72% of courts use stenographic court reporters “always” in criminal cases, according to judges surveyed, and 92% indicated they use stenographic court reporters “most of the time” in criminal cases. As the stakes get higher such as first degree felonies, complex civil litigation, and capital cases most courts even in states with digital recording they still turn to the stenographic reporter to capture the record.
Relevant to the above points was the verbatim response by one judge who said, “I review digital records transcribed by court clerks, and they are at times, horrible, mostly because of INFIRMITIES in the recording system.
. Despite any advancements that might have taken place with digital audio recording, the technology simply in not there to emulate a keyword search function.
-" imagine a judge looking for a single 30-second passage of testimony from a full court day’s proceedings who must fast forward/rewind ad nauseam until finding that single passage, which can be like looking for a needle in a haystack. Compare this with the keyword searching afforded to a judge with a court reporter’s electronic transcript, which takes mere seconds."
Courts must provide an unbiased, accurate, and verbatim record of proceedings. “There is nothing on the tape” or “ we can’t find the recording for that day” are unacceptable excuses in any court system/
The maelstrom of overlapping high-speed speech, ambient noise. Paper shuffling, coughing, voices with foreign accents, and variance of pitch of voices that surface in an electronic recording comint to render an electronic recording a poor substitute for a stenographic court reporter. Combine that with the ever present challenge of identifying who is speaking on a recording after the fact, and the inevitable end result is a degradation in the accuracy of the official record. Advances have been made in recording, but these challenges cannot be overcome. Only a skilled stenographic court reporter can guarantee a reliable, verbatim record. Guesswork is the unavoidable result of an off-site transcriptionist trying to piece together a transcript from an audio recording.
The risks and consequences of electronic recording to make the record are well established. A recording brings with it every bit of ambient noise in a courtroom-coughing, sneezing, sirens, doors slamming, paper rustling, and people talking over one another. The recordingcreates the need for someone to type every word on a word processor to create a transcript for review by the appellate court. PICTURE A 1960’S TYPING POOL WITH DOZENS OF PEOPLE TYPING AWAY ON TYPEWRITERS INSTEAD OF WORD PROCESSORS. RELYING ON AN ELECTRONIC RECORDING IS AKIN TO COURT SYSTEMS STEPPING BACK INTO THE 1960’S.
Only realtime court reporters are able to make legal proceedings available to the 36 million hearing impaired Americans, allowing full participation as jurors, litigants, spectators, or counsel. It is a necessity for the deaf and hearing-challenged , whose access to the judicial system is guaranteed under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
nwi.com | Posted: Sunday, November 28
In the Third District, appellant Atlantic States Cast Iron Pipe Company filed a motion to correct the record due to the approximately 10,000 inaudible and indiscernibles that riddle the trial and sidebar transcripts. The errors were not spelling, grammar, or punctuation errors, but substantive mistakes. According to the motion, no court reporter was present during the trial, and the audio discs taken of the proceedings were sent to a transcription service. The District Court pursued its own review of the transcripts and learned that several audio discs were missing from the trial. According to the motion, "Despite the District Court's best efforts, the record is not certifiable at this point." The appellants requested an extension to review the transcript once the District Court has produced a certified record.
GA Board No Longer Offers State Certification Testing
Posted From http://www.gccra.org/
Effective January 1, 2009, the Georgia Board of Court Reporting will no longer offer certification testing. Those desiring to test must take the NCRA or NVRA exam. Applicants must then apply to the Board of Court Reporting to acquire a Georgia certification. Both the NCRA and NVRA tests will be held in Georgia, but you may take the exam in any state you wish.
You may check the GCCRA calendar for testing dates in Georgia or you may visit the websites of NCRA and NVRA for testing schedules.
Eligibility for Certification
Any person who meets the following criteria is eligible for certification as a Georgia court reporter:
Chris.... News on my Court Reporting Career
I'm getting married soon, and I'm excited but busy planning and paying for everything. At the same time, I am in the early stages of starting my own court reporting business. I am continuing to work for the same court reporting firm as before, but I will be operating this as a side business which I hope will become very profitable.
My father, who believes very strongly in this court reporting course, purchased the Court Reporting at Home program for me my junior year of high school.
I was amazed how simplistic the lessons were and how quickly I was learning and progressing. I completed theory in roughly four months and passed the first four speed levels (60-120 wpm) in the next four months.
I passed the National Court Reporters Association's Written Knowledge Test while I was still in high school, and then I completed my 225s. At 18 years old I went from being a court reporting student to a professional court reporter. I was employed by a court reporting firm after interning with them for only two weeks.
I've even appeared on the local news on two occasions while reporting a hearing in court.
I would not have been able to get where I am today without the Court Reporting at Home program and