Thursday, September 25, 1997
JP seeks cameras in courtroom for hearing
By ANTHONY WILSON / Abilene Reporter-News
Justice of the Peace Rex Andrew wants cameras in the courtroom
during a hearing on his use of ignition interlocks for DWI defendants,
claiming television lights will expose other judges' failure to
order the devices.
But Andrew's legal counsel, District Attorney James Eidson,
a staunch opponent of televised court proceedings, said he won't
pursue the JP's request.
"I'm not surprised," Andrew said. "Nobody involved
in this process wants to see it on the 6 o'clock news."
Andrew on Wednesday simultaneously delivered a written request
to Eidson and faxed a statement to the local media calling for
his Oct. 31 hearing before state District Judge Jess Holloway
to be televised.
At issue is whether Andrew can issue a blanket order to all
Taylor County DWI defendants requiring them to install ignition
interlocks in their cars within 30 days of their release on bond.
The device requires a breath analysis before a car will start.
From September 1995 through July 1996, Andrew kept a stack
of signed orders at the Taylor County jail. He summoned defendants
who failed to comply to face contempt charges and more jail time.
Defense attorney Don Wilson is challenging the practice, arguing
Andrew has no jurisdiction over defendants who never appear before
him, who aren't allowed hearings on the matter and whose cases
are filed in other courts.
On Wednesday, Wilson criticized Andrew for trying to use the
media to strong-arm a favorable ruling.
"That's an attempt by Judge Andrew to pressure (Holloway)
into deciding the case his way rather than according to the law,"
the attorney said. "He's been told he does not have jurisdiction,
and he will not accept that.
"If he's going to be a champion against drunk drivers,"
he added, "he should at least follow the law."
Andrew, who is not an attorney, said he wants cameras in the
courtroom to show neither prosecutors nor judges are seeking ignition
interlocks for probationers -- an issue separate from his hearing.
The local bar, judges included, has expressed legal concerns
about the interlock law. Eidson has said he is monitoring cases
in other counties for guidance on how to proceed under the law.
Andrew wants his hearing televised because of the "far-reaching"
effects on Taylor County's protection from drunken drivers.
"Since the courtroom will not hold 100,000-plus people,
I believe television cameras in the courtroom is the next best
alternative," Andrew said in his statement. "... Openness
in courtroom proceedings is in the best interest of the citizens."
But not in the best interest of justice, Eidson countered.
He favors the long-standing local tradition of barring cameras
on the courthouse's fourth and fifth floors.
"The courthouse is for justice, not entertainment,"
Eidson said, citing the O.J. Simpson case as exhibit A. "I
don't anticipate filing this motion."
Andrew said he doesn't know if he'll seek another attorney
to represent him.
Eidson and Wilson agreed the hearing, expected to be a short
debate on legal matters, possibly without any witness testimony,
would not rival fictional TV courtroom dramas for viewers.
"This case would put my wife to sleep," Wilson quipped.
"There are no lurid details, just a narrow legal question.
Dull."
Send a Letter to the Editor about This
Story | Start or Join A Discussion about This Story
Send the URL (Address) of This Story
to A Friend:
Copyright ©1997,
Abilene Reporter-News / Texnews / E.W. Scripps Publications
|
