ILNews

Supreme Court uses PBS to educate public on courts

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court is teaming up with the state’s Public Broadcasting Service to offer specials informing residents about the court system.

The programs will cover a variety of topics including pro se representation, the importance of jury service, alternative dispute resolution, and will also include several Indiana Supreme Court oral arguments. The videos will begin airing Thursday.

Indiana Supreme Court public information officer Kathryn Dolan said the programs are part of a new partnership between PBS and the Supreme Court and there will be others offered in the future. The programs in this series are the same that are available online on the court’s website. Dolan said the Supreme Court is pleased that PBS will be offering a new audience for the videos.

All eight Indiana PBS stations will offer the programming, although not all of their schedules have been updated to include the series. The first program set to air Thursday is “Family Matters: Choosing to Represent Yourself in Court.”


Indiana Trial Lawyers Association, Indiana Paralegal Association, Indiana State Bar Association, Indiana Supreme Court, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting provided funding for the series.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT