When the Record Breaks – A Deposition Disaster That Proves Why Humans Beat Machines

Posted bystenoimperiumPosted inAI and the Legal System, Court Reporting, Legal ServicesTags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

One slam of the table—and the record vanished. In an era where artificial intelligence and digital tools are creeping into every corner of professional life, the legal system is no exception. But not every innovation is an improvement—especially when justice is on the line. A recent incident during a deposition serves as a stark reminder of why certified court reporters remain essential to the integrity of the legal record.

Last Thursday, a videographer shared an unsettling story from a deposition he had recently covered at a well-known law firm. At a previous session held at the same location, he recalled, the firm opted to use a “digital court reporter”—a non-certified operator relying on recording equipment and automated software to capture testimony instead of a licensed stenographic reporter.

That choice turned into a disaster.

According to the videographer, during that deposition, opposing counsel became visibly frustrated. Tensions flared, and in a moment of anger, the attorney slammed both fists down on the table. The force was significant—enough to shake the flimsy setup supporting the digital equipment.

What happened next is exactly what critics of artificial intelligence and digital reporting have long warned about: the so-called “court reporter” lost a large section of the testimony.

Whether it was due to vibration damage, corrupted files, microphone misalignment, or equipment failure, the fact remains—there is now a gap in the official record. And when critical witness testimony is missing, the consequences can be far-reaching: procedural delays, sanctions, mistrials, or even appeals based on incomplete transcripts.

Imagine a world where the future of a case—perhaps one involving millions of dollars, or even someone’s liberty—rests on a recording system that can be interrupted by something as simple as a table slap. That’s not a risk the justice system can afford to take.

This incident highlights a crucial distinction: a certified court reporter is not just a transcriptionist. A licensed stenographer is a neutral officer of the court, trained not only to capture every word but to maintain control of the proceeding, ensure clarity in the record, and immediately address any issues that might jeopardize its integrity.

When technology fails, a human stenographer steps in—asking for clarifications, marking exhibits, annotating interruptions, and reading back testimony in real time. A machine, no matter how sophisticated, cannot exercise judgment, issue corrections on the spot, or advocate for a clean, usable transcript.

And when the record is incomplete, there’s no rewind button to restore lost testimony. The damage is done.

When testimony is lost due to equipment failure or incomplete capture—like in the case of the slammed table during a digitally reported deposition—the consequences can be severe. Attorneys may be forced to file motions to strike key testimony, or worse, face a mistrial if the missing record involves critical witness statements. In appellate courts, the absence of a complete, certified transcript can undermine the ability to challenge a ruling, effectively waiving the right to appeal. Courts may also impose sanctions on attorneys or law firms for failing to ensure a proper record was made. These aren’t hypothetical risks—they’re real legal landmines that can derail a case, harm a client, or cost a firm its credibility.

This is not just about outdated vs. modern solutions. It’s about reliability, accuracy, and accountability.

According to a 2023 study conducted by the National Court Reporters Association (NCRA), digital recording systems failed to capture complete and accurate testimony in 14% of proceedings that were monitored. The most common issues cited included overlapping speakers, equipment malfunctions, and unintelligible audio—factors that certified stenographic reporters are specifically trained to manage in real time. Additionally, courts in multiple jurisdictions have expressed concern over the reliability of digital records, with some judges issuing orders requiring certified reporters to ensure transcript accuracy. These findings underscore what legal professionals already know: technology is a tool, not a substitute for human judgment, training, and accountability.

Digital recording might have a place in certain low-stakes or budget-restricted situations, but when it comes to depositions—where testimony often sets the tone for trial strategy and settlement value—the record must be unimpeachable. That means using trained, certified professionals who know how to manage a high-pressure environment and deliver a transcript you can trust.

As the legal industry faces increasing pressure to cut costs and streamline operations, this story should be a wake-up call: you get what you pay for. Saving a few bucks on a digital setup can cost your client their case.

Let this be a reminder to attorneys and law firms: if the record matters, hire a real court reporter.

Because in the courtroom or the conference room, there’s no substitute for skill, training, and human judgment.

To protect the integrity of the legal system, attorneys, judges, and law firms must take a stand. If you’re a litigator, demand a certified court reporter—not just for accuracy, but to safeguard your client’s rights and your own professional reputation. Court administrators and policymakers should reject shortcuts that compromise the record and support legislation that mandates licensed, trained professionals in all legal proceedings. The justice system depends on a reliable record. Don’t gamble with anything less.

StenoImperium
Court Reporting. Unfiltered. Unafraid.

Disclaimer

The content of this post is intended for informational and discussion purposes only. All opinions expressed herein are those of the author and are based on publicly available information, industry standards, and good-faith concerns about nonprofit governance and professional ethics. No part of this article is intended to defame, accuse, or misrepresent any individual or organization. Readers are encouraged to verify facts independently and to engage constructively in dialogue about leadership, transparency, and accountability in the court reporting profession.

  • The content on this blog represents the personal opinions, observations, and commentary of the author. It is intended for editorial and journalistic purposes and is protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
  • Nothing here constitutes legal advice. Readers are encouraged to review the facts and form independent conclusions.

***To unsubscribe, just smash that UNSUBSCRIBE button below — yes, the one that’s universally glued to the bottom of every newsletter ever created. It’s basically the “Exit” sign of the email world. You can’t miss it. It looks like this (brace yourself for the excitement):

Published by stenoimperium

We exist to facilitate the fortifying of the Stenography profession and ensure its survival for the next hundred years! As court reporters, we've handed the relationship role with our customers, or attorneys, over to the agencies and their sales reps.  This has done a lot of damage to our industry.  It has taken away our ability to have those relationships, the ability to be humanized and valued.  We've become a replaceable commodity. Merely saying we are the “Gold Standard” tells them that we’re the best, but there are alternatives.  Who we are though, is much, much more powerful than that!  We are the Responsible Charge.  “Responsible Charge” means responsibility for the direction, control, supervision, and possession of stenographic & transcription work, as the case may be, to assure that the work product has been critically examined and evaluated for compliance with appropriate professional standards by a licensee in the profession, and by sealing and signing the documents, the professional stenographer accepts responsibility for the stenographic or transcription work, respectively, represented by the documents and that applicable stenographic and professional standards have been met.  This designation exists in other professions, such as engineering, land surveying, public water works, landscape architects, land surveyors, fire preventionists, geologists, architects, and more.  In the case of professional engineers, the engineering association adopted a Responsible Charge position statement that says, “A professional engineer is only considered to be in responsible charge of an engineering work if the professional engineer makes independent professional decisions regarding the engineering work without requiring instruction or approval from another authority and maintains control over those decisions by the professional engineer’s physical presence at the location where the engineering work is performed or by electronic communication with the individual executing the engineering work.” If we were to adopt a Responsible Charge position statement for our industry, we could start with a draft that looks something like this: "A professional court reporter, or stenographer, is only considered to be in responsible charge of court reporting work if the professional court reporter makes independent professional decisions regarding the court reporting work without requiring instruction or approval from another authority and maintains control over those decisions by the professional court reporter’s physical presence at the location where the court reporting work is performed or by electronic communication with the individual executing the court reporting work.” Shared purpose The cornerstone of a strategic narrative is a shared purpose. This shared purpose is the outcome that you and your customer are working toward together. It’s more than a value proposition of what you deliver to them. Or a mission of what you do for the world. It’s the journey that you are on with them. By having a shared purpose, the relationship shifts from consumer to co-creator. In court reporting, our mission is “to bring justice to every litigant in the U.S.”  That purpose is shared by all involved in the litigation process – judges, attorneys, everyone.  Who we are is the Responsible Charge.  How we do that is by Protecting the Record.

Leave a comment