Blog Category: Arbitration

Wearable realtime is real. For reporters unfamiliar with this emerging technology, it enables a reporter’s realtime feed to appear on either one or both of the smartglass wearer’s lenses. The reporter need not be present with the smartglass wearer, thanks to the built-in microphone of the smartglasses.  Mirabai Knight demonstrated how she utilizes Google Glass with her deaf and hard-of-hearing clients to provide discrete captioning in previously unexplored scenarios, such as medical appointments, artwork critiques, networking mixers, and orientation events.

The reporter can be present remotely, while the realtime feed is being streamed to the smartglass wearer’s cell phone, which has either StreamText, CapApp or Text-on-Top loaded on it. From that device, the realtime feed then appears on the smartglass lenses, enabling the wearer to interact seamlessly with the hearing community.

Skeptics who question the need for a reporter’s involvement because they have Siri or Skyvi haven’t tried to speak naturally into Google Glass, as demonstrated in this video. Although one day it may be possible for a computer to accurately translate everything it “hears,” the issue for the wearable computing reader is that it does not filter out background noise, voices that the wearer does not intend to listen to, or commands proffered by others, as discussed in this Esquire article, which is exactly why we are so badly needed.

Although Google Glass wearers complain about headaches associated with either prolonged use and/or placement of the display, and the fact that some establishments are banning them from their premises due to privacy issues, this hasn’t yet been an issue for wearable realtime users, both because the wearer generally does not wear their smartglasses for extended periods, and only uses them as a captioning aid.

Vuzix M100, ReconJet and Google Glass are already available to the public, while MetaPro AR, Sony SmartGlass, LaForge ICIS, Atheer Sphere SDK, GlassUp and Lumus DK-40 are still in the works and will be on the market either by the end of 2014 or early 2015.

Smartglasses are no longer science fiction. They’re here right now and ready for realtime writers to embrace. A whole new realtime world awaits.

The National Court Reporters Association (NCRA) has put together a video game entitled, “Courting Disaster,” and it has done so because it teaches some very important lessons, beginning with “Dial D for Depo.”

This chapter of the game begins with the witness missing her flight to attend the deposition in an entirely different state, and she finds herself stuck in her originating town. Fortunately, she is able to make herself available remotely via videoconference, and the deposition proceeds after both counsel stipulate to the reporter’s authority to administer the oath. After the witness has completed her testimony, you receive a “WARNING” associated with your having placed that witness under oath, because counsel’s stipulation did not override that state’s laws governing oaths and affirmations. In plain English, what this means is that you may have broken the law, and that your license may be suspended or revoked. In South Dakota, you may be found guilty of having committed a misdemeanor, and fined up to $1,000.

The reason you may have broken the law is that in 18 states, there are clear and concise laws governing the need to have either the reporter or the notary administering the oath present with the witness.  In the 32 remaining states where there are no specific laws governing CSRs, the national notary laws are the guidance and dictate that the notary must be present with the witness in order to swear him/her in.

If you’re shocked – “Dial D for Depo” served its purpose. According to this NCRA article, in Texas, Wyoming, and Florida, the person administering the oath must be present with the witness, with one exception, and that relates to Florida police officers. Washington and Illinois require both the person administering the oath and reporting the testimony to be present with the witness. South Carolina and Missouri do offer counsel the opportunity to stipulate to remote oath administration, while Alaska allows for remote oath administration without stipulation.

The moral here is do your homework when it comes to administering oaths. This NCRA game is titled “Courting Disaster” for a reason. Play it. Learn from it, and don’t presume that because counsel stipulated to your authority that you necessarily have it.

Coping with witnesses who understand and speak English, yet carry heavy accents, can make for a stressful assignment. Here are some stress-reduction tips that are sure to make it easier:

1. Prior to going on the record, ask all counsel and the witness if you may place your laptop in front of the witness. If counsel agrees, take a minute to explain to everyone that by doing so the witness will be able to read what you heard him or her say, so that if the witness sees something that isn’t what they intended, they can clarify it immediately.
2. Inform counsel and the witness that you’ll need them to clarify at a break or at the end of the proceeding anything you may have translated incorrectly because it was unfamiliar to you or you didn’t understand the witness.
3. Turn your computer’s audio backup on. And if your steno machine has audio backup capability, turn that on as well.
4. Put on headphones that are either connected to the laptop that is sitting in front of the witness, or to a multi-directional mic also placed strategically in front of the witness.
5. Write exactly what you hear – even if that means you’re writing something that doesn’t sound like a word.
6. If you write something that doesn’t sound right, mark it and go back to it either at a break or after counsel’s examination.
7. Try not to interrupt the proceeding. Since you’ve explained that you’ll probably have some questions, with everyone present either on breaks or at the end of the proceeding, you’ll be able to scan from one quick mark to the next and ask your questions.
8. As you scan from question to question, give everyone present the opportunity to read and listen to the word or words you were unsure of, and replace each phonetically spelled word before you leave that assignment.
9. Do not insert nominatives the witness does not use or try to “fix” the witness’ syntax. Everyone present can hear that the witness’ English is broken. As a verbatim reporter, you are sworn to write every word spoken, not to interpret what you believe should have been spoken.
10. Here are some clues that may help you decipher what your witness is saying:

• “W’s” may be pronounced as “v’s,” and “th’s” may be pronounced as “t’s,” as discussed in the Frankfurt International School’s “Guide to Learning English.”
• Long “e’s” may be pronounced as short “i’s,”as mentioned in this Yahoo Answers post
• “S’s” and “z’s” may be confused, as is highlighted in this Google Groups forum.
• “L’s” may be mispronounced as “r’s,” and vice versa, as mentioned in this English Grammar4U online lesson.
• “S’s” may be pronounced as “sh’s,” as discussed in this ESL Pedagogy article.
• “H’s” may be dropped, as focused on in this Dialect Blog post.
• “T’s” may be pronounced as “d’s,” and vice versa, as differentiated in this English Pronunciation T & D video.
• “J’s” may be pronounced as “h’s,” as discussed in this Colorin Colorado article.
• “Ow’s” may be pronounced as “oh’s,” as mentioned in this IBM WebSphere English pronunciation article.
• Short “e’s” may be confused with short “i’s,” as highlighted in this American English Pronunciation lesson.
• Long “oh’s” may be pronounced as short “o’s” and “v’s” may be pronounced as “b’s,” as discussed in this ESL Pedagogy lesson.

Reporting witnesses with heavy accents isn’t easy, but using your laptop, audio backup, headphones and quick marks, and listening for the troublesome vowels and sounds listed above will certainly give you a leg up.

Taking videotaped depositions of de bene esse witnesses is not a new innovation.  What is new is the ability to display for the jury both the exhibit and the witness’ reaction to the exhibit simultaneously with interactive picture-in-picture technology.

Imagine the impact on your jury to see the witness’ comfort – or lack thereof – during his testimony. The power of this technology could well be just what you need to help the jury deliver a verdict in your favor.

Video technologists utilize Elmo high-definition document scanners and video mixers to integrate any and all media types, including video clips, electronic documents, MRIs, or any other demonstratives needed to create compelling, powerful picture-in-picture presentations that display with clarity each and every issue to be deliberated.

With Interactive Media Display, you never have to stop the proceedings and direct the jury’s attention to the exhibit on another screen or to a stack of papers, because it’s all displayed clearly and concisely alongside the video of the witness.

Enhanced video mixing and recording of the laptop screen is available, as are projectors and speakers.  A good trial technology team utilizing this software can catapult your case into the 21^st Century, which is exactly what today’s tech-savvy juries expect. Don’t let your jury down. Engage them with interactive media display and provide them with the “experience” they seek.

You’re a court reporter. When you first launched yourself into this career, you knew court reporters worked long hours, but you probably didn’t realize just how many it took to get the job done.

Now that you’ve been working awhile, your dictionary is robust, your writing is improving all the time, and you’re beginning to wonder if you’re ready to hire a scopist. If you can answer “yes” to these questions, then you are:

1. Do I write clean notes?
2. Do I spend my evenings and weekends either editing or proofing?
3. Does my life revolve around deadlines?
4. Do I want to have a life outside of work?

Now that you’re ready, the next question is how to go about finding a scopist you can trust. With all the scoping services listed online, as with any other service, start by asking colleagues for referrals.  Also, there are scopist groups on both Facebook and LinkedIn.  Join these groups and let them know you’re looking for a scopist, what your requirements are, and provide an email address where you can be reached.

Once you’ve found a scopist, don’t immediately throw all your work at them. Bring them into your world slowly. Take some small jobs, send them the format, the insert files, a PDF of the exhibits, and the steno/audio files. When you get those initial jobs back, proofread them carefully. Keep the lines of communication flowing between you and your scopist. If (s)he’s editing something differently from the way you’d like it, tell him/her.  Communication is the key to a successful partnership.

After you’ve used that scopist awhile, if you want to begin increasing your workload and relying upon him or her more often, ask. Don’t assume they’re available, because they may well be juggling other reporters’ work. Finding a scopist who will work for you exclusively so that you can take all-day every-day jobs may take awhile, but when you find “that perfect fit,” it can be life changing.

Keith Shreckengast, a reporter with Planet Depos, hailed his scopist, Darlene Williams, as being a “life changer.” As he explained their relationship, they use Eclipse’s Connection Magic, Version 6, to connect with one another live throughout the entire course of the proceedings. In fact, Darlene can hear everything that is being said as she’s seeing Keith’s steno stream into her home office. In many cases, by the time Keith walks away from his assignment, Darlene has completed the transcript, ready for Keith to hand over as a rough draft; final transcript shortly thereafter. All Keith has to do is toggle through her questions and do a quick proof. As Keith explained the pre- and post-Darlene era, “I now have a life!”

A side-by-side comparison of the cost-to-value proposition of having just such a reporter/scopist relationship might include the following: Reporter A takes 200 pages per day for five days straight, totaling 1000 pages. That reporter pays his scopist $1.00/pg, but the reporter earns $3.00/pg for the original and $1.50 for the copy sale.  Although the check written by the reporter to the scopist was $1,000, that reporter earned $3,500. Reporter B, on the other hand, went out on Monday, Wednesday and Friday because he scopes his own work, taking only 600 pages, earning just $2,700. In addition to earning a solid $800 less, Reporter B will lose half of his weekend editing Friday’s job. Over the course of one month alone, Reporter B earned $3200 less than Reporter A; and over one year’s time, his lost earning potential amounts to a whopping $38,400!

Life’s waiting for you. What are you waiting for?