Video depositions can be a very productive technology tool in an attorney’s toolbox. When a witness can’t testify live at a proceeding, a video deposition allows the witness’s testimony to be recorded on video and in a paper transcript.   Video depositions provide several advantages.  Here are just a few:

• Demonstrates a witness’s body language
• Holds the jury’s attention when played back in court
• Brings a witness to trial who cannot attend in person
• Saves costly expert witness fees and travel expenses
• Allows visual view of physical evidence

Once you know you need to schedule a video deposition, how do you go about finding a good quality videographer and court reporter?  You need to know what questions to ask when you call to schedule a video deposition.  Here are a few areas you will want to ask about to ensure you are hiring a good professional legal videographer who has the specialized skills you will need.

6 Questions to Ask Before Scheduling a Video Deposition

1.      Are your videographers certified?

The National Court Reporters Association offers a certification for videographers called the Certified Legal Video Specialist. Videographers with this certification undergo specialized training and are prepared to offer specific services required for legal video.

2.      Do you provide the ability to view exhibits on camera?

Multi-camera taping allows the viewing of both deponent and deposition exhibits at the same time.  The video screen should show the two side by side, replicating an in-person deposition where you would have the exhibits available to review.  With side-by-side viewing, you will be able to see exactly what is being referenced by the witness.

3.      Can you provide courtroom video playback?

If you may wish to play the deposition in the courtroom, you will want to hire a videographer who will come in at the scheduled time and play back the deposition for the judge and jury.  This eliminates you having to put together the technology you will need for playback.  A good videographer will take care of this for you.

4.      Do you provide post-production editing and digitizing?

Post-production editing and digitizing gives you a couple of useful advantages.  The video and transcript will be in sync. On playback, this will allow you to search text within the video. Also, when playing a synced video, you are giving the viewers the chance to see, hear and read the testimony. This reaches each juror on multiple cognitive levels and holds their attention.

5.      Is quality audio captured?

Whether you’re using the video for playback at court or simply for your own trial preparation, good quality audio is a must.  Be sure your videographer uses high quality microphones and equipment to reproduce the audio in the video.

6.      Can I view the deposition as streaming realtime video?

Streaming realtime video allows you the ability to view the video on a computer at most locations that have an internet connection.  The realtime feature means you will be able to be present by video at the deposition as it is happening.

By using these simple questions, you will discover the quality and knowledge level of the videographer you are about to hire.  If a videographer has trouble answering these questions, you may want to consider looking elsewhere. 

Most court reporting firms have a videographer in-house, or have one they have worked with in the past and can recommend.  By using a videographer suggested by your court reporter, you are likely to find one who is experienced in the special needs of legal video depositions.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Jane Jones is a court reporter, Co-Founder and Co-Owner of Brown & Jones Reporting, Inc. Connect with her on LinkedIn and Google+.

The idea has an obvious appeal. Getting a typed transcript and a video record of a deposition without having to pay the wages for two professionals to be present sounds great. In fact, it sounds too good to be true.

Having a single individual attempt to perform both services simultaneously may result in the creation of a record that is incomplete or does not conform to existing professional standards.

The most valuable aspect of having a trained videographer behind the camera is that he or she can monitor the equipment and ensure the recording is running smoothly at all times. The same level of performance simply cannot be guaranteed when one person is charged with controlling the camera while creating a verbatim transcript.

The creation of a complete video record depends on the successful coordination of multiple moving parts and it is critical that all equipment is set up properly at the outset of the interview session. Failure to meet existing standards for legal videography could jeopardize the utility of the record.

The set of standards for video depositions developed by the Certified Legal Video Specialist (CLVS) Council of the National Court Reporters Association includes 62 specific rules. For example, videographers are required to deploy at least four working microphones at all times during a deposition and ensure that the deponent and any exhibits being presented are in clear view of the camera.

The CLVS standards also stipulate that a "videographer shall continuously monitor the video recording" and the audio output during the deposition. It would be nearly impossible for an individual to follow this rule while creating a verbatim transcript.

For lawyers working on cases in Wisconsin, nothing ensures that a comprehensive record of your depositions will be created like working with both a certified court reporter and a trained legal videographer.

Depositions are necessary steps in the legal process. These meetings help establish the case and introduce beginning information to be built upon in court. They also often require a certain amount of preparation and execution in order to be effective, reported the Orlando Sentinel.

According to the source, it's critical that witnesses recognize that they cannot win a case at a deposition. While it's important that they tell the truth and fully answer the questions, they should abstain from telling the entire story and potentially divulging too much information.

Which is the second consideration – to only answer what has been asked. Once a question is completely answered, witnesses should stop talking. By giving lengthy answers or rambling on, the deposed can give the opposing side more information that they need to know, which can be harmful for their side of the case. The old adage stands here that silence is golden.

But, in order to avoid revealing too much, it's essential that witnesses think before they answer each question. By doing so, they can plan a response that truthfully satisfies the query while also maintaining any privileged or damaging information.

In addition to those three key aspects, the deposed should be sure to never guess the answer to a question. "I don't know," or "I can't remember," are acceptable responses. They should be sure to never volunteer any information, get angry  or disclose anything their attorney told them before the deposition.

For litigators, another onus lies on their shoulders to ensure that they are able to acquire the most accurate deposition transcripts. By partnering with Wisconsin court reporters that also offer video deposition services, lawyers can ensure they get the most comprehensive transcripts available.

With the advances made in video conferencing technology, attorneys now find it easier than ever to hold depositions, court hearings or consultations with clients in far-flung locales. When paired with skilled court reporters and certified legal videographers, video conferencing makes it effortless for attorneys to conduct a long-distance court deposition.

The technology has rendered distance – once a chief challenge to attorneys and other professionals who needed to connect with clients that were not locally based – hardly an obstacle at all. Cost is now also less of a challenge, with affordable and high-quality legal deposition services available to more legal professionals.

However, a number of professionals are also maximizing video conferencing for its ability to unite large groups of spectators easily, encourage information sharing and project work, and improve collaboration.

Experts in non court-related industries also espouse these benefits. In a column for Campus Technology, Ruth Reynard described the often-untapped advantages of video conferencing technology. Reynard is an education consultant and an executive with the Daymar Colleges Group, which specializes in career training.

Reynard wrote that professionals in her industry have increasingly found video conferencing technology to be an invaluable instrument for instructional sessions. Particularly in an age during which consumers have access to high-quality streaming video from smartphones and tablet computers, video conferencing offers access to career training and lectures that once was only a pipe dream.

Law firms in Wisconsion can take advantage of this burgeoning technology by establishing a partnership with a leading provider of certified legal deposition services. With professional legal videographers available at a moment's notice, attorneys have the resources needed to contact and communicate with clients, associates and partners a world away.
 

Ask any lawyer or court reporter – missing a deposition is taken very seriously in courts of law. While some scenarios may prevent individuals from being able to attend a deposition, these events should still maintain precedence above any other. The consequences of this are exemplified through a few very public figures.

Professional boxer Floyd Mayweather is being sued by competitor Manny Pacquiao for skipping a deposition last year, which was part of a much larger lawsuit for defamation against Mayweather who, allegedly, accused Pacquiao of using performance enhancing drugs.

Mayweather was seen at a nightclub in Atlanta when he was supposed to in a deposition  in Las Vegas. According to Yahoo!, Judge Larry Hicks has ordered Mayweather to pay Pacquiao's attorney fees and court costs, which amount to roughly $190,000.

Another example comes from Oakland, California where Mayor Jean Quan canceled an all-day deposition hearing on August 30 for September 25. Her reasoning was that she had to appear before a last-minute City Council meeting.

When asked by the San Francisco Gate whether Quan plans on attending the next deposition date she said, "I absolutely plan to. I didn't plan to have a closed session. I had to do it."

Quan is currently tangled in litigations alleging that the Oakland Police Department have failed to implement a litany of reforms that were required after a 2003 court order. Those reforms include the improvement of monitoring officers who aggregate "use-of-force complaints," to tighten internal affairs investigations procedures and to filter out racial profiling.

If litigators in the Midwest area expect that someone they must depose will not be able to make the meeting, they may want to partner with Wisconsin court reporters that offer videoconferencing services or videography deposition services to create a more flexible arrangement.

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.