I went to the website (getacourtreportingjob) - or something like that. This is an ad I found.
They want an ATTRACTIVE person to work on the glamorous profession of lawyers, doctors and judges. I thought it was bad enough with attorneys hiring secretaries based on looks. Well, since I am 50, and average looking, I guess I won't apply.

Salary: N/A / Yearly Location: Dallas, TX
Type: Full-Time Zip Code: 75201

We are seeking an attractive, dependable, detail oriented and highly organized Learn to be a Digital Court Reporter. Excellent Pay! Equipment & Training Provided Part-time - Full-time Be a part of the glamorous profession of Lawyers, Doctors & Judges! Computer knowledge and keyboard skills a must.

Views: 247

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I can take a stab at what a "digital court reporter" is. It would be a person who utilizes a digital recording device to electronically record court proceedings.

They used to be called "electronic reporters," back when they were recording the proceedings on standard audiotapes with four channels. Now there is four-channel digital software available, and so they can record it digitally with four channels, as opposed to standard audiotapes with four channels.

Today, many courts nationwide have decided to use this digital software, as it is believed that it would be more cost effective than having a stenotype court reporter.

However, most of these courts use government employees a/k/a "court monitors," who have no education whatsoever on what it is to be a court reporter. They are taught how to push the ON and OFF button on the recording device.

They NEVER type the transcript. Their audio is sent out to transcription company vendors. I call these government court monitors "monkey reporters." I personally don't believe it is right to have legal documents created in this manner.

I am not saying all court monitors suck, but I refuse to certify a transcript with my "good name" on a legal document that was produced from a monkey reporter, giving me crappy audio with no name spellings. I could write a dissertation on this topic alone, but I won't clutter up this thread.

I am EXTREMELY familiar with all four methods of so-called "court reporting": stenotype, stenomask, electronic (digital/tape), and pen writing.

At any rate, Trina, that is what a "digital court reporter" is. It is someone who produces audio with a digital recording device.
a "digital court reporter" monitors a tape recorder.
They do not use tape recorders anymore, Marge. They use a digital recording device and software in the courtroom and/or legal proceedings.

Here is link to one of them called Liberty Recording. The software of this digital recording system can also do the video of the proceedings. It costs $4,400: Liberty Recording digital system

The digital recording system used in most courtrooms and has been around for the longest is FTR-Gold, "FTR" standing for "For the Record": FTR digital recording system

The problem with the digital recording systems in the courts is the untrained and uneducated operators, which are usually called "court monitors." These are people who have absolutely no education on being a court reporter.

The software people, Liberty or FTR, provide about an hour training on how to use the system. Then the courts outsource the transcription of these digital recordings to transcription company vendors.

I can recite horror stories about the digital recording system usage in courtroom and legal arenas. The court monitors don't do what their name suggests. They don't monitor, resulting in over-modulation of the witness sometimes. The notes they give to the transcription company vendor are sometimes missing pertinent information, like the counsel names. LOL

I realize there are very strong feelings from the stenotype community about digital and tape recording devices being used in courtroom and/or legal settings. IMHO, it is the person who is using the method that is the culprit. You can't just take somebody off the street, show them where the ON and OFF button is, and then have them be so-called "court reporters."

Personally, I do not think it is efficient and fair to have untrained court monitors creating these legal recordings, and then expect a transcription company vendor to produce the transcript from crappy audio and insuffient information being provided. Courts believe that by utilizing the digital and tape recording method that they are saving money, but, in effect, they are doing harm to the almighty record. Kevin Bacon said so. LOL
I checked out the website in Ohio.

Are they selling breast implants or transcripts??? It's really difficult to tell what services they're offering.
Janet, I think you are seriously on to something! I agree!!!!
I think that's the owner's wife.
That would really fit, Judy. Your average, typical family business.

You know, I've been wearing pant suits for years now. Can you picture that woman going underneath the conference table to plug in her equipment? I can imagine hearing a big R-i-p-p! One bend, and it's all over!

An attorney friend forwarded the link he received soliciting their business. Same tight dress, but the stiletto heel was propped up on a chair. Tasteless...and a bit past her prime to be selling sex appeal, IMHO.

The word "whore" comes to mind, but I wouldn't use it to describe the models in the print ad, more to describe past presidents of NCRA that would sell stenographers out for tape recorders.
Wow. The first time I only took a glimse of the woman on the website. After reading others comments I went back and took another look. They have "We take extraordinary care of our clients." And the extraordinary is halfway underlined! That picture says that's the owner, but that picture looks more like a high class call girl than a court reporter. No where in their ad does it say anything about the qualifications of their court reporters.

Wow. That woman really gets around. Here are some comments about her from NCRA.
There is also a copy of her ad for her first digital reporting company. She also has something to do with Prep Academy Schools. AND she is a former model and beauty queen in Ohio.
Apparently her husband was really big in NCRA. There are some blogs about him in the NCRA website. He must have been really big because back in the 70's he bought the Baron miniframe ($100,000). He did not lease it. His wife must of wanted to be part of the court reporting action too - but didn't have the machine shorthand skills- so, wa-la, digital court reporting - the next best thing.
Apparently her husband was really big in NCRA.

MaryAnn, wanna handle this one?
hoo boy, that is an understatment, huh?


Latest Activity

© 2024   Created by Kelli Combs (admin).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service