Follow the Truth: The trial of Daniel Andre Green

Today, almost all the trials I cover are not only recorded by our television cameras, they are streamed live on the internet so true crime fans can watch every moment. But back in 1996, judges were more reluctant to allow cameras in the courtroom due to the perceived spectacle that the O.J. Simpson trial turned out to be.

The decision not to allow cameras in the courtroom is a double-edged sword. On one hand, not having the cameras decreases the possibility the lawyers and witnesses will posture for public attention. On the other hand, without cameras, the public can only understand the case through the eyes of the media and how they paraphrase events inside the courtroom. Journalists cannot possibly report everything that happens, so the audience is left only with a brief daily summary.

Even though we have the transcript of the trial, not having video of what happened inside the courtroom is a game-changer in my opinion. It deprives journalists and the public of seeing exactly what happened and what didn’t happen.

I understand why his attorneys didn’t want him to testify. He had a record. He was previously convicted of assault and spent time in prison. (That charge was ultimately overturned, but it still would have come up in court if he had testified and could have prejudiced the jury.)

As human beings, we want the accused person to tell us he is not guilty. Juries want to hear it from the defendant’s mouth. They are regular people, not lawyers. And while they are tasked with seeking the truth under the law, human nature dictates that without Daniel’s voice in the courtroom, they are left wondering why he did not defend himself on the stand. Who knows what difference it would have made if the jury heard Daniel say "I did not kill Michael Jordan's dad."