Do you not put any 'stuttering' in the transcript if they are repeating "the-the-the" type thing?? How 'verbatim' is the rule?

And do you interupt them to answer when the atty lets them uh-huh/etc for all the answers???

Thanks.
Rho

Views: 187

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Interesting!
I think attorneys who false start need to see that they false start. It might help them clean up their act. If it doesn't, their problem.

Also, all those false starts add pages. Lots and lots of pages. For the pain of false start attorneys, I deserve that extra money.

Besides, some of those false starts, you can read where they're heading on a line of questioning and then whey they abruptly change their mind in a whole different direction on their questioning sometime.

My other thought would be, an attorney is much more likely to complain about something left out than something put in. Hey, she left out all the witnesses false starts. I can see that as a complaint. They want to show the witness is stupid something.
I don't leave out witness false starts -- that's sworn testimony. And I don't edit out long false starts of attys, just the little one-worders. The longer ones, often the witness will follow up on. I do agree it would be nice if the attys would act on their messes, but they don't! The guy I make totally verbatim, with all his uh-huh through the answers and All rights, hasn't cleaned up his act, although he *is* trying to be better about interruptions.

A lot of times, it's a matter of time that I'm editing those false starts and making an interrupted Q or A a solid one. You don't always have time to put in the interruption at the point it's occurring. Going back and making sure the interruption is in the "right" place per audio is a TOTAL waste of time IMO. I do it for this guy and for video. Otherwise, forget it.
I've had someone stutter on videotape. You don't realize how bad they stutter until you go back over it. You kind of screen it and clean it up unconsciously. At least, I guess that must have been what I was doing.
I agree with Brenda's statements on verbatim, and "We're better than that." Re: clarifying "uh-huh" and "huh-uh," I would no more stop a witness and ask them to say yes or no than I would stop them and ask them to clarify what they mean by "kind of fast" or "sort of slow." Often, attys tell witnesses that "uh-huh" and "huh-uh" aren't real words, so they must use "yes" or "no" in their answers. And that works for them. But "uh-huh" and "huh-uh" ARE real words, and indeed I CAN take them down, so I'd never interfere with the testimony like that.

M.A.
yep, i leave the uh-huhs and uh-uhs alone and take them down as they're uttered, unless i didn't undestand and need to jump in to ask for clarification. i'd put the 'stuttering' into a different category, however, and attempt to clean it up after initially (3 or 4 pages) leaving it as it is to give the context and flavor of what's actually happening.

most of my stuff, like kelli's, is videotaped as well so in those instances they get as verbatim a record as absolutely possible. i play my audio when i proof the job and often need to fill in the scrambled speakers and interrupted colloquy as i prepare the transcript. as for the stuttering, though, even with video i think i'd try to limit it a bit throughout.

and if i need to jump in in an impossible reporting situation and let the attorneys know that i'm not able to get what they're all so excitedly talking about way too fast, i put myself in in colloquy giving them my warning(s).

-tom
I think it is a personal decision, unless of course it's a video, then you have to try to get all those "the's" in there, which is actually quite a bit of work, as you know. Non-video, I clean up a little bit; otherwise, it gets out of hand, IMO.

I try to jump on the uh-huh people right away, and usually the attorney will take it up shortly thereafter if they continue. Unfortunately, as things have gotten more and more casual, this is a daily problem. If you don't jump on it right away, it also gets out of hand.

My advice, deal with stuff right away and save yourself grief later.

RSS

Latest Activity

Pattie Walker updated their profile
Friday
michael chait posted a status
"Searching for a reporter with 2 days a week available to work for my agency in New Haven area. We pay promptly &extra for live attendance."
Friday
Cathy Houser left a comment for Shelley Schniepp
Dec 19
Pohlman USA joined Kelli Combs (admin)'s group
Dec 18
Hanna Jenkin updated their profile
Dec 17
Hanna Jenkin joined Kelli Combs (admin)'s group
Dec 17
Hanna Jenkin is now a member of CSRNation
Dec 17
Lisa Valentine, CSR updated their profile
Dec 17
Kelli Combs (admin) left a comment for Alison Smith
Dec 17
Watson Court Reporters and Taryn Bozeman are now friends
Dec 16
Trustpoint.One shared Kelli Combs (admin)'s group on Facebook
Dec 16
Alison Smith is now a member of CSRNation
Dec 16

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service