An idea to defray court cost.

[notoppings]

With the love of *Reality TV* I think that some states with high profile cases should charge for seating in the court room, where a judge may ban press from the court room now they should charge a premium for seating and for really large cases they should set up a pay per view. I could see the courts recovering a lot of court cost this way.

Could you imagine how much they could have charged the press for a seat at the OJ Simpson trial, easily $10,000 a seat each day and $500 for each spectator each day. People would have paid it.

Some people may whine about civil rights and invasion of privacy but in general a court room is a public forum, all this does is expand the public.

Any thoughts?

[Mozzes]

Any thoughts?

I don't know if there are enough high-profile cases that would generate enough interest for it to cover any appreciable amount of the cost.

[notoppings]

I don't know if there are enough high-profile cases that would generate enough interest for it to cover any appreciable amount of the cost.

I could see that. Maybe they should also charge a general admission price for all court cases. Family and involved people enter for free all others, buy a ticket at the door. Any little bit helps to keep taxes down.

[SShack]

It would be a violation of the First Amendment and Sixth Amendment. The first limits restrictions on the press and the Sixth guarantees a "public trial."

[blueback]

It would be a huge conflict of interest. It would open the door for all sorts of mischief. For example, if entertaining courts bring in more money, what's to stop someone from basing their legal decisions on how much money the court could get by dragging out the trial or by making a dramatic twist.