these judiciaries resignations?

J...

[HorrendousOne]

U.S. Constitution: The First Amendment

Congress SHALL MAKE NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; OR ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM of speech, or OF THE PRESS; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. [Emphasis mine].

[HorrendousOne]

NH State Constitution: Article 1, Section 22 titled "Free Speech; Liberty of the Press"

Free speech and LIBERTY OF THE PRESS are ESSENTIAL TO the security of FREEDOM in a state: They ought, therefore, to be INVIOLABLY PRESERVED.

The press has the RIGHT, not privilege, to be in any courtroom anywhere in the United States and to record the events by any means necessary to inform the public of the events that occur. Dave is a member of the press, by definition. Therefore, Dave may report.

[newyorkhc84]

Every asshole with daddy's video camera or a cellphone is NOT a reporter. You are just a fucking clown.

[HorrendousOne]

press (noun):

5.

a. The collecting and publishing or broadcasting of news; journalism in general. [Dave]

b. The entirety of media and agencies that collect, publish, transmit, or broadcast the news. [Dave's a part of that entirety]

c. The people involved in the media, as news reporters, photographers, publishers, and broadcasters. [Dave]

Dave IS a member of the press, by definition. The People dont need a permission slip from the government to exercise an enumerated Right.

[greenback001]

btw, although i don't always leave a comment, but let me say this time, great work as always.

[greenback001]

all the big media companies have youtube channels. youtube is pinnacle.

[sugarpuddin88]

Gimme a Break!

Elites are above the law!

Daschle, Killefer, & Geithner skippin' out on payin' taxes; Berney Madoff fraud; Barney Frank was arrested for running a male prostitution ring from his own house when he was supposed to have oversight of Freddie Mack; Sen Dodd for mortgage fraud; etc

Is it now time American citizens break the law?

Pentagon admits that 2.3 Trillion dollars has gone missing, ($8000 per person) Army office hit at the Pentagon on 911 was their acct office!

[ivyleague28477]

For clarification, Dave, both Merrimack and Manchester ruled in favor of YouTube being acceptable media.

[terrafirma91]

To put this in proper perspective, the Courts have something to hide. They would rather keep their evil doings away from scrutiny. Aren't courts supposed to be about justice in America? Our courts have become wicked beyond imagination.

[P3rf3ctStorm]

Judge Steven Morrison is full of it. What does he base that decision on? The NH State Constitution? The U.S. Constitution? Case law? No, it's just his ignorant "opinion".

[AreThereNoMoreNames]

Of course. That's why he doesn't want to debate it. He knows it's wrong, but he's not going to admit it, and he doesn't want anyone to bring light to that.

[P3rf3ctStorm]

Yeah, if the judicial system has nothing to hide (which they obviously do) & their "decisions" are all based on facts of law, not on their individual "opinions", then why would they have any problem whatsoever with allowing the press, who represents the PUBLIC, to record the events involved in a PUBLIC trial, in a PUBLIC place (a courtroom), & to be viewed by the PUBLIC at large? Hm? The only real answer to that question is that they don't want the PUBLIC to know what goes on in their courtroom.

[HandsHeldHigh1]

i would fell better if i had a gun too

[whoo689]

Youtube isn't media! Ha!

Tell that to all the mainstream and alternative media outlets that have shows on regular cable and satellite channels that use Youtube to increase viewership that it's "not media", your honor.

[somecomputergeek]

"All cameras off"????

WTF???

I thought we had freedom of the press in this country. This is a PUBLIC PLACE. Saying "cameras off" is a form of CENSORSHIP. What if I was doing an audio recording? What if I was scribbling notes? What the hell does it matter if what tool I'm using to record something?

[somecomputergeek]

Who the hell is a judge to determining what is or isn't "media"?

What? Do you have to have millions of dollars to set up a television station or a newspaper?

He doesn't think it "qualifies"? QUALIFIES? Qualifies for WHAT? Do we need to have license? This is BULLSHIT!

[airborne373]

These so called judges need to be removed and replaced.

[LumpyRevolution]

Simply removing them all is fine with me.

[TEBON]

imagine someone once must have said that TV cameras aren't allowed because Television wasn't media? Where do they find these judges? How pathetic.

[witegetobro]

who's to say that quote is true though?

[Loveseekingmissile]

media: the means of communication, as radio and television, newspapers, and magazines, that reach or influence people widely: The media are covering the speech tonight.

Don't just say Youtube, any means of communication can be media. Remember Youtube can become as censored as television and then we would have to move to another medium.

[803honda]

if a 6 year old writes a newspaper in crayon it is media.

[modelmotion]

Note that most of the media outlets now have youtube channels including bloomberg and a/p.

[walk4redress]

You Tube is my Media.

[modelmotion]

Think again Judge. We are. Deal with it.

[Baphometsblood]

wish i could but in NM you get arrested if you bring in any recording devices. since they try to search you when you go in their is no way to sneek it in.

[sshepard94]

I'm in Indiana. I get a tremendous amount of my news from YouTube, including most of my New Hampshire liberty movement information from the Ridley Report.

Increasingly, bloggers and on-line reporters are leapfrogging the corporate media in providing useful and pertinent information.