As technology changes and businesses adapt to advancements in operations evolving advancements can bring, one industry that's been able to traverse this aspect of modern business quite well has been that of court reporters. From creating real-time deposition transcripts, providing videoconferencing services and even live captioning major events, court reporters have always been in demand. Conni Psaros was recently interviewed by the Patriot Ledger and explains more on the evolution of court reporters.

In the interview, Psaros explains how the technology of court reporting has changed throughout the years, from 1977, when the first computer-aided transcription was made available, to the present, where court reporters are able to transcribe depositions and hearings verbatim on a steno machine that can be hooked up to a computer which provides instant translations of the transcripts.

In addition, the use of videoconferencing technology has further propelled the industry into an even higher demand.

"Videoconferencing is a growing market in the court reporting industry," Psaros told the source. "With programs like Skype, a reporter can now bring a laptop with camera to a site and counsel can depose a witness remotely, saving travel time and money. Cloud technology is playing a bigger role in how files are shared … The iPad is taking the legal market by storm. There is an interactive software app that counsel can download for free and use to receive the testimony immediately from the reporter."

As this blog has reported in the past, videoconferencing is becoming an increasingly hot commodity in not only legal systems, but in almost every public and private sector industry. As court reporters become more technologically advanced in the way they transcribe depositions and hearings, lawyers in the Midwest may want to partner with Wisconsin court reporters to ensure they get the most accurate deposition transcripts. 

In connection with a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Midwest Environmental Advocates (MEA), the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (DOT) has been accused of violating civil rights laws. The initial lawsuit claims that DOT's reconstruction of a major highway section called the Zoo Interchange is discriminatory against minority groups because it does not consider public transportation improvements as part of the reconstruction.

This lawsuit is in accordance with the results of a recent investigation by the Federal Highway Administration's Office of Civil Rights that found that DOT has not been following mandated federal civil rights rules for at least seven years, according to the Milwaukee Sentinel Journal.

In addition, the investigation said "the violations are of even greater concern in the light of the repeated comments, concerns and complaints our organizations and others have submitted … about [the department's] failure to address the overall discriminatory nature of its planning and project selection, actions that clearly and repeatedly disadvantage communities of color in southeastern Wisconsin."

Also, the plaintiff's final 28-page report listed that DOT would often devote it's anti-discrimination efforts on hiring disabled staff members or contracting "disadvantaged businesses," rather than focusing on the overall picture of how its operations affect minorities in the area.

The report states that the department has 90 days to become compliant with federal rules.

While the initial lawsuit between DOT and the ACLU is still ongoing, the recent findings will surely complicate the depositions, hearings and trial. In order to effectively fold these findings into the trials, lawyers may want to partner with Wisconsin court reporters that can produce high-quality deposition transcripts.

As reported by this blog, many court systems and other government services are beginning to implement videoconferencing services into their operations. These technological advances have allowed many counties and cities to save funds during a down economy. One of the most recent examples comes from Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.

When the Montgomery Court system implemented videoconferencing services in 2001 it saved $136,000 from inmate transportation costs, according to the Times Herald, a local paper. The year after, the county saved an additional $50,000 holding over 1,197 hearings via videoconferencing services.

"I anticipate growth in all areas of videoconferencing in the upcoming year because the program has now become an integral part of the daily court routine," Sharon Drach, the county's video technology manager, told the source. "Cost-saving benefits, courthouse safety and outside revenue are concrete benefits of the success of videoconferencing in the courtroom."

According to the source, it costs the court system $193.40 roundtrip to transport an inmate to a courthouse for a hearing. This cost includes both gas and personnel.

From then on the savings just snowballed, with hearings and depositions being telecommunicated, the county saved $1.1 million in 2011 alone. As many as 2,365 videoconferences took place. Similar to the Philadelphia court system's use of videoconferencing, this has allowed Montgomery County judges and lawyers to accomplish more during a typical workday for a smaller overall cost than before.

As videoconferencing is steadily on the rise in court systems nationwide, lawyers and judges in the Midwest may want to partner with Wisconsin court reporters that offer video deposition services. By doing so, they will be able to efficiently meet with clients and other parties.

As reported by this blog, there are many advantages to being a court reporter, one of which is recording historical events such as major court cases and other cultural instances that are televised.

With the advent of closed captioning, court reporters have taken on a new role in the industry – providing captions for broadcasts. Digital broadcasting and its burgeoning use has caused the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to create a mandate that requires some material on the internet to be captioned, furthering the dependence on reliable, real-time court reporters.

With the new FCC regulations becoming effective on September 30, many court reporters will have their hands full between writing deposition transcripts and providing captioning for digital programming.

The SheppardMullin FCC Law Blog has clarified the new law in a recent post. According to the source, the regulations do not apply to programming exclusively shown on the internet. It is only required for broadcasts that are on both mediums.

In addition, the "live and near-live" real-time captioning requirement was created for the "simulcast retransmissions of live broadcast content," such as major sporting events. While the rest of the regulations go in effect at the end of the month, broadcasters have until March 30, 2013 to gear up for this change.

Also, only full-length programming is affected by the new law, not "clips" of programs. Furthermore, "consumer-generated" content is also not affected by the new mandate. Therefore, if a consumer posts a video on YouTube it does not need to be captioned, whereas if NBC reposts entire episodes of television shows on the site that were broadcasted on television, they must have a caption option.

With the regulations soon to set in, broadcasters in the Midwest may want to partner with Wisconsin court reporters that can provide real-time reporting for online captioning services in time to meet deadline.

As reported by this blog, the use of videoconferencing is quickly gaining popularity across all industries – not just the legal system. This includes medicine, which is why residents of Ware County, Georgia can now see a physician despite the nearest doctor being a four-hour drive away in Atlanta, according to Bloomberg.

With videoconferencing equipment set up in its schools, the county is at an advantage compared to most rural areas. The source cited the National Rural Health Association, which has data showing that nearly 25 percent of Americans live in rural areas but only 9 percent of physicians work outside of major cities.

In addition, the association's data highlights that rural residents are 4 percent more likely to be uninsured than workers in metropolises. Complicating that, these residents are also more likely to carry risky diseases, such as diabetes, arthritis and bronchitis, which should be handled by medical specialists.

"As we're looking toward the future, everybody knows the system is strained," Kenneth Krakaur, senior vice president of Sentara, which partnered with MDLive to provide medical videoconferencing services in the Southeast U.S., told the source. "We live in a 'there's an app for that' kind of society, so this fits well."

This may be why, according to WinterGreen Research, the telemedicine industry is expected to grow by $2.5 billion by 2018. This is up from the $736 million it showed this past year. But, these services aren't just for medicinal purposes.

As videoconferencing expands into more industries, it's clear that its practicality and efficiency is beneficial to nearly all professions. Lawyers in the Midwest may want to partner with Milwaukee court reporters that offer videoconferencing services to conduct more efficient depositions or hearings.

Hurricane Isaac has had an effect on more than just levees and dams. During its development as a tropical storm, the squall was set to pass over Cuba, causing the looming trial of the five alleged terrorists that organized the September 11 attacks to be disrupted.

An internet outage and the threat of the Hurricane initially created a 24-hour delay in the trial,  which led to an outright cancellation. The group of lawyers and court reporters were unable to even start the pretrial hearing as all parties were flown back state-side.

According to CNN, the internet outage was caused by a freight train accident near Baltimore which damaged necessary fiber-optic cables and eliminated internet service going to the military base.

Although the hearings may have gotten off to a bumpy start, the actual trials aren't projected to begin until 2016, according to the Telegraph.

"The prosecution has been preparing for this case for 11 years," James Connell, a defense lawyer in the case, told the source. "It makes sense that now that they have gotten around to bringing this case that there needs to be time for all of the information they have spent 11 years digesting that the defense needs time to digest that."

All of this information needs to be recorded by real-time court reporters. 

From a small deposition hearing of Al Capone to providing real-time captioning of the Olympic Games, this blog has reported on how court reporters have had a front row seat into some of the greatest trials in American culture. As this is a military trial, court reporters will be needed to record the depositions, hearings and trials of the five alleged terrorists in Guantanamo Bay.

As important as it is for the reporters at Gitmo to provide accurate deposition transcripts for the Department of Justice, it's just as important for any other litigation. In order to get the best transcripts available, lawyers in the Midwest may want to partner with Wisconsin court reporters.

In a recent case against a Kansas City Catholic bishop, controversy has risen over one witness's deposition transcript and her request to clarify a statement she made, according to the Kansas City Star.

Julie Creech, the computer systems manager at the Diocese of Kansas City-St.Joseph, was brought in to testify on her encounter with Bishop Robert Finn after she found "lewd photographs of young girls" on the Reverend Shawn Ratigan's laptop.

According to Creech, when she confronted the Bishop about these photographs, he said, "Sometimes boys will be boys," according to the deposition transcripts.

But, according to her lawyer John Gromowsky, Creech was mistaken and "hoped to acknowledge and correct her mistaken testimony." This notion was granted with seemingly little wiggle room, according to the source.

John Osgood, a former federal prosecutor who is now a criminal defense lawyer, told the source that the correction of deposition transcripts are usually limited to smaller issues such as punctuation, grammar or if the court reporter heard something incorrectly. It is not normally customary for an individual to clarify or change the transcript.

"She can't say, 'I want to clarify the deposition or change the deposition,'" said Osgood.

But, if Creech does take the correct measures to clarify or submit to more deposition questions, according to the source, it could create a "prior inconsistent statement," which makes her an easy target as a less than credible witness.

It's clear that having the most accurate deposition transcripts is critical to a case. If lawyers wish to create a detailed account of any depositions or proceedings, they may want to partner with Wisconsin court reporters who also offer video deposition services.

By using both conventional court reporting and video services, investigators and lawyers will have a comprehensive account of exactly who said what.

When the general public is well-informed and educated on the way of the courts and legal system, it's easier for all of those involved in the legal sphere – from judges, attorneys to court reporters – to do their jobs. That's a guiding principle behind a presentation recently held in Madison that was sponsored by the State Bar of Wisconsin.

The Our Courts program – developed in Colorado – offers residents with nonpartisan and accessible information on the operations and functions of the courts, in an effort to better educate the public on the nuances of the legal system. This is designed to combat what State Bar Public Education Coordinator Marsha Varvil-Weld describes as "sensational" media coverage, which is often the only source of court information available for the general public.

"That makes general and accurate information about the courts difficult to find. Our Courts presentations address the role of fair and impartial courts in applying and preserving the rule of law. The Our Courts program will fill a need that no one else has been adequately addressing," said Varvil-Weld in a report on the State Bar website.

In August, a session was held with local judges, attorneys and legal professionals to discuss the merits and application of such a program in Wisconsin. State Bar officials hope to roll out the educational forum to the public in 2013, said the report.

The State Bar said it recognized a need for this type of education in 2008, when a survey of Wisconsin residents showed a general lack of knowledge regarding the structure and processes of the state court system. With a better-informed public, local judges, attorneys and court reporters might encounter less skepticism and more thoughtful analysis of legal proceedings from the general discourse.