Slashdot Mirror


Order in the e-Court!

theodp writes "Every word spoken in the e-Courtroom where Branden Basham is on trial for his life appears immediately before the judge on a computer screen. There's a flat-screen monitor between every two seats in the jury box, a witness-box monitor with touch-screen features, and large-screen monitors for public viewing. Lawyers say e-Courtrooms help reduce trial time by making evidence display and tracking documents more efficient. 'It made the Chadrick Fulks' case three to five days shorter,' said an Assistant U.S. Attorney, referring to Basham's co-defendant, who plead guilty and was sentenced to death."

9 of 286 comments (clear)

  1. This is a brilliant idea by michaeltoe · · Score: 5, Funny

    In fact, while we're at it, let's just put the whole thing up on a Fox News Poll... no better justice than majority!

    1. Re:This is a brilliant idea by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I was on a jury
      Biggest waste of three days in my life) a few years ago,
      If you think that administering Justice is a waste of time, perhaps you do not deserve Justice.
  2. I second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    that eMotion.

  3. Re:Lawyers love this by masoncooper · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There's no loss. Entering the evidence into the trial presentation software takes time too. But usually this is carried out by legal assistants. Our firm uses a product called Visionary that allows us to lay out all sorts of evidence and recall it at a moments notice to present on the secondary display. The cool part is that the software is free, they make their money through processing video. When a deposition comes in, you can request a tape from the court reporting service and then send it to them, they will then encode the entire thing and sync the transcript with the video. The result is the ability to highlight a paragraph or even a sentence in the depo and press play, the secondary display then shows the playback of the person actually saying that. Seeing someone say something has a MUCH greater effect on the judge or jury than simply quoting them.

  4. Re:Yeah, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    They tried it once, but it only threw PDFs at people.

  5. Lawer Needed: Photoshop skills a plus by rackirlen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I really don't think I want to be judged on the skill of my lawer in photoshop and powerpoint...

    Seriously, powerpoint is one of the things that NASA reports have blamed for the lack of attention to some details... I really think that the old, hash though paper way keeps the legal system more secure from tampering... (as much as it can be anyhow)

  6. Theatrics by linuxwrangler · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've thought for a long time that the entire case should be recorded and then shown to a jury. Both sides can present their best cases and nobody can get away with theatrics.

    Atty 1: "So has your buggering of small animals caused harm to your eyesight making you an unfit witness?"

    Atty 2: "Objection"

    Judge: "Sustained - the jury is instructed to disregard."

    Atty 1: "No further questions"

    Any question/response ruled inadmissable would be deleted - no chance of influencing the jury either intentionally or by accident.

    If the jury pool is tainted or unable to reach a verdict, just seat a new jury and replay the recordings.

    If evidence or judge's instructions are ruled incorrect or inadmissable by a higher court just edit the recording and show it to a new jury. This also eliminates the problem of a witness who dies before a retrial.

    --

    ~~~~~~~
    "You are not remembered for doing what is expected of you." - Atul Chitnis
  7. Re:My job by nm42 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ok, I call BS. I handle litigation technology for a law firm, and have been in many E-courtrooms. There is no camera made to focus on the defendant.
    Take a look here for a real view of the e-courtroom setups.
    The cameras are voice activated, so only the person speaking will appear on the recording. Additionally, these are widely used in civil matters, so there is no "defendant" per se. And a "nice behind-the-scenes" tidbit. The hardware used to capture all of this? Tivo.

  8. Re:My job by here4fun · · Score: 5, Interesting
    grandparent: When we're testing the systems in new installations we're ordered to cut back on the gamma and hike up the contrast for the cameras that focus on the defendant. The reason? To make the defendant more menacing.

    parent: Is it any worse than having the defendant show up with freshly cut hair, a clean shaved face, and in a suit?

    Should it matter how the defendant looks? If we have a system where looks matter, then we need a new system. If someone is white and in a nice suit, should that excuse the person, where the judge thinks "oh, he made a bad mistake, i feel sorry for him", but if it is a poor black teen the judge thinks "miserable evil uneducated basturd, you deserve to suffer for being so dark".

    It is like there are two legal systems, one for the rich and one for the poor. One who can afford their own private lawyer, and one who gets a public defender. Let me guess, these monitors will mostly be used with poorer people who can't afford their own attorney to assert their rights.