8:oo am Sept. 12, Office of Chief Special Prosecutor Dennis Villaignacio. Some members of the prosecution team in a huddle.
Volunteer lawyer for the prosecution Atty. Anton Peralta : “Are we or aren’t we going to catch a big fish this time?”
Tag: People vs. Estrada
“The Combat of Mars and Minerva” by Jacques Louis David from abcgallery.com
The Supreme Court saved the day for posterity and world history. ABS-CBN news reported at 5:47 pm today that the Supreme Court has granted the petition for a live media coverage.
According to abs-cbnnews.com, the Supreme Court has allowed one video camera to be operated only by Supreme Court personnel to be positioned at a designated area, and the camera would focus only on the court personnel reading the decision.
Had the Supreme Court not acted on this with dispatch, we would have lost any optical documentation of the promulgation and the world would think that the Courts in this country are hiding something with the continued refusal (now overturned) to allow video documentation of its disposition of the case.
One video camera “equalizes” the kind of images that all the television networks would have. (not good for free enterprise; but well…)
Can I just make one teeny-weeny suggestion? Even as the camera is focused only on the court personnel reading the decision, maybe it would be visually more complete if the cameraman would use a long shot instead of a tight shot of the court personnel; I don’t think the court personnel’s hair or back of his/her head, no matter how beautiful, and I’m sure it’s beautiful, , would have documentation value. So, maybe a long shot would contain more information , and therefore more documentation value, than a tight shot of the face or hair of the court personnel. Also, in all the hearings in this case, the court camera had been positioned in one corner after the justices’ bench, to their right. That’s a good position, so maybe for consistency’s sake, that could be maintained.
Maraming salamat po. Ako ay lubos na gumagalang.
