As media took their seats for last Wednesday's hearing for Mr. Simpson, a number of them brought in cell phone cameras and were snapping pictures inside the courtroom. A few also were using the phones to text out updates to their producers and editors. Cell phones in Nevada courts are not allowed during the court proceeding and, as the devices have become more popular, judges have often requested bailiffs to confiscate them, especially if a phone rings or an owner snaps photos during court.

Before the start of the hearing I asked the journalists and public gathered for the hearing to put down their phones and make sure they were set on silence. I also indicated they should probably turn them off. I gave my "this is a church" speech and reminded them that the court demands seriousness from its participants. I repeated myself three times and a Clark County Courts Marshal also reminded them of the rule.

In the past year, the court's employees have been asked to review and sign a Model Code of Conduct, which details how we should act and behave as court employees. The model code seeks to bring out integrity and professionalism in the actions of the judiciary. Judges already must conform to a high set of judicial canons and now the employees are expected to be unwavering in their commitment to high professional standards. One of these standards is to provide access to justice that is unbiased and unprejudiced.

The hearing progressed routinely with the judge explaining the charges to the defendant and taking care of routine matters. At the end of the hearing, the defendant was escorted out of the courtroom and the media pool camera, with many media broadcasting the proceedings live, panned and followed Mr. Simpson as he exited. Just as he left the courtroom, a court reporter brought up a cell phone camera and snapped a picture.

Shortly after that event, a viewer in another state phoned in to complain about the actions of the court employee. Throughout the day more complaints came in by phone and email. The court leadership met to discuss the problem and to determine what should be done. By the end of the day, the judge had addressed the event with the employee and an appropriate action was taken.

Since the newscycle was focused on the hearing for Mr. Simpson, I focused on taking care of their needs and didn't meet with the court executive officer until the next morning. He asked me to release a statement acknowledging the problem and communicating to the public that the court had taken the appropriate steps to address the actions of the employee.

An apology seemed a more appropriate action than an empty statement from the court executive officer. I offered to write the letter, and the court executive officer followed up by editing my style by providing his own words. And while it may seem like this was an empty apology aimed at getting publicity, I didn't intend it that way; it was a sincere apology offered to show the court remains dedicated to professionalism and regretted the actions of its employee. We only made the decision to release the apology to the public after NBC, CNN, Inside Edition, Extra and TMZ.com inquired Thursday afternoon about the court reporter's cell phone picture.

Quite a few critics within the court remain upset about the letter this week. They view the event as a personnel matter that should be kept private and feel the court should not be offering apologies for the actions of an employee. They have questioned the motivations of the court executive officer and me. This has led to introspection and second guessing on my part.

Earlier this week I met with a producer for NBC Nightly News. Our conversation came around to the cell phone picture and he wondered what had happened to it. I told him I had seen the picture and personally saw it deleted. It was a blurred photo that contained no detail. I asked him about the apology letter and asked him if he felt it was self-serving. He told me the following story:

During the planning for Thursday's Nightly News, Brian Williams considered commenting about the cell phone camera and the implications of everyone having the means to capture news and share it with others. Apparently, the court's letter of apology changed the tone of the story and it was dropped.

Eventually, out of the more than 6,000 story placements about the O.J. Simpson case last week, only a handful (less than 15 stories) were found about the cell phone camera. Apparently, more people were concerned about the alleged crime than they were worried about the actions of a court reporter. Of the people who did comment about the cell phone, most were shocked by the actions of the reporter, but most believed the court was doing what it could to demonstrate professionalism.

After the letter was sent to Mr, Simpson's attorneys, Mr. Yale Galanter told Greta Van Susteren that he was "touched and grateful" for the apology:

VAN SUSTEREN: All right, let me ask you about a document that I've received a copy of. I think probably anybody has. It's sort of a peculiar one. I assume you have it because it's addressed to you from the Clark County courts administration. It's sort of ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äù it's written ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äù dated September 20. It's an apology, which is sort of peculiar. Have you received this from the court executive officer?

GALANTER: I have.

VAN SUSTEREN: What ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äù I mean, this is so peculiar. Can you explain what this is all about?

GALANTER: Well, before I explain it, first let me say, as I said at the press conference yesterday, I thought everybody in the courthouse, at the detention center acted professionally, and this letter really just puts the icing on that cake.

There was a clerk in the courtroom that took a picture of Mr. Simpson or a partial picture of Mr. Simpson with a cell phone. It immediately became known. This person's supervisor or boss took care of that problem, called me personally, expressed his sincere apology, just was very gracious. And I was so touched and grateful for that phone call because they are true professionals in that courthouse, and I appreciated the fact that they were on top of this immediately.

My experience knows that an apology takes courage, but rarely does a sincere apology fail to make amends. And in this case, an apology was the right thing to do.

I have attempted to build a case study in the past week, mostly as a way for me to remember what happened, and too, to give me some fodder for future posts. Thanks for reading and if you have a comment, I'd appreciate to hear from you.