Maine Eliminates Court Reporter Positions To Make Way For ER
Posted on May 8th, 2008 at 2:21 pm, by Gordon AiavaoAccording to the online edition of the Kennebec Journal and Morning Sentinel, the state of Maine will be moving to eliminate official court reporter positions and replace them with electronic recording. Of the 16 current official positions, seven officials with the least seniority have already received “pre-layoff notification” letters.
Here’s what James T. Glessner, state court administrator, had to say about the elimination.
“We’re working with the employee union on this,” he said. “We have a dollar amount we have to save in our budget, so we wanted to clarify the process by which these layoffs go into effect.”
Mr. Glessner claims that the reduction of court reporters will result in a savings of $600,000 a year.
Speaking on behalf of the reporters was Tim Belcher of the Maine State Employees Association.
“Machines are not a substitute for human beings, in this case. Being able to turn to a live human being and having that person tell you what a witness said a half-hour ago is a very essential function.”
You can read more on this issue by clicking here.
May 8th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
“Mr. Glessner claims that the reduction of court reporters will result in a savings of $600,000 a year.”
Has Mr. Glessner considered the costs in delays and mistrials and errors?
This article brings up some very good points. Tim Belcher is right. “Having a person tell you what a witness said a half-hour ago is an essential function.” Attorneys and judges need instant readback and quick turnaround in transcript production during a trial and if the case appeals. If the attorneys and judges can’t get their hands on the information they need or have to spend more time trying to obtain the information they need, think about how much of their salary is wasted on research that court reporters can provide instantly.
Mistrials are occurring more and more in cases where ER is used because somebody forgets to press “record” or the transcript comes back filled with “inaudibles” and “untranslates” that make it impossible for anyone to guess at what was said on the record. This results in either dismissing the case or retrying it…yikes! Now that’s a lot of tax payer money wasted!
And, finally, unless you are the one who is sitting in the courtroom, taking down every word and knowing when you have to interrupt to clarify a word, the transcript will be filled with errors. The PAJ-TF at COCRA has a transcript from San Jose, California. It is an ER transcript typed by a firm in New York. San Jose is spelled “Sanhose.” There are many errors throughout the ER transcript which occurred simply because the typist wasn’t in the courtroom taking down every word on a shorthand machine…he/she was in New York.
Being in court is a trying time for a person. They deserve the most accurate record out there. Certified shorthand reporters are held to a much higher standard and have much better technology than any other method of record keeping.
A court of law is not the place to cut corners…especially when “cutting corners” by bringing in ER is going to end up costing tax payers more money, not less.
May 8th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
It’s no surprise that current economic conditions in the country is bringing out the supporters of electronic recording. But as has been said time after time, any economic saving is shortsighted by those pushing ER. There are long terms effects of having ER in courts that will wind up costing the courts and states more money than what they claim to be saving.