Print

Email story

Comment

Letter to the editor

Court reporters turn digital

Pinellas has launched a new digital court reporting system to record lawyers, judges and witnesses. In Pasco, digital reporting is at least a year away.

By WILLIAM R. LEVESQUE
Published July 4, 2004

LARGO - For decades, they sat unobtrusively in criminal proceedings, typing into a special device to record every word spoken in the courtroom as they make the court's official record.

The work of the official court reporter is essential. They make transcripts for appeals and judges and lawyers and, sometimes, for just the curious.

"I've been told ever since I was a child that I would be replaced by a tape recorder someday," said Donna Kanabay, a court reporter for 27 years and president of Kanabay & Kanabay court reporters in St. Petersburg.

Now, the machines are taking over.

Last week, Pinellas finished its launch of a new $440,000 digital court reporting system, using eight microphones in each of the criminal courthouse's 22 felony and misdemeanor courtrooms to record lawyers, judges and witnesses. The sound is stored digitally on computer.

The circuit joins at least a half dozen around Florida, including Hillsborough County, that have already gone digital to some degree. In Pasco, digital reporting is at least a year away.

Court administrators also have hired 23 people to work the system that replaces dozens of court reporters for a majority of proceedings in criminal court.

Court administrators hope to keep using live reporters in felony trials. But they say they will only do so if reporters, who are continually in short supply, are available. The only proceedings where live reporters will be guaranteed is death penalty trials and a handful of other proceedings, such as hearings over the termination of parental rights.

"I think this is inevitable and it's progress," said Ron Stuart, a spokesman for Pinellas-Pasco's judicial circuit. "It's going to be a more accurate system. We certainly have no plans to go back."

The move is expected to eventually save money, though how much and when remains unclear. But Stuart said the impetus has less to do with money than a chronic shortage of live court reporters over the last several years.

Court reporting firms said nobody is really out of a job because of the switch. With demand for reporters still exceeding supply, there is ample work for most everyone in other areas, especially civil court.

Heather Donaho, vice president of the court reporting firm Robert A. Dempster & Associations, said, "There's so much work available, we feel there is more than enough for everybody."

Not everyone is completely happy with the new system. Pinellas-Pasco Public Defender Bob Dillinger said transcripts produced from sound recordings by court employees are often inaccurate, frequently misidentifying lawyers or failing to list everything spoken in court.

Even if court reporters aren't really out of work, none of them will say the machines are superior to live reporters, who can ask for names or stop testimony to have mumbling witnesses repeat themselves.

"The best voice-to-text machine that anyone ever developed is the live human being," said Rick Greenspan, Florida Court Reporters Association president.

Another area of concern for some is how the sound recordings will be treated as a public record.

Both Dillinger and State Attorney Bernie McCabe say they want access to the original sound recordings produced by the system, not just transcripts of proceedings. Transcripts are produced by court employees listening from the sound recording.

The circuit's chief judge hasn't yet decided whether he will release the sound. If he doesn't, Dillinger said, it would make the circuit the first in the state to refuse to do so.

"The sound is public," Dillinger said, "and if the public wants it, the public should be able to get it."

McCabe said transcripts are more expensive to produce than simply providing a CD with a recording. In many cases, he said, a transcript isn't necessary.

"I think we should have the ability to get the sound in the interest of saving taxpayer money," McCabe said. "It's a public courtroom and what goes on in there is public business. I think the public should be able to know what it is."

But Stuart said Circuit Judge David Demers, chief judge for the Pinellas-Pasco circuit, is considering concerns that many of the words in the sound recording might be off the record or otherwise unsuitable for release.

For example, Stuart said, the microphones are so sensitive they might be able to pick up attorney-client communications, even if they are innocently whispered.

"Judge Demers wants everything to be as open as possible," Stuart said. Demers was unavailable to comment. "As the same time, he doesn't want to get into a situation where he is breaking the rules or the law."

Stuart said that, even if the sound is released, court officials might have to go back to edit out recorded material that should not be released.

"Those microphones can pick up a lot of conversations," he said.

McCabe bristled at the idea of editing sound. He said judges can mute the sound when all parties agree to go off the record. Attorneys also have mute buttons at tables for the defense and prosecution.

"My lawyers can't say, "Never mind, I don't want that in there,"' McCabe said. "And I don't see why the judges should be any different. I can't say, "Erase that.' I don't get this paranoia that's going on" about the digital system.

In Hillsborough, the sound recordings are a public record, available to anyone willing to buy a CD. Hillsborough doesn't use digital court reporting in all its courtrooms, as does Pinellas.

Pinellas County Judge Sonny Im said he hadn't considered that the sound might be available as a public record. He said few people in misdemeanor court ever request transcripts.

"I have to think about that," Im said when asked whether he supported the release of the sound. "I think the technology is certainly the trend of the future."

Court officials also defend the accuracy of the system, saying bugs will be inevitable but that it has worked well elsewhere.

Stuart and Ken Nelson, the court's technology officer, said lawyers will have to get used to clearly identifying themselves before speaking rather than rely on a live court reporter who already knows them.

As for accuracy, Stuart said, the microphones accurately pick up everything spoken before the judge. And if there are any questions or doubts about a transcript, court employees can always go back to check the original sound recording, he said.

Signs on courtroom doors also will warn visitors that they should not expect privacy in the courtroom and that their words could be recorded.

"I have no doubt that it will all become second nature to everyone here," Nelson said.

Court employees work in a control room that looks a bit space age, as they monitor up to four courtrooms, electronically marking recordings at critical points for easy retrieval later. Testimony can be replayed in the courtroom over speakers after a message is relayed to the control room.

The digital recordings will be saved for 10 years. And Nelson said data cannot be lost with recordings being backed-up electronically.

Abdiel Ortiz, the chief technology officer in Hillsborough courts, said his county uses a digital court reporting system made by a different company than in Pinellas, which purchased its system from a Massachusetts company called CourtSmart Digital Systems Inc.

"We've gone through growth pains," said Ortiz, who said Hillsborough's first steps into digital reporting began nearly a decade before Pinellas. "It's been something of a learning curve. Now, the technology is yielding terrific results."

[Last modified July 4, 2004, 01:00:39]