Fill out this form to email this article to a friend
In courtroom, high-tech can be high risk
Critics say the increased use of machines instead of court reporters places a higher priority on cost-cutting than fairness.
By CANDACE RONDEAUX
Published July 30, 2005
TAMPA - It was supposed to be a routine drug trial: judge, jury, attorneys, defendant. Witnesses testified. Motions were in play. Then justice went on the fritz, or at least the machine that was recording Corey Moore's trial did.
Moore had a string of drug convictions dating to 1996. The latest charge was possession of cocaine and tampering with evidence. This trial would end differently.
Hours after testimony began in Moore's case, Hillsborough Circuit Judge Lamar Battles learned the courtroom's new digital court reporting system had failed to capture the testimony of a key witness. The glitch led to a mistrial in Moore's May 3 drug case.
Moore was later convicted. But his case has raised questions: Is digital recording better than human reporting, or more trouble than it's worth?
Botched recordings, microphone mishaps, tapes of privileged attorney-client conversations - critics say those are all symptoms of a cash-strapped court system enamored of cost-cutting technology that has turned human court reporters into an endangered species and put fair trials at risk.
"It certainly impacts our ability to get justice in a trial setting," said Hillsborough County Public Defender Julianne Holt. "If you can't be assured that these (digital) court reporters are getting everything and making sure that everything is audible, how can you guarantee that the record is preserved?"
The concern led Holt to file a writ with the 2nd District Court of Appeal on Friday, contending the county's digital court reporting system is deeply flawed. In April, Holt had appealed in a letter to Hillsborough Chief Judge Manuel Menendez Jr. to put in place safeguards that would secure the integrity of attorney-client conversations in the courtroom. But Holt said she wasn't satisfied with the response she got and wants the higher court to remedy the situation.
"I don't believe that I can continue to operate as an attorney having my confidential conversations recorded," Holt said.
Friday's filing with the appellate court marks the first time a state official has mounted a formal legal challenge to an electronic court recording system. But the move could presage a trend, making the state ground zero in a debate over man vs. machine i n the nation's courtrooms.
Dozens of problems have been reported. In Naples, attorneys for a former U.S. Army warrant officer accused of having sex with a 16-year-old girl demanded a new trial because electronically recorded transcripts were garbled. In New Jersey, a switched-off microphone led to a two-hour gap in a liquor liability trial. The technical hiccup gave defense attorneys strong grounds to demand a new trial, according to a June New Jersey Law Journal report.
"It has been devastating and as a result attorneys - particularly those who have clients who are wealthy - bring their own court reporters," said Marianne Cammarota, a New Jersey court reporter and member of the National Court Reporters Association's board of directors.
Cammarota said court reporters and attorneys successfully fought a plan to bring electronic recording into New Jersey criminal courts 15 years ago. But electronic recording in civil courts has resulted in a two-tiered system of justice in the state's civil courts - one for the wealthy, another for the indigent, she added.
Hillsborough Circuit Court administrator Mike Bridenback said he would prefer to keep traditional court reporters, but he said it's just too expensive. It costs about $1.1-million a year to keep Hillsborough's 13 stenotypists on staff. Cutbacks will eliminate two of those positions this fall, he said.
While stenotypists earn about $61,000 a year, employees who monitor digital recordings earn about $30,000, Bridenback said. And a centralized monitoring system could eventually reduce staffing, he said.
Digital court reporting systems are in 27 Hillsborough courtrooms. Microphones placed around the courtroom feed audio into a computer program, while monitors annotate the input.
The systems have also been installed in Pinellas and Pasco County courtrooms, as in many of the state's 20 judicial circuits.
The cost of producing court records has ballooned in Florida in recent years. During the last fiscal year the state allocated about $25-million for court reporting. That figure will jump 8 percent to $27.4-million next year, said Claude Hendon, chief legislative analyst for the state Senate Justice Appropriations Committee.
Hendon said court reporting costs are the most expensive part of Florida's judiciary budget. After a 1998 amendment to Florida's constitution shifted the cost of running the courts from local counties to the state, legislators began looking for cuts.
The Hillsborough courthouse's $1.3-million a year contract with WUSF and Tampa's Record Transcripts Inc. to run the digital system is cheaper in the long run and more efficient, Menendez said.
"I'm sure there are some problems with it,but the reality is that we've been budgeted X amount of dollars," the chief judge said.
But judges and attorneys in Florida and elsewhere have criticized the move to electronic recording, saying glitches are just as costly to the public. Texas Judge Rick Davis said he decided to switch back to using a court reporter after he found numerous instances of inaccurate or incomplete records.
In one court case Davis presided over, a man accused of sexual assault nearly won a reversal because the digital record had been lost. In the end, the convicted felon decided not to pursue a retrial. But it was too close a call for Davis, who said the outcome in a retrial could have been more costly to the public if a guilty man had been set free. He now uses both a digital recorder and a live court reporter.
"You have to recognize the fact that ultimately there's some costs associated with justice that you cannot get around," Davis said. "We ought not to run roughshod over due process for the sake of a few dollars."
But a national shortage of traditional court reporters has made it increasingly difficult to staff the courts. There are about 50,000 to 60,000 court reporters nationwide, and only a fraction of those work in actual courtrooms, said NCRA spokesman Peter Wacht.
Certified court reporters are expected to be able to type a grueling 225 words a minute with a 95 percent accuracy rate upon graduation. Four of five don't make it through the two-year training program, Wacht said.
Those who survive get tempted by the private sector, where annual salaries can range from $60,000 to $100,000 year.
Florida State Court Administrator Lisa Goodner says courts will have to adjust. Greater exposure to digital court reporting should help judges and attorneys work out technical kinks she said.
Still, skeptics remain.
Self-described technophobe Hillsborough Circuit Judge Wayne Timmerman said he can't imagine life without his court reporter. Digital court reporting has not yet been introduced in his courtroom and he hopes it stays that way.
"Occasionally, she'll remember something about a case that I don't," Timmerman said. "She's invaluable to me. The thought of having her replaced with a machine is just unbelievable."
Candace Rondeaux can be reached at 813 226-3337 or rondeaux@sptimes.com
[Last modified July 30, 2005, 01:33:58]
Share your thoughts on this story
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
News
Fifty years ago, they were screwed-up kids sent to the Florida School for Boys to be straightened out. But now they are screwed-up men, scarred by the whippings they endured. Read the story and see a video and portrait gallery.
Print
Email story
Comment
Email editor
