Obtaining a Court Transcript
Discussion
I don't think you would obtain a transript from the Court, they will only release the tape of the hearing.
You will then have to instruct a transcript service to do the rest.
In the County Court the whole thing will cost you over 200 quid. I have no idea how much it will cost in a Crown Court..
You will then have to instruct a transcript service to do the rest.
In the County Court the whole thing will cost you over 200 quid. I have no idea how much it will cost in a Crown Court..
this company does the Crown Courts in the Birmingham area
linky but it will cost
it's all recorded onto tape - and your cost will be for someone to listen to the tape and type it up
or - just check the local papers for a few days after the case, they normally try and report everything in a Crown case
or for more info try : http://www.bailii.org/
HTH
linky but it will cost
it's all recorded onto tape - and your cost will be for someone to listen to the tape and type it up
or - just check the local papers for a few days after the case, they normally try and report everything in a Crown case
or for more info try : http://www.bailii.org/
HTH
Court transcripts.
There appears to be very little about obtaining court transcripts. Back in January there was some debate but it appears to have died a death.
I have a case number, I have the name of the court and I have he name of the defendant and the prosecutor.
It was an open court, there was nothing sexual about the case so anything to do with the Sexual Offences (Protected Material) Act 1997, does not come into play, yet it is proving difficult to obtain a copy.
The fudge has control before it is released, (which I consider to be wrong that any fudge should have total control.)
I can understand the fudge having to give his permission for it's release prior to it being checked for is accuracy, but that should be the limit of the fudges participation.
Why are the courts so afraid of showing justice being done?
We cannot take a tape recorder into court without permission from the court and there is no record where they have granted that permission.
Why is it that the police must tape-record interviews with suspects using a twin tape device and one of those tapes must be given to the suspect? Yet there is no such facility concerning court transcripts.
I am not talking about cost here, I am merely talking about the openness of any court in providing a script of the events as to what was said by all parties in an open court.
The bundle held by both sides are not requested here, only what is said by each of the bundle holders, the fudge, the defendant/s, the witnesses if any and any other spoken word in that open court
If there are anyone with knowledge of our rights to court hearings, it would be extremely helpful.
There appears to be very little about obtaining court transcripts. Back in January there was some debate but it appears to have died a death.
I have a case number, I have the name of the court and I have he name of the defendant and the prosecutor.
It was an open court, there was nothing sexual about the case so anything to do with the Sexual Offences (Protected Material) Act 1997, does not come into play, yet it is proving difficult to obtain a copy.
The fudge has control before it is released, (which I consider to be wrong that any fudge should have total control.)
I can understand the fudge having to give his permission for it's release prior to it being checked for is accuracy, but that should be the limit of the fudges participation.
Why are the courts so afraid of showing justice being done?
We cannot take a tape recorder into court without permission from the court and there is no record where they have granted that permission.
Why is it that the police must tape-record interviews with suspects using a twin tape device and one of those tapes must be given to the suspect? Yet there is no such facility concerning court transcripts.
I am not talking about cost here, I am merely talking about the openness of any court in providing a script of the events as to what was said by all parties in an open court.
The bundle held by both sides are not requested here, only what is said by each of the bundle holders, the fudge, the defendant/s, the witnesses if any and any other spoken word in that open court
If there are anyone with knowledge of our rights to court hearings, it would be extremely helpful.
I have acquired a Crown Court transcript.
Inquired to the Crown Court (Carlisle), who had to ask the judge if he was OK with the transcript being released to me - and I provided reasons as to why I wished to read it.
You need case number only - although it is harder to find than the adversaries!
I was then put on to a company who transcribe the proceedings into written documents, and for a (not insignificant) fee, they provided a PDF which included the summing up which I had an interest in.
The fee varies according to the amount of transcribing, so the longer the case the more you pay. The case I was interested in was an appeal, so could have been quite lengthy - but I was lucky.
The lady at Carlisle Crown Court was extremely helpful, including giving me the details of the defending solicitors in case they had already obtained a transcript which I could access (they hadn't)!
You could also contact newspaper reporters who might have covered cases, in the hope they took shorthand notes.
In my example the Scottish Daily Record had used a news agency service and the original reporter could not be traced!
I went to a lot of trouble, but it WAS worth it - it made very interesting reading!
Inquired to the Crown Court (Carlisle), who had to ask the judge if he was OK with the transcript being released to me - and I provided reasons as to why I wished to read it.
You need case number only - although it is harder to find than the adversaries!
I was then put on to a company who transcribe the proceedings into written documents, and for a (not insignificant) fee, they provided a PDF which included the summing up which I had an interest in.
The fee varies according to the amount of transcribing, so the longer the case the more you pay. The case I was interested in was an appeal, so could have been quite lengthy - but I was lucky.
The lady at Carlisle Crown Court was extremely helpful, including giving me the details of the defending solicitors in case they had already obtained a transcript which I could access (they hadn't)!
You could also contact newspaper reporters who might have covered cases, in the hope they took shorthand notes.
In my example the Scottish Daily Record had used a news agency service and the original reporter could not be traced!
I went to a lot of trouble, but it WAS worth it - it made very interesting reading!
streaky said:
^^^^^
A Harry Potter fan, an iPhone user, possessor of a sweet tooth, or a humourist?
References to "fudge".]
Streaky
Gives new meaning to that Cadburys "Finger of Fudge is just enough to give yourself a treat" advertisement!A Harry Potter fan, an iPhone user, possessor of a sweet tooth, or a humourist?
References to "fudge".]
Streaky
The prime agent for the super injunctions springs immediately to mind!
Sometimes, fudgement is more interesting than judgement, but it is the judgement that I am more interested in.
A judge will either judge a case or fudge it, deciding which, is why we need to see a transcript of what was said and by whom.
We all no how the press coverup, by proclaiming a spokesperson or the use of any other adjective that leaves everyone guessing as to who said what, where and when.
If a judge say's something in open court, we should all have the right to know what was said whether or not we were there. Unless there are names put to a claim or whatever, then how would we know whether it was made up or not?
Why should we have to jump through so many hurdles to get what is after all, what we have paid for?
follow it through:- We pay for the justice system and out of that, everything else is paid for.
A judge will either judge a case or fudge it, deciding which, is why we need to see a transcript of what was said and by whom.
We all no how the press coverup, by proclaiming a spokesperson or the use of any other adjective that leaves everyone guessing as to who said what, where and when.
If a judge say's something in open court, we should all have the right to know what was said whether or not we were there. Unless there are names put to a claim or whatever, then how would we know whether it was made up or not?
Why should we have to jump through so many hurdles to get what is after all, what we have paid for?
follow it through:- We pay for the justice system and out of that, everything else is paid for.
Jasandjules said:
A 1-2 hour hearing should be around £200-300+ Vat, perhaps a little more.
Quite expensive just to find out the judges summing up - you could see if the case was reported and access the judgment that way?
I suggested that at 9.30 this morning Quite expensive just to find out the judges summing up - you could see if the case was reported and access the judgment that way?
- but I also pointed out that some cases get left to agencies, and tracking down an original shorthand copy may not be easy.The summing up does sometimes include details from the judge as to the character of the various witnesses!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff