I just started doing work for another reporter, and she does something I'm not used to in her transcripts, and she wants me to do the same. I just wanted to get feedback as to whether anyone else does this.
After every objection, when the witness still answers the question, she puts the witness's answer in colloquy rather than as an A. (answer). Example:
Q. What was your location at that time?
MR. SMITH: Objection.
WITNESS: I was on Madison Avenue.
To me, this makes the witness's answer technically not testimony. I'm open to thoughts on this...???
Also, when a sentence trails off unfinished, I have always put a dash at the end of the sentence. Does anyone ever use periods? Example:
A. Yes, I put on my brakes, but . . .
Thanks for any input.
Tricia
If the witness answers the question after colloquy, it's an A., for me. If they speak to someone in colloquy, it's THE WITNESS.
I tried once to put it as THE WITNESS after colloquy regardless, since it's so easy to set up that way on Eclipse. It got as far as final corrections, and then I just couldn't do it. :)
I recently did a CA job that had hanging As. It was very difficult for me to do. The sample transcript I was sent indicated no bylines after interruptions or objections as well. I went to CA board licensing and looked it up and came up with bylines being used on the tab setting for Q/A followed by Q. Something like this.
MR. JONES: Object.
A. Yes, he passed me.
MR. SEAGULL Q. Then what did you do next?
It was so strange, I immediately deferred back to the sample transcript which was just the hanging A and no bylines after colloquy, just the byline at the Examination heading. I know in the past the CA transcripts used to look much more like ours, NV. I'm almost sure their bylines were on a line above the Q and A. I've seen bylines in parentheses after a Q or A, but never byline then Q or A. My feeling was that it has to do with stricter enforcement of document padding. It really made it hard to follow, I have to say. I think if you're looking in the middle of the transcript for something, it's helpful to find a byline somewhere so you know who's questioning.
Anyway, surprised me quite a bit.
I never have a "hanging A." THE WITNESS is how anything the witness says appears unless it's directly after a Q. If there is any intervening colloquy, I use THE WITNESS. I've seen the arguments for the other way, but this is the way I was trained, this is the way it's done around here (in Michigan it is in the handbook that it MUST be that way), and the "hanging A" looks odd and wrong to me.
It's a big country and things are different all over. One of those things that people do differently that must be accepted as that and not as a right or wrong.
As far as the ellipses, I use them to show the difference between an interruption and a trail-off. I learned to use dashes no matter what, but it does look like the attorney is interrupting the witness all day when he isn't. I changed to using them within the past two years.
Dottie, I don't have any trouble with ellipses at all. I have a simple outline and they're defined like this:
{~}.{~}.{~}.
There's no problem as far as keeping the periods together on the line and attached to the previous word. I don't like ... It's not technically correct and the {~} takes care of the spacing problem.
Brenda: Isn't this dictionary entry simpler?
{^}{~}...
Mike
Probably simpler, but I really don't like the ... without the spaces. It's one of those things that I know what is technically proper and seeing it without the spaces bugs me. I don't even type or text or IM without the spaces! What can I say? I'm a freak. :)
Once the definition is in, it's in and no problem. My steno outline is so simple, it just comes up. Then I have a keyboard macro to insert it when I'm editing. Automatic!
I doubt there's anyone out there that would ever call you a freak. Inspirational? Yes. Freak? Never. Sincerely. You are a great inspiration to me in more ways than you'll ever know.
But entering the ellipses from the machine is easy. It's the editing process that it's a pain.
It's the editing process that it's a pain.
That's when you use a macro! :) I use Ctrl+. to bring in the ellipses with the same definition as in my dix. Seems to work fine.
I actually use very few macros, and I absolutely hate hyperkeys. The reasons are many.
I do a lot of dailies and realtime, and because I'm communicating with my scopist on nearly a daily basis, I always have several windows open at the same time. The majority of the prepackaged macros will execute in whatever window I have open at the time, which is beyond irritating. I want my macros to only execute in Eclipse.
As a result, adopting macros is a pretty lengthy implementation process with me. I write them, try to figure out how to make them work so that only Eclipse recognizes them, and usually have to tweak them several times. I am always working on something that has a greater need, and ellipses just isn't at the top of that list.
Then add working with scopists on top of that and getting them to implement those macros, yeah, no, more trouble than it's worth.
Ellipses is something that'll have to wait till when I've already done all those other things I need to do, which I don't see that happening anytime soon.
Gotcha! I'm working waaaaaaaaaaaaay down the line on the simplicity scale, so it works for me. I only started using ellipses relatively recently. Dashes are still very common, so whichever works best is the best!
I still throw in dashes after "so" and "and" where you're not quite sure if they're finished yet. I've programmed those to become ellipses if they're followed by a Q. So that's another way I've gotten around having to edit in the ellipses after the fact. I understand this is just not on your radar, Dorothy, but maybe it will work for someone else who is editing in the ellipses.
That should be the next poll. I mean, who really uses the fancy macros to look pull up Google and whatnot while writing? I'd rather have macros where all the consequences are known and intended results, not a crapshoot according to whatever you may be doing at any particular moment in time. I'd then be able to take advantage of all the macros like you do.
When I started reporting in NY, I did not put THE WITNESS after colloquy, it was also just in Q&A. But then I moved to CA. The rules for the CA CSR were you had to always put witness in colloquy and then have to re-id the questioning atty. If you didn't it was marked wrong. Don't know if that's still the case in CA.
I remember hearing once at a seminar at mid-year conference (Grammar or something) that we should NEVER put ellipses in a transcript. That's the way she said it, too. Can't remember who she was or the reasoning for that, but I guess I trusted her and have never done it. P.S. I remember it was the mid-year NCRA in LA in March of 2002.
Tricia,
I'm with you on this one. In fact, I will even take it a step further and offer that I would do the following (modifying your original example a tad):
Q. What was your location at that time?
MR. SMITH: Objection.
Go ahead and answer, if you know the answer.
WITNESS: Yes, I know the answer.
A. I was on Madison Avenue.
My thought is that the witness in this instance is "answering" to two different people, and reflecting it this way makes it much more clear to the reader which response goes with which "question." Additionally, if a judge eventually rules on the objection in favor of the questioning attorney and the transcript needs to be edited for readback/video playback, the transcript is much more easy to follow.
And I DO use the ellipses to indicate when a witness has trailed off and has not been interrupted but just doesn't finish a thought. I will admit that I changed that halfway through my career, having first been taught that ellipses had no place in a transcript. At least this old dog learned one new trick along the way :).
Chuck
I wouldn't have a conniption fit if a scopist wanted to do it either way; however, my notes are set up one way. Long as it's all consistent. If a scopist really wanted to take the time to go change it all, spend all that time, all the power to him or her -- long as it's consistent and as long as I don't pay by the hour.
As for ellipses, soon as Eclipse is more ellipses friendly, I'll only use them then. For now, it's more trouble than it's worth.
Tricia
I, too, have always done THE WITNESS after the objection, just the way we were taught many, many years ago, although I've seen it done both ways over the years. I read in the JCR that the "correct" way is the A., but it didn't make me change my method. I guess it just makes more sense to me with the witness... and yes, I've started to use the ellipses...instead of dashes. Guess some things CAN change? :-)
Just my two cents worth,
I've always used "WITNESS" after colloquy instead of "A."
I recently started using ellipses if the speaker trails off at the end, to differentiate from dashes, which indicates the speaker was interrupted.
Liz