No court reporters a big step backward

Responding to the March 22 "Court reporting can go a step further" view, I agree with the opinion we need an accurate record of court proceedings. But I was very troubled to read further the belief of my role in the courtroom.

I and my fellow reporters do not use a primitive typewriter. The writers we use are state-of-the-art computerized steno machines. As I record every word said by a method of shorthand, Bluetooth technology works with a software program specially developed for court reporters. I can send my notes instantly transcribed to my laptop for read-back as necessary to the judge or jury.

On occasion I will use this real-time to assist a party who is hearing impaired. They can read off my laptop the proceedings as they are transpiring. Our transcripts are a verbatim, certified accurate report of proceedings. We all are licensed by the state, having had to pass rigorous testing of 225 words per minute.

Court reporters have no interest in the proceedings other than to capture every word. We can stop proceedings if we can't hear a witness as well as focus on the parties speaking and tune out lockup doors slamming or interpreters providing simultaneous translation in another language. We all pay for our own equipment. A writer alone can be $5,000 to $7,000.

Then we purchase computers, printers, backup systems, software and software support. We pay for continuing education seminars for associations we belong to to keep abreast of changes in our field. We store criminal proceedings forever and maintain storage systems as well.

Kane County is fortunate to have such a talented group of court reporters in the judicial system. Losing court reporters to a substandard record such as video would be taking a giant step backward.

Jill Gasparaitis

Hampshire