When court reporter Tina Riedel receives a request for a transcript of a Lawrence County Common Pleas Court proceeding, she relies on a suite of technology to assemble the document.

Her first step is locating the audio of the proceeding. In the common pleas court, every proceeding is digitally recorded. Riedel finds it on her computer, then drops the digital audio file into artificial intelligence (AI) software. The tool purchased by the court transcribes the audio file into text in a Word document.

Judge Andrew Ballard said he noticed a few years ago that Riedel was “being overwhelmed with waves of transcript requests,” many of which need to be produced in a specific timeframe. He began searching for technology that could assist with her transcription duties. They selected an AI speech-to-text program after learning of the significant software improvements in recent years.

Even with the power of available technology, courts must still certify the record that is documented in the transcript.

“Nothing is certified straight from AI,” Judge Ballard explains. “The technology is nowhere close to attaining the level of accuracy for a certified record.”

For the official record, human expertise is invaluable. Once a proceeding is transcribed, Riedel reads the AI-generated transcript while listening to the full audio of the proceeding. She corrects the record as she listens. The transcription gives her a foundation to work from, rather than a blank page.

“It has helped cut down on the time it takes me to finish a transcript,” she said.

For a hearing that’s an hour long, the program composes an initial transcription in less than 15 minutes, Riedel said. She and Judge Ballard estimate that starting from the AI-generated transcription has reduced her time to produce a final, certified transcript by about 50%. The transcription tool is also beneficial because Riedel can zoom in on a voice to get the wording right. That feature is possible because of the sound setup in Judge Ballard’s courtroom. Riedel said the bench and the witness box are miked, and there are also flat microphones on the counsel tables for each side and at the jury box, to capture answers during the questioning of potential jurors.

Given the importance of the audio recordings, Riedel attends every hearing in Judge Ballard’s courtroom. Instead of documenting what happens by typing on a steno machine like many court reporters, she checks that the microphones are functioning and keeps an eye on the audio recording software.

When working on the transcript, Riedel said the capability to isolate the sound at one microphone allows her to pick up words that she wouldn’t have been able to hear otherwise. She can also slow down the recording if someone talks rapidly, or stop and replay sections.

She said the trickiest challenge with the audio is back-and-forth dialogue, such as when an attorney is questioning a witness. Riedel said the AI transcription of those interactions is often too hard to clean up, so she’ll delete it and instead type fresh while listening to those sections. Overall, though, she finds the transcriptions to be quite reliable and the time saved to be advantageous. Her tight timelines include a 40-day deadline for delivering transcripts of civil and criminal cases for appeals in their appellate district. Riedel said two 40-day extensions are allowed. She notes that just one recent request for a criminal case involved transcribing eight pre-trial hearings and a bench trial that took place over a total of four years.

“With the number of requests, I would be panicked if I still had to type strictly from the recording,” she said.

Judge Ballard concurs.

“The AI transcript is far from perfect and always requires edits, but we have seen a significant reduction in production time by editing the draft versus transcribing the record from scratch,” he said.

The judge has shared his experiences using the technology with other courts as a presenter at the annual Court Technology Conference, which is organized by the Ohio Judicial Conference. He encourages Ohio courts to explore the possibilities.

“Cost is minimal, and production time is exceptionally quick,” Judge Ballard said. “There is no way this system can replace Riedel – but it has definitely made her work life better.”