Comparisons Between Court Reporting Methods

Comparisons: Court Reporting Methods

There are several ways to preserve a record of court cases, depositions, or other proceedings:

Preparing a synopsis, a paraphrase, or taking minutes of what occurred;

"Taking down" what was said in handwritten shorthand notations
— once the only method available, now rarely seen;

Using equipment, such as a Stenograph machine, to manually type phonetic code symbols representing what was said;

Repeating everything that is said into a shielded recording microphone, such as a Stenomask — also called voice-writing when performed with speech-recognition software; and

Using electronic equipment to directly capture an exact, live sound recording of what was actually said in the real world.

Obviously, taking minutes or jotting down a paraphrase does not produce a verbatim record.
For example, Mr. Smith made a hearsay objection which the court overruled recounts what happened, but does not reveal what was actually said.

However, each of the remaining methods — written shorthand, Stenograph machine shorthand, Stenomask / Voice-Writing, and E‑Reporting — can preserve a verbatim record. Each has advantages and disadvantages, strengths and weaknesses. Each is highly dependent upon the experience, skill level, and dedication of individual practitioners.

Those who say, I do it this way, and my way is always best, reveal either a lack of technical sophistication or a self-interested bias — perhaps both.


Considerations					Observations
Daily or even hourly transcription is available.	Yes	Yes	Yes	All methods can produce expedited transcripts.
"Real-time" transcript is available.	No	Yes	Yes	"Real-time" transcripts normally require subsequent editing. Not all practitioners perform in this mode, whether using Stenotype or Stenomask equipment.
Preserves speakers' words, in their own real-world, real-life voices, at a professional level of sound quality.	Yes	No	No	When it is included as an integral part of the official record, E-Reporting permits independent third-party verification at any time that what appears in a transcript is, in fact, what was said. Many machine- and voice-writing reporters record audio privately as a fail-safe measure, in an attempt to ensure that inadvertently omitted words / phrases, or incorrectly noted names / terms can be corrected before release of a final transcript. Of course, with so much attention absorbed in code-typing or word-repeating, little time is available to attend to audio functions. Such personal recordings are rarely filed along with transcripts, so are not typically made available to judges, court clerks, attorneys, or other parties for independent verification of transcript integrity. Single-channel, single-microphone recordings — sometimes called "all-room" or "room-wide" — cannot produce the sound quality and voice / speaker separations available with professional multi-channel systems. Plugging such auxiliary backup devices into public address systems may increase volume, but does nothing to improve (or even ensure) intelligibility — and in any case, is unrelated to voice separation issues.
Preserves foreign language speakers' native languages AND interpreters' translations.	Yes	No	No	Audio recording permits permanent and independent verification that translations are accurately rendered, both from and into English.
Reveals speakers' intonations, emotions, accents, speed and manner of delivery.	Yes	No	No	Witness credibility issues are most reliably determined when fact-finders can consult real-world testimony, as opposed to merely reading a filtered reflection of that testimony on paper or on a computer screen. Hearing their actual voices best reveals whether people are expressing significant emotion, or are speaking sarcastically, jokingly, sadly, rapidly, haltingly, etc.
Accommodates simultaneous speech.	Yes	No	No	E-Reporting's multi-channel voice separations distinguish multiple speakers even when they are talking at the same time.
Rapid-fire speakers can "outrun" the words-per-minute skill level of the reporter.	No	Yes	Yes	"Words per minute" capability is not a limiting factor for E-Reporters — and is, in fact, an irrelevant consideration.
Verbal meanings are filtered through (and limited by) the reporter's skill or knowledge level.	No	Yes	Yes	E-Reporting produces an exact record, whether or not the reporter has ever heard the words / phrases before, or can transmit them coherently.
Read- or playback of any prior portion of the record is available.	Yes	Yes	Yes	Digital E-Reporting is particularly suited to this need, as returning to any prior point in the record is instantaneous by merely selecting the reporter's annotation — and live recording continues even while the E‑Reporter is performing the playback itself.
Is a suitable occupation for those with hand, motor control, or postural / positional challenges.	Yes	Yes	No	All reporting methods demand careful attention, but E‑Reporting does not add the ongoing stress of mechanically or vocally keeping up with and trying to simultaneously reproduce all that is said.
Reportage can be maintained during a full court day without undue stress or fatigue.	Yes	No	No	E-Reporters are not required to maintain a strict posture for long periods of time and are not at a high risk for repetitive stress injuries such as carpal tunnel syndrome. Sustained performance pressures are significantly reduced.
Can be learned without extended physical / mechanical training at a vocational school.	Yes	Yes?	No	E-Reporting skills are usually well honed within 3 - 6 months, voice-writing in 9 months to a year, and machine stenography in 3 or more years.
Product of immediate value to those who understand but do not read English fluently, whether dyslexic or foreign-born.	Yes	No	No	Written transcripts, no matter how quickly produced, convey no information to non-readers, whether presented on paper or on computer screens.
Product of immediate value to the visually impaired or blind.	Yes	Rare	Rare	Direct audio recording is the simplest way, by far, to accommodate the needs of the visually impaired or fully blind. Voice-writing or "real-time" reporting requires voice-synthesizing software add-ons — or the capacity to produce versions in Braille.
Product of immediate value to the deaf.	No	Yes	Yes	Assumes "real-time" transcription is provided.
Product of immediate value to the hearing impaired.	Yes?	Yes	Yes	Assisted listening at a higher volume can be provided via wireless devices; otherwise, "real-time" transcripts need to be available.

close window