You may have seen the recent video of the lawyer who couldn't turn off the cat filter during a Zoom trial.
What struck me about it is the legal warning in the top left frame warning that it is prohibited to record or livestream the hearing. And yet somebody recorded it.
Is somebody going to face contempt charges for this?
The warning notice is intended for viewers and participants, not for the court to make its own official record of the proceedings.
Presumably, it was this court record that the judge released for educational purposes under his own Order via Twitter. In which case, there has been no contempt of court.
Last night's news included a 2 minute segment, 'I'm not a cat'.
District Court Judge, the Honorable Roy Ferguson, clearly indicates why he released the video to the public:
This is a time when people are down, and depressed and lonely.
And angry at each other, and at the government.
…
Everyone is enjoying it.
The feedback is all positive.
People are happy to see it, and they're laughing.
And I hear that that's something we need more of.
Unless he released it without the permission of the embarrassed lawyer, which is highly unlikely, he did nothing inappropriate.
