Monday, January 11, 2016

"Objections raised as courtrooms go digital" as reported by the Boston Globe



As detailed in this article published on January 2, 2016, Boston Globe 'Objections raised as courtrooms go digital', Superior Courts in Massachusetts have started installing a new digital system to record criminal trials, which could eventually mean the phasing out of the 40 court reporters who work as officials.  This system, developed by For The Record, will cost $5 million to install and implement.  This does not, however, take into account the COST of courtroom monitors, the COST of transcribing these digital files, the QUALITY of the transcripts produced in this manner, or the TIMELINESS of transcript delivery.  To replace certified professionals with a recording device has proven to be a misguided solution to fixing a bottom line.  Court reporters, specifically machine writers, constantly improve their skills and invest in the latest ground-breaking technology, at their own expense, to be able to provide clean realtime feeds that judges and counsel rely on.  Digital recordings are an inferior substitute for nationally certified court reporters. 

Below is the response to this article from our state association:

Massachusetts Court Reporters Association is proud of the important role that official court reporters serve in preserving and producing the record in criminal and civil proceedings across our country every day. The presence of an official court reporter in the courtroom at the time of the judicial proceeding is the most accurate and reliable way to make an official record and the justice system is served, as it has been for generations, with a trained court reporter present to capture the proceedings.

The court reporter is in the courtroom for the sole purpose of recording the spoken word and would, thus, never “forget to flip the switch” resulting in important testimony or argument going unrecorded. Without the presence of a court reporter, there is no opportunity to interrupt the proceedings for an unheard word, nod or mumble.
Stenographic reporters have played an integral role in bringing state-of-the-art technology into the courtroom. In fact, this technology offers many advantages when compared to digital audio or video recording. For example, a realtime court reporter's stenographic notes are translated instantly, displayed on a computer screen and digitally archived to a computer. Realtime court reporters create a verbatim text record of the proceedings for instant review and use by attorneys and judges. In fact, realtime is the only "voice-to-text" technology that meets the rigorous demand for accuracy that exists in the legal environment.

Several courtrooms that replaced court reporters with alternative methodologies have now switched back to court reporters. States such as New Mexico, New Jersey and Texas have found that the recording systems left much to be desired. Problems with inaudibles, blank tapes and overall system failures caused courtrooms in these states to return to the use of court reporters for major cases.

Kathleen Silva, President
Massachusetts Court Reporters Association

www.doriswong.com
"Like" us on Facebook