The Role of Virtual Conferences in Driving Global

[shishir.seoexpert1]

In fact, it is still and always an investigative regime that visits and revisits this face-to-face that constitutes American culture. Step by step, through words and attitudes, everyone forms their own opinion. Guilty or innocent? A drama is played out in the power that defines the ultimate in storytelling. In the courtroom, respect for the theatrical rule of the 3 units of time, place and action is total . Guaranteed efficiency.



These images are so strong, so present gambling data brazil throughout series, feature films or reports, that for most French people the functioning of our justice system can only be the same. Misunderstandings are regular in French courtrooms where it is not uncommon to hear a presiding judge correct a witness who believes he can start a dialogue with a lawyer. This is possible in the USA, whereas in our country the rule is that we only address the magistrate in charge of conducting the hearing. It is clear. The image of American justice has in some way replaced ours . There is a kind of cultural failure here, it is obvious, damaging, but can nevertheless be explained. And the strength of the American cultural industry is not the only key to understanding...

French reluctance towards the image of justice



Filming trials has always been problematic in France. Of course, in 1954, cameras and still cameras appeared in the images of the Dominici trial . But there was no sound of the proceedings. No long sequences of the exchanges during the trial. And a fortiori, no full recording of this resounding moment in criminal history. It is true that the technology at the time hardly allowed it. Looking at these documents, one can imagine a noisy disorder of the media struggling in the middle of the courtroom. The same thing happened for the Besnard trial, two years earlier.

However, the judiciary could not stand this "media noise". A major criticism, it was detrimental to the serenity of the debates . 1954 was therefore the year of the ban. A law passed urgently prohibited " the use of any device allowing the recording, fixing, or transmission of speech or images ". It would take more than thirty years for the ban to be lifted.