Effective Examination and Cross-examination using MP3 Audio and Microsoft OneNote – Part II, How to Link the Text and Audio

This is Part II of the series of entries on linking audio and text using OneNote for use in court or really for any other forum in which one would want to be able to locate specific sections on audio.  It would work either literally or descriptively.  For example, the text may read something like “Bird Sounds”, describing the content, or “I am talking”, quoting the content itself.

I hope that the attached video is self-explanatory.  Please feel free to ask questions or engage in discussion, as I am always learning more about these applications!

OneNote Audio – Part II

GM

Posted in New Technology and Litigation | Tagged | Leave a comment

Using Audio Notetaker to Assist in Navigating Audio Files for Presentation

A Guide To Generating A Fluid, User-Defined Catalogue Of The Contents Of An Audio Recording.

I recently purchased a copy of Audio Notetaker because I was attracted to its visual depiction of “sound bites”.  In an earlier post, I discussed the use of OneNote to generate a linked, issue-based breakdown or audio files. Whereas OneNote actually links the line of text used to catalogue the moment, Audio Notetaker requires one to actually click on a graphic depiction of the spot on the audio.

Although I still prefer OneNote for quick summary of audio or video, Audio Notetaker makes it easier to work with the audio, in my opinion. The program is very smooth, does not hang at all and feels robust. The audio starts instantly when a “sound bite” is selected.  Unlike OneNote, this program does not currently link the notes made to the audio file, and that is in my opinion an area where this software could improve.  Here is what an audio file looks like when first uploaded into Audio Notetaker… Continue reading

Posted in New Technology and Litigation | Tagged | Leave a comment

Effective Examination and Cross-examination using MP3 Audio and Microsoft OneNote – Part I, The End Product

This is Part I of a few posts through which I aim to teach lawyers and others how to use common software to use audio files in a fluid, powerful, persuasive way. This technique can be used in court or in any other scenario where the presenter is in relative control of the situation and is able to present a person with audio information. In court, this will often be a statement by the individual being questioned. It could, however, be a soundtrack such as a 911 call or media in which there is a significant sound. For example, the sound of a train or a car honking in the background could provide persuasive proof that the audio was not recorded in a remote location far from roads and traffic. Everycase will be different. I imagine that a journalist or broadcaster would be interested in this technique (as may their sound engineer or producer) since it enables specific cataloguing of locations within the media file. Continue reading

Posted in Evidence, New Technology and Litigation | Leave a comment

Litigator’s Guide to Using Video for Direct or Cross-Examination

This is a step by step guide to creating a chaptered video and corresponding questions for a witness for use in court.

Open Microsoft Silverlight Encoder.

media_1288831030616.png

This product is one of a few commercially available video editing tools which enable the user to create reference points inside video or audio files. The same can be done with, for example, Adobe Flash. I will be producing a lesson on the use of Microsoft OneNote to enable real-time refreshing or confrontation of a witness with an audio recording but I have been unable to use OneNote with video. That being said, the OneNote technique is quicker, simpler and more flexible than the approach outlined in this lesson.

Continue reading

Posted in Evidence, New Technology and Litigation | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The Paperless Podium: Hardware, Software and Techniques for Modern Advocacy.

This dialogue is intended to address the needs of anyone who finds a need to persuasively present complex facts. In addition to lawyers, it may be useful to sales professionals, business people, politicians or public relations professionals.
I have a strong interest in and motivation to use changing technology to improve upon my ability to organize information and utilize it in the courtroom and throughout the litigation process. I had an idea back in 2003 that maybe that maybe there was a reason why programs other than Word, Powerpoint and Excel were included in the Microsoft Office suite. I opened up Access and after a few hours of frustration, began to see value in the creation of relational databases for the purpose of case management and preparation. I like the following definition of such databases because it emphasizes the function and benefits to lawyers and other persuasive presenters:

A method of structuring data in the form of records so that relations between different entities and attributes can be used for data access and transformation.

Eventually, other programs caught my interest but I still use Access for certain types of cases. I hope to review and outline some of the many tools that I have come across and hope to uncover new ideas along the way.
It is no secret that modern criminal litigation has resulted in an increased number of cases where evidence is generated in huge quantities. Most cases still involve two to four material witnesses in my guess-timation, but many cases involve upwards of twenty witnesses, business records, phone records, hard drive data, and audio-video recordings. The DVD and even the hard drive have replaced photocopied and stapled documents as the storage medium for case information.

Continue reading

Posted in New Technology and Litigation | Tagged | Leave a comment

Edgar: The Admissibility of an Accused’s Own Statement

After an unusually long vacation this summer I returned to work and it feels as though the ground has shifted a bit. The Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision in R. v. Edgar, released on July 23, 2010, refines and clarifies the law in Ontario on the admissibity of prior statements of an accused person, when tendered by the accused. Until Edgar, I was reasonably confident in the orthodox approach to prior consistent statements of accused persons, in particular given the decision of our Supreme Court in R. v. Rojas. I was off work for an extended period (go ahead and make your Crown/government employee jokes at this time) to return to a few trials over the last week. In four of those trials, the issue of these statements was a live issue, from my perspective, and more importantly that of the presiding Judge. This made it an issue for defence counsel as well. Interestingly, I have heard the words “Brown and Dunn” a few times over the years, but never twice in one week in separate trials, over the same issue. Edgar raises issues for both crown and defence counsel.

Continue reading

Posted in Criminal Law, Evidence | Tagged , | 1 Comment