Welcome to CSR Nation
I have a question about if it's the reporter's responsibility after a transcript is turned in, to go back and delete words that the attorney says are highly confidential and wants me to "redact" from the transcript.
I feel this is a Production issue and not my responsibility. This job is almost 300 pages and they want me to go through my transcript and delete words everywhere. I've been a reporter for 27 years and have never been asked to do this. Oh, of course, I have to take my own time for free to do it as well.
There was no way to do that because the word [redacted] is more spaces than what I was deleting. What I was deleting was xxx or xxxx letters. Doesn't work.
My concern is if I miss one, my license is on the line. I don't think I should be put in this position. I went through the entire 280 page transcript and had to find every blacked-out space where the words need to be changed to [redacted]. There were all different words that needed to be taken out. I had to painstakingly do this. It would have been easier to get a word list of the words that the attorney wanted taken out and I could have done a find/replace instead. That's fool-proof. This way, I'm just hoping I got them all.
I am calling the CSR board on Monday to find out if this is my responsibility, as I feel the liability is too great and the court reporting agency should be in my corner on this issue.
Kelli, can you make a file like an etran that gives you a word index and then you can look at the word index?
I already did the redactions and turned the job back in to the agency. I'm done.
Kelli, I know you've already turned it back in, but Eclipse has the capability to create a word list very similar to that of an E-tran. I could show you how, if you didn't already know.
If the attorney would have just given me a list of words he wanted redacted, I could have done a find/replace and been done in five minutes. That's easier than making an etran. Instead, he just sends a PDF of all the blacked out words in the transcript. I had to go back to my transcript and find every place to even see what the word was. This was very time consuming on my part. Apparently my time is not an issue to anyone but me.
Oh, now I understand. That would be time consuming.
I've had to redact once, when the witness started talking about something completely unrelated. The attorneys asked me to redact the portion where they were talking about blah, blah, blah. Well, I didn't want to guess exactly what the "portion" was, so I insisted, after the depo, that they tell me exactly what to redact. I went back to that section, read it to them, and made them tell me where to start and end the redaction. I marked it in the transcript, edited it in full, made a copy and redacted the copy and saved both files to CMA. Always CYA . . . 'cause you're the only one who cares about it in the end and when it counts.
My question is why didn't they tell you this at the time of the job? I don't see how that can be legal. You produced an accurate transcript. If he could produce a PDF with blacked-out portions, why couldn't they just do that to the transcript?
Very, very good question, Deborah. I wondered the same thing. Why not just give the same PDF to the witness to read and sign? Maybe it has to be an offician transcript or something. No idea. Maybe it will become public record too. Who knows?
This must be an East Coast thing because two reporters commented and they both are from the East Coast. Must be prevalent there.
It's not prevalent, Kelli. This was the first time I've done it.
Exactly. I would be very hesitant to do this. If all parties agree, in writing, that portions should be redacted, I would--but it is a service and billable.
I would use the redaction feature in Eclipse. I would make a second transcript with redacted material, if they wanted. All of this costs money, of course--unless an agency pisses itself to do it. Then they ask the reporter to do it for free. S/he either does or doesn't.