Outsourcing your transcription needs has always gone all right in the past. There may have been a few problems or delays, but they were minor, and it was about what you would expect considering the price.
However, lately you’ve been thinking about the benefits of video depositions for your firm. It would be great to offer your clients an additional professional service, especially if it drastically affects the outcome of their case. But is it worth the extra investment?
Here are a few things to consider when choosing between recorded and transcribed testimony:
- Tone. An electronic recording allows the jury to see and hear your client, allowing the jury members the chance to empathize with his voice, inflection, and the way he describes their experiences. Many shy clients may come off as too dry or glib due to their word choices, and without the benefit of a recording, the jury will only have the written words to go on.
- Avoiding confusion. Multiple microphones during recording can isolate the spoken tracks, making it less likely that words will be lost, misheard, or misquoted—even when attorneys and clients are talking over one another.
- Appearance. Many clients who have been injured or endured extreme suffering will show it on their faces and in their movements rather than their words. Juries are more likely to be moved by a person telling her own story that by a court reporter reading what happened to another person.
- Even playing field. The opposing attorney may opt to record his client’s deposition, giving him an advantage of the jury is sympathetic to his story.
Do you prefer video depositions, transcribed testimony, or both?