Tag: coalition to capture the record

Steven Lerner @ Law360: Coalition For Digital Court Reporting Won’t Disclose Backers

This article was recently posted to the Stenonymous Facebook group.

According to the article, Paul Gaynor is the lobbyist and spokesperson for the Coalition to Capture the Record, an organization I wrote about recently. The companies behind the Coalition do not want to identify themselves to Law360 right now, with Paul Gaynor being quoted, “we’re just rolling this out and we’re getting our ducks in a row…” “We’re not really interested in disclosing it right now. This isn’t some big secret.”

“It’s not a big secret that we’re keeping this secret.”

Mr. Gaynor, were we born yesterday?

Sue Terry, former President of the National Court Reporters Association and current chair of the NCRA Strong Committee is quoted as saying “legitimate organizations prioritize transparency and want to be accessible to the public.” “The absence of clear contact details, physical address, direct telephone numbers, coupled with the lack of publicly accessible ownership information would be giant red flags for me.”

National Court Reporters Association President Kristen Anderson is also quoted. “I am unsure how any reputable entity would venture to gather industry recognition, respect, and reputation by remaining anonymous.” “Since their [motto] is ‘collaborating to ensure equal access to justice’ on their website, how is that even done if you do not know who is sponsoring the platform for ‘collaborating’?” “Unmasking the arcane presentation of this coalition would serve the best interests of the public, the legal system, the bar, the judiciary, and legal advocacy organizations across the country.”

I don’t want to steal Mr. Lerner’s thunder. If you have any interest, you should go read the article. Sorry about the paywall. I will say that it uses California’s shortage, forecasted to be 20x worse than some other parts of the country, to make the case for “real” shortage. It’s kind of like sticking your head in an oven and claiming the whole room is too hot. It also ignores the elephant in the room that they were not using funds earmarked to obtain and retain court reporters while going to the media and crying shortage. It also ignores the fact that the better-paid private sector work is getting covered with far fewer problems. No money, big problems. Meanwhile we have these little shadow groups throwing money on digital all damn day.

I will say this too: There are two lines in the article that make me laugh.

  1. “The exact degree of the shortage has been debated in the legal industry for years, with some stenographers arguing that legal service organizations exaggerate the shortage to drum up new digital court reporting business.” We haven’t been arguing. We documented and exposed this fraud. You refuse to write that because you or the folks above you discriminate against people with disabilities. That’s okay. Don’t worry. Society is on your side. It’ll be a funny thing if my field ever funds me enough to light Law360 on literary fire for failing to address a fraud being perpetrated against civil litigation lawyers that’s been public knowledge for *checks notes* almost 3 years. I’m sure your subs will go up when that becomes more widely known.
  2. “The Speech to Text Institute, a former nonprofit that advocated for a similar position, disbanded after 2022.” In actuality, stenographers backing me helped me expose them for fraud, leading to Trey Perez’s eventual lawsuit against them and others, which the Speech-to-Text Institute has not “legally” answered to. In fact, the organization replied to the lawsuit after its “disbanding”, just not with a legal document known as an “answer.”

There has not been much movement on the lawsuit front. The most recent docket report shows no changes from the last time I viewed it. Available below.

Docket-Report-Trey-Perez-LawsuitDownload

All my creative language aside, appreciate the article very much. Hope to see more that I can share from Mr. Lerner and Law360. The stenographic community loves coverage. I don’t know if Law360 can turn that into subscription dollars, but it ought to try. After all, I bought a subscription to the New York Law Journal. I could easily see myself picking up one for Law360 next year.

P.S.

To my fans that participate in Protect Your Record Project group or activities, it’s my humble opinion that you can help protect the record by letting attorneys know the Veritext fraud is public knowledge. They can Google it. The whole world can Google it. And Veritext let the statute of limitations on defamation lapse so it will literally never be disputed in a court of law. A few of you have come to me and said they’re so upset with Veritext and the prices and yadda yadda. Capitalize on that.

The more lawyers that learn about this fraud, the more that might report it to the FTC. If enough do, the FTC might actually do something. It’s as simple as that. If nothing else, as word spreads, news media might be more amenable to publishing the truth instead of its groupthink garbage.

Perhaps donate to PYRP today instead of Stenonymous.

All I’m saying is… let’s make this a reality:

The court reporter shortage fraud has not received adequate media attention despite the lawsuit against the Speech-to-Text Institute and the continued obfuscation of groups supporting digital court reporting.

Addendum:

I later was told Law360 is a strict B2B provider and the cost is at least a few hundred dollars a month. So that impacts some of the comments I made on this page.

Does Coalition to Capture the Record Really Have An Access-to-Justice Mission?

The Coalition to Capture the Record was brought to my attention.

First interesting thing to note, the website doubles down on the shortage narrative of the Speech-to-Text Institute Bloc, the group of corporations I identified as having joined in a fraud.

Note that then-NCRA-President Jason Meadors had previously noted the Ducker Report that had forecasted the shortage had been pretty well debunked. This is following NCRA STRONG’s assertion that it was outdated. I guess I played a role there too.

The Coalition to Capture the Record doubles down on the court reporter shortage fraud despite a president of the largest court reporting association in the country admitting Ducker was debunked and a committee of the National Court Reporters Association more or less describing it as defunct.

They also conveniently sidestep the access-to-justice issues previously brought up by stenographers. Digital and AI could cause more harm than good.

There’s also an implication that it’ll bring down the cost of litigation. This long-running lie was called into question by a 2009 study.

So once again, it’s that same behavior we saw Speech-to-Text Institute engaging in. “The shortage is the shortage and we can’t beat it so we must go digital.” This is being done despite the overwhelming evidence that localized shortages can be beat. For example, in New York City, a localized Bronx shortage was recently plugged in our courts. Turns out when we actually try to fill these spots, we’re successful, and the political machinery that stops us from filling spots is the problem.

There’s also a pull from STAR’s playbook, the organization a lot of the fraudsters ran to in order to legitimize their positions again (they also went AAERT). They call for unity.

If digital court reporters and stenographers are equal, why aren’t they paid the same? I know that bothers my audience. But let’s ask that question out loud and often, because eventually digital court reporters will start asking for more — and then this whole song and dance becomes moot, because it’s about replacing our workforce with a workforce that’s easier to abuse and control. It has never, ever been about shortage.

Ever.

This next gem led me to conclude that this is not a serious organization, but a potential propaganda front.

Why does the Coalition to Capture the Record care about whether digital court reporters will replace stenographers?

Think about it. If your mission is access to justice, what does anything else matter? All this stuff about shortage and “we won’t replace you”, and all that nonsense, it’s not a message you would write to people interested in access. It’s a message you would write to stenographers you are trying to placate so that they don’t take a stand against their own elimination. A narrative to disarm and demoralize. “Give up, there is nothing you can do, join us.”

I believe in access to justice. I signed up for more information. And with time and evidence, my views may change.

But does anyone see what I’m seeing?

P.S.

I’m going to write about something on my mind. You’re not expected to read it.

The Max Azzarello thing happened outside my courthouse. Luckily for me, I wasn’t there, but I did see a brief video clip.

He’s been described as this gentle soul, intelligent guy that went downhill after his mother, who he had a close relationship with, died.

I wondered how many people might say the same about me, if I passed away. Admittedly, my relationship with my mother was not close, but we loved each other deeply. But how many of you would come out of the woodwork to call me a conspiracy theorist in my death? And despite not a peep while I’m alive and well to defend myself and my beliefs.

Of course, I’m never going to hurt myself. It’s not going to happen. Maybe that’ll be the deciding factor. And should anything suspicious occur, I hope my loved ones don’t accept a false narrative.

There’s also the fact that what I write about was real and what he wrote about was a distorted version of the truth. Yes, big money interests are using their wealth and power to influence markets, governments, and consumers. Yes, the government has serious problems because it’s woefully ill equipped to deal with lawbreaking businesses in the quantity and on the scale that they exist today.

But I can’t help but empathize. I know how it feels to scream into the void and hear nothing back.

If someone finds this corner of the internet and you’re in a dark place…

…I’ve been there too.

Hurting yourself isn’t the way. Certainly not self-immolation. The future will be brighter with you in it.

A better tomorrow needs builders. If your story ends here, how can the world change for the better?

I’ll tell you what most people told me.

You are not alone.