Why courtroom artists, not courtroom photographers?

flash bulbs would be too distracting?

As far as i know, it is not allowed (i am talking about the Netherlands here) to make photos of a suspect in a courtroom, this to protect the suspect’s privacy and identity.
Drawing is allowed, probably because the results of the artist’s work isn’t the real picture?
Here on this page you can find some drawings made by different artists, who depicted a woman, Lucia de B(erk), who was a suspect in a mass murder case.
She was found not guilty in the end, last year, and was freed, after she was convicted twice for it and received long year imprisonment sentence.
On this photo you can see what she really looks like.
All these years the artists, since they believed she was guilty of killing multiple children, depicted her as a kind of witch (or at least that was what a lot of people and media thought).

It is believed that photographs showing the suspect would prejudice his right to a fair trial.

A trial is about events which occurred outside the courtroom. Ideally, the evidence and testimony are important, not the courtroom action.

Good question. Other than the photograph stealing their soul, all I can think of is that:
– the courtroom artist is a tradition
– the drawing gives an idea of what’s happening in the trial without being too…real. Or too invasive. Kinda like what’s already been said ^