Video Court Reporting Brings More Benefits Than Drawbacks

Traditionally, depositions are taken by a deposition reporter and turned into official depositions manuscripts. However, as the legal profession adopts more technological approaches, more attorneys are choosing to video record depositions instead of relying on written depositions only. While written depositions are still produced in the case of video court reporting, video court reporting is often viewed as a more convincing evidentiary tool than a deposition transcript for two reasons. For one, video provides a more compelling version of a witness's statements if the witness cannot be present. Instead of hearing someone else read the witness's words, a jury can hear the witness in their own voice and also pick up on subjective aspects of the witness's delivery, such as sincerity, incredulity, a sense of resign, etc. The second reason why video depositions are preferred is a corollary of the first reason: attorneys and the jury can evaluate the sincerity of the witness' words based on the tone of voice and body language that witness' display.

But even as video reporting possesses some obvious advantages over traditional court reporting, it also possesses some drawbacks. For one, video reporting often places the deposition reporters at a disadvantage by preventing them from interrupting the witness when his or her responses are verbally unclear, as an interruption is viewed as compromising a "clean" video record. Therefore, to produce a clear, accurate manuscript, deposition reporters must amend transcripts by checking them against a videographer's audio files. Another disadvantage of video reporting for deposition reporters is that it often takes longer to produce a final transcript. Because a transcript must match every audio aspect of a video-including false starts, stutters, sighs, etc. - checking the manuscript against the video to ensure that every sound was transcribed can take significant extra time. A third disadvantage of video reporting is that attorneys are changed by the hour for video edits. When depositions turn into drawn out affairs due to witness' vague responses, attorneys often choose to have the most revealing parts of a transcript presented separately.

Even with its drawbacks, video court reporting has emerged as an optimal way to convey what transcripts usually can't: the true emotional state of a witness as he or she gave testimony. Indeed, just as video reporting can benefit the prosecution by showing the sincerity of its witnesses, it can also benefit the defense by showing a prosecution witness to be arrogant, vengeful, shallow, etc. In the early days of deposition video, the acoustics of courtrooms sometimes made a witness's words unclear. But today, attorneys can implement litigation support software that shows a streaming written record of witness' speech below their video. For attorneys that wish to retain the services of a reputable video court reporter or deposition reporter, consulting with a litigation support services provider is the best option.