Riverside Superior Court Reporter Lay off.

The Superior court in response to AOC budget cuts is in the process of implementing wide spread budget cuts including removing court reporters from family law, civil law and probate proceedings. Court reporters were salaried court employees, with litigants being charged $ 60, per hearing if they didn’t have a fee waiver. It is unclear how the court cannot afford court reporters if their salary is being reimbursed by the fees that litigants pay to the court. Court reporters are mandated for criminal and juvenile proceedings, and those are not affected. If the layoffs occur, civil litigants will have to hire reporters if they want a transcript of trials or other proceedings. Current costs for situations in which court reporters are hired per diem have a price tag of $518 a day.

Litigants will have to prepare themselves for proceedings where objections and judicial notices are not listed on the court record as the reporter’s transcript will not be available to preserve those objections. Litigants will have to prepare themselves for judicial officers who suppress evidence, where the evidence is not listed in the minute order as having been offered with a burden of proof. What will occur is that the court will have free license to continue with the judicial rape and battery against parents and their children with no record of the violation of judicial canon of ethics, that govern the standard of judicial officers.

The San Bernardino Superior Court will still implement court reporters on a pooled assignment basis.

Most litigants will be unable to hire court reporters to transcribe proceedings and the transcript of proceedings will be eliminated all together, allowing further rampant judicial malfeasance to continue. Since the Court has announced that it will be eliminating court reporters perhaps the court will announce a mechanism for litigants to preserve their objections to evidence and inadmissible testimony on the minute order record.

Another alternative would be to allow the electronic record of proceedings, (video and audio), to be made available to litigants.

News and Views Riverside Superior Court and San Bernardino Superior Court; National Family Law Abuse

The Superior court in response to AOC budget cuts is in the process of implementing wide spread budget cuts including removing court reporters from family law, civil law and probate proceedings.  Court reporters were salaried court employees, with litigants being charged $ 60, per hearing if they didn’t have a fee waiver.  It is unclear how the court cannot afford court reporters if their salary is being reimbursed by the fees that litigants pay to the court.   Court reporters are mandated for criminal and juvenile proceedings, and those are not affected. If the layoffs occur, civil litigants will have to hire reporters if they want a transcript of trials or other proceedings. Current costs for situations in which court reporters are hired per diem have a price tag of $518 a day.

Litigants will have to prepare themselves for proceedings where objections and judicial notices are not listed on the…

View original post 187 more words

Advertisements

One comment on “Riverside Superior Court Reporter Lay off.

  1. Court reporters should be removed as employees. That makes them highly subservient to judges like Ellsworth or Dugan who are known for asking reporters to modify transcript records wherever they want the record to cover up for their mistakes.
    Why do you think courts do not want tape recorders in the courtroom to expose their disgusting tampering with evidential records.
    In bankruptcy federal courts there are no reporters and only tape recordings. But they still won’t let you bring your own for verification. I can understand it could not be used as evidence as they wouldn’t like litigants to do to the voice records what the courts do with impunity every day.
    The answer is to replace court reporters with two tape machine under the care of a transcriber who is not a public employee who can easily be interfered with by the presiding judge.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s