The first, off duty, on his own motorcycle, in a collision in front of 301 Warren St.; the second a few blocks away in another collision while responding to the first. Unknown conditions as I type.

The state's judges and mainstream media are considering whether to change rules, adopted in 1998, that govern how cameras can be used in courtrooms during trials. Well, and now me - I've been asked to join the committee that will make recommendations to the Supreme Judicial Court, which has the final say.

The rules, which seek to balance the public's right to know with the rights of defendants and other people in the courtroom, and with preserving decorum during trials, did a decent job ten years ago, when only bigfoot media organizations ever seemed to cover court proceedings.

But now? The rules bar more than one video and one still camera from a courtroom. This might make sense when all the media outlets have agreed beforehand to share these "pool" images, but what if a blogger covers a hearing or trial and wants to run a photo? And if a defendant objects to photo coverage and wants to have it barred, he's supposed to send a written objection to "the Bureau Chief or Newspaper Editor or Broadcast Editor of the Associated Press, Boston."

Read the current rules and let me know how you'd think they should be changed.

Also see:
Proposed Nevada rules, which would change "representatives of the media" to "news reporters."
Blogging and the courts - A federal court's experience with bloggers during a high-profile trial.

Jglee explains why she just can't get enough of its ice cream, even in the winter.

The fun starts at 1 p.m. on Wednesday, June 2 in the council chambers on the fifth floor of City Hall. According to Council President Mike Ross, the council will not actually vote on the arbitration panel's proposed settlement until another meeting, as yet unscheduled.