Courtroom Technology Bytes into an Increasingly ‘Show-and-Tell World’

ANDREW ASHBY | The Daily News

Overhead projectors are giving way to computers and large display screens in Memphis-area courtrooms, while jurors are becoming more accustomed to technological presentations.

Charles Wright, president of The Data Co., a company that helps lawyers with visual presentations during trials, has seen the technological shift in Memphis' law community. A few years ago, law firms would use technology for presentations only intermittently.

“People expect it now,” Wright said. “Most people are going to put on some form of presentation. If you go in there and one side is showing their evidence while one side is not, the jury is wondering what the problem is.”

A PowerPoint society

Presentations require a computer and a display device, such as a projector or television. One trend Wright has noticed is how jurors expect to see these items in the courtroom. He said this might be partly because of popular TV crime dramas such as “CSI” and “Law & Order.”

“Jurors are seeing shows like that, where the courtrooms have these dynamic presentations,” he said. “So when they go to a real courtroom, they expect to see what they see on television.”

When preparing a presentation, The Data Co.'s technicians enter data such as court documents, video depositions (recorded testimony), graphics or 3-D animations. The information is organized using trial presentation software called Sanction.

“Then all the attorney has to do is come in with their computer, hook into the system and show their evidence,” Wright said.

The cost of a presentation varies depending on how much help attorneys need. The Data Co. charges $2,500 a day for a technician, a computer and the display system. However, if a courtroom already has the equipment set up, it could only cost $1,000.

Many federal courtrooms contain all the necessary equipment, while city and county courtrooms typically do not because it's costly and the equipment is being constantly upgraded, Wright said.

“I'm sure they're looking at doing it in the future, but it does cost a lot,” he said. “When judges ask us about it, we let them know that once you wire a courtroom, don't think it's just done because technology changes.”

Tickle me, Elmo

Another device used to present evidence is called an “Elmo.” The device draws its name from the company that manufacturers it, Plainview, N.Y.-based Elmo USA Ltd. It looks like an overhead projector, except instead of a light bulb, it contains a camera. Once the Elmo is connected to a display source, it's a quick way to present evidence to an audience. For example, a document can be placed on the Elmo and then projected onto a large screen right away.

“I always carry one in case something last minute comes in,” Wright said. “It's just always good to have one.”

Circuit Court Judge Robert L. “Butch” Childers, who started practicing law in April 1975 and became a judge in September 1984, said he's seen how technology has changed in the courtroom over the years. For example, it's now standard practice for lawyers to store large numbers of documents electronically.

“So instead of having boxes and boxes and boxes of documents, they have it all on a few CD-ROMs,” Childers said. “And you need a technician to know how to retrieve that document when the lawyer needs it in the middle of trial in literally a moment's notice.”

Most of the technology in Childers' courtroom is used for video depositions, which are given when expert witnesses cannot appear live in court. Instead, they tape their testimony ahead of time.

Video depositions are good for doctors, who have a statutory exemption from testifying live at trial. Tennessee law allows them to give depositions because coming to court might disrupt their practices and compromise their patients' health.

However, attorneys would rather juries hear evidence from the doctor instead of reading a transcript from a deposition.

 It just makes it more interesting and the hope is that the jurors will pay more attention to the doctor's testimony when they actually see a live human being giving that testimony, even if it's on video tape,” Childers said.

Mutually beneficial arrangement

A presentation can fill up a courtroom. Childers remembers one case in which the plaintiff and defendant both brought computer technicians to present evidence. They set up a 40-inch television monitor next to the jury box, two smaller monitors in front of it, televisions at each lawyer's table and one for the judge. Both sides shared the display equipment.

“It was very technologically advanced; it was slick,” Childers said. “They could get these exhibits up in an instant by telling their technicians what they wanted.”

Just having computers in the courtroom has been beneficial, at least from Childers' standpoint. Childers has a computer at his bench, which enables him to click on Internet law research services such as Lexis or Westlaw to check on a case.

Leo Bearman, a shareholder with Memphis-based Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz PC, mostly uses presentations in long and complex trials as an aid to remind juries of earlier testimony, evidence or exhibits.

“If the trial is short and moves quickly, then it's not nearly as necessary as it would be if a trial lasted several days, several weeks or even several months,” Bearman said.

Bearman has been practicing law for 46 years and has seen firsthand how technology gradually has seeped into court proceedings.

“People are becoming more astute in the presentation of evidence and in the use of technology before a jury,” he said. “As a result, I think it's becoming used more effectively.”

Rick Charlton, a lawyer at The Winchester Law Firm, saves presentations for larger cases.

“The technology is expensive, and therefore you would only use it in an appropriate (case) where the financial stakes are high enough to warrant that expenditure,” he said.

Although technological presentations can be expensive for smaller cases, Charlton has seen it being used more often.

“I know we're in a show-and-tell world,” Charlton said. “You never know your jurors until you're into a case, but usually some of them are more favorably impressed by technology than otherwise.”