Judge Penny denies request for the public to listen in on hearings online - Update: Attorney Christopher Melcher responds to news

[Forever222]

Chris will appeal it. 

Typical Penny move. 

[BRITannico]

[Wishmaster]

5 hours ago, Kletus said:

DEAR JUDGE PENNYWISE:

HERE'S MY ***!

 

Now her post makes sense. Of course it's a big FU to Judge Penny. 👍

[No Seas Cortes]

It's hard not to make a sentence of words like: hate, I, b tch, this 

[rennen]

5 hours ago, PokemonSpears said:

I think it was obvious.

Of course we all want transparency, and we would all love to hear Britney speak, but that program was literally done exclusively for the pandemic restrictions, they will obviously stick to that reasoning, as convenient as it is for all of us to make it permanent.

As she says in the response, everybody from the media were admitted in the last hearing, including people from the public, and they're still invited to attend physically if they want to. As far as people can attend and witness the hearings, and we get the full transcript afterwards, I think that's ok.

This.

And I'm not sure why people are coming for Penny as if she is the one who has the power to cancel every single audio feed for every single court case in the LA Superior Court.

I'm not a fan of Penny's either but this decision wasn't hers. It was made by people above her. 

[PokemonSpears]

1 minute ago, rennen said:

This.

And I'm not sure why people are coming for Penny as if she is the one who has the power to cancel every single audio feed for every single court case in the LA Superior Court.

I'm not a fan of Penny's either but this decision wasn't hers. It was made by people above her. 

I think if any, the request should've been made to someone above her, because this is obviously coming as if it's just for Britney, when in fact it would be convenient for all cases, but then that's something that needs to be ordered from way higher than Penny. Like they should look for a reform to the law or whatever that states that all the hearings should be broadcasted for transparency, but that would obviously take time.

Or they should've argued that with the new COVID variant they should ban physical appearances again and reestablish the remote program lol

[Moscow]

I am not surprised, let's see what happens on 29th! 

[Greek_Fan]

B *tch! 

[Goten21]

Horrible decision

[Christopher Melcher]

I am taking it to the court of appeal next week, asking that audio access be restored for all non-confidential proceedings in all courthouses in Los Angeles. It’s important for the public and media to hear what’s happening in our courts, not just on 9/29. The court said it got rid of audio access because it was a program needed only when social distancing kept people from coming to court. But the court tweeted recently that the public should avoid coming to court because of an uptick in covid exposures at the courthouse due to the pandemic. So that’s inconsistent. The real reason is that the court got upset because Britney’s statement was recorded. That violated the rules, but her statement was made in open court in a public proceeding.  I will keep you posted. 

[Slayer]

6 minutes ago, Christopher Melcher said:

I am taking it to the court of appeal next week, asking that audio access be restored for all non-confidential proceedings in all courthouses in Los Angeles. It’s important for the public and media to hear what’s happening in our courts, not just on 9/29. The court said it got rid of audio access because it was a program needed only when social distancing kept people from coming to court. But the court tweeted recently that the public should avoid coming to court because of an uptick in covid exposures at the courthouse due to the pandemic. So that’s inconsistent. The real reason is that the court got upset because Britney’s statement was recorded. That violated the rules, but her statement was made in open court in a public proceeding.  I will keep you posted. 

Thanks Christopher for all your efforts!

#FreeBritney

[Easy There]

Is the press and public be allowed in court room at least ?

If she denies that. Isn't she breaking a law ? Like smth with constitution  ?

[Easy There]

7 minutes ago, Christopher Melcher said:

I am taking it to the court of appeal next week, asking that audio access be restored for all non-confidential proceedings in all courthouses in Los Angeles. It’s important for the public and media to hear what’s happening in our courts, not just on 9/29. The court said it got rid of audio access because it was a program needed only when social distancing kept people from coming to court. But the court tweeted recently that the public should avoid coming to court because of an uptick in covid exposures at the courthouse due to the pandemic. So that’s inconsistent. The real reason is that the court got upset because Britney’s statement was recorded. That violated the rules, but her statement was made in open court in a public proceeding.  I will keep you posted. 

Man ur awesome. Love listening you and the podcast you are doing on YouTube.

Thanks for being such an amazing guy and for fighting on sides where we as fans can't.

[Jordan Miller]

1 hour ago, Christopher Melcher said:

I am taking it to the court of appeal next week, asking that audio access be restored for all non-confidential proceedings in all courthouses in Los Angeles. It’s important for the public and media to hear what’s happening in our courts, not just on 9/29. The court said it got rid of audio access because it was a program needed only when social distancing kept people from coming to court. But the court tweeted recently that the public should avoid coming to court because of an uptick in covid exposures at the courthouse due to the pandemic. So that’s inconsistent. The real reason is that the court got upset because Britney’s statement was recorded. That violated the rules, but her statement was made in open court in a public proceeding.  I will keep you posted. 

Appreciate you joining and posting this 🙏 

[Alestaos]

So i am probably wrong here but wouldn't audio recording also be beneficial for all types of cases? It could help either side and be very useful in situations of special needs/ illness.

But I'm not surprised she said no to the request, however i think if i'm remembering right didn't Britney say that she wanted the public to see/hear her case?

I can see it on both sides tbh but i do hope the appeal works in Britneys favor

[One More Time]

1 hour ago, Christopher Melcher said:

I am taking it to the court of appeal next week, asking that audio access be restored for all non-confidential proceedings in all courthouses in Los Angeles. It’s important for the public and media to hear what’s happening in our courts, not just on 9/29. The court said it got rid of audio access because it was a program needed only when social distancing kept people from coming to court. But the court tweeted recently that the public should avoid coming to court because of an uptick in covid exposures at the courthouse due to the pandemic. So that’s inconsistent. The real reason is that the court got upset because Britney’s statement was recorded. That violated the rules, but her statement was made in open court in a public proceeding.  I will keep you posted. 

 

[MintChocoLatte]

I think this transparency would be good for cases in the LA court. At least when people involved want it. For a lot of us, Britney’s case made us aware of the shady things going on there at times. This level of transparency would contribute to removing some of that shadiness I think. Maybe I’m just talking bs I’m not a lawyer.