Massachusetts judge gives filmmaker a lesson on court transcripts
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ruled that a documentary filmmaker is not entitled to access the unofficial backup court report of a 2007 rape trial, the Boston Globe reports.
Steve Audette, a documentary film producer, requested an electronic recording of the trial, which was a backup to the official print transcript. The court ruled against Audette, stating that he and the rest of the public had free access to the official court record, which was prepared and transcribed by a certified court reporter who had used an electronic recording as a backup to the transcript. According to Justice Ralph Gants, access to one version of the transcript did not mean rights to access the other.
"Where an official record of the proceeding [the transcript] is available to the public, a presumption of public access to an unofficial record is more likely to generate public confusion than to aid public understanding," Gants wrote in a 19-page unanimous opinion, according to the Globe.
The trial in question is that of Keith Winfield. According to the news source, the court reporter present at the 2007 trial was a voice writer who chose to use the recording merely as a reference. As a result, the court said that there had not been any restriction of an official court document. However, it also stated that, legally, the filmmaker would gain nothing by showing what could be gained by acquiring the backup recording. In order to gain access to the recording, an individual would have to prove that the legal system had barr​ed justice from being served by restricting access, the Globe reported.
This story is yet another example that, even with advent of recording technologies, courts still rely on Milwaukee court reporters to maintain a trial's official transcript.
