|
Wired for
justice Craig Meyer, deputy clerk at the U.S. District Court in Medford, sits in the jury box among the monitors of the newly installed Documentary Evidence Presentation System. Meyer said the system allows jurors to see evidence close-up as it is being explained by witnesses. Courtroom technology aims for fairness By CHRIS BRISTOL Suing a major American corporation is never easy, no matter how level the playing field. Of course, the playing field is rarely level. Nobody knows that better than Medford attorney Kelly Andersen, who took the Ford Motor Co. to court two years ago over a crash in which two women driving a Mercury Sable were seriously injured when the brakes failed on a trip to Crater Lake.Ford flew in some high-powered attorneys from Portland, who tried to impress the jury with some of the fanciest evidence that had ever graced the halls of Medford's tiny federal courthouse. Using computer-video monitors designed to magnify and project hard-to-see car parts such as brakelines and bolts, Ford's attorneys tried to pin the blame on the driver, not the car. The U.S. District Court jury deadlocked. Luckily for the plaintiffs, Andersen negotiated a settlement (the terms remain undisclosed) just before the jury gave up. The experience left a slightly sour taste in his mouth. More than 700 exhibits were introduced as evidence, and Andersen said the defendant's high-tech presentations "put us at a disadvantage." "Ford probably outspent us 20-to-1," he added. "That courtroom was wired." In recent months, the courthouse has been rewired. But this time, the technology belongs to the court, meaning both sides can use it. The new system was installed in October and used for the first time last month, in a civil trial involving a contract dispute between a Klamath Falls man and Weyerhaeuser Co. Federal courts in Eugene and Portland already have the technology. At the heart of it is a projector linked to eight monitors (super flat, like laptop computer screens) in the jury box. The contraption works much like an overhead projector, the kind used in classrooms, except jurors have their own screens to see evidence such as documents and photographs close up.Called the Documentary Evidence Presentation System, or DEPS, the system is networked throughout the courtroom. Other monitors were installed at the attorneys tables, the bench and the witness stand. The judge's clerk controls the system, and the judge has an emergency on/off switch.Craig Meyer, deputy clerk in charge of the Medford federal court, said the system was installed to level the playing field. "It was starting to get unfair, where big firms were coming down from Portland and trying to dazzle juries with technology only they (the attorneys) could afford," he said. Attorneys and witness use video highlight pens -- similar to telestrators used by football analysts like John Madden -- to focus on key pieces of evidence. Printouts can be made, and the highlights can be drawn in different colors. Meyer said a key benefit of the system is that it allows jurors to see a piece of evidence as it is being explained by a witness, instead of waiting for it to be passed around by hand. The projector can zoom in and zoom out, for precise description. "The jurors are all seeing it at the same time the witness is talking about it," Meyer explained. "It's really slick, especially with photographs." But the DEPS system is not just a glorified classroom projector. The system is designed to download evidence directly from computers, including multimedia presentations, which saves time and improves the pace of trials. It also has a VCR and can replay videotaped testimony, along with transcripts. "When attorneys start hooking their PCs into it," he said, "that's when the system will really start to show its full use." Assistant U.S. Attorney Bob Thomson agreed. "The real improvement is having a way to computerize your exhibits," the veteran prosecutor said, "and do everything you need to do with visual aids from your seat." The cost of the system, including hardware and software, was not available from federal officials in Portland. The system was manufactured by New York-based DOAR Communications. Overreliance on fancy presentations can have its down side, especially in civil cases, according to Andersen. Although he supports the neutral use of technology in court, Andersen cautioned that attorneys who get too fancy can run the risk of sending the jury a signal that their clients have lots of money. "Jurors react at a very human level," he said. "The power of a good story is probably better than endless technology." |
