Let's talk about three-camera depositions.
Over the last several years, I have gotten in the habit of using three cameras in the vast majority of the depositions I take.
What is a three-camera deposition? A three-camera deposition (at least, the way I do it) has a camera on the witness, a separate camera on the lawyer doing the questioning (me), and a third camera on the document being shown to the witness. That third camera is either an Elmo or an iPevo document camera that's being recorded, thereby allowing me to point to things on the document, underline passages, or highlight things.
All three cameras are rolling during the entirety of the deposition. This means that, at the end of the deposition, you are left with three separate recorded camera feeds from three separate cameras.
The magic comes in the editing process. With your videographer, you carefully select and designate which camera feed should be shown on the screen at any given time. It is also possible to edit the feeds together so that a "split screen" is being shown with the witness and the document they're reviewing at the time, or with the questioning lawyer and the witness at the same time. A good videographer can do all of this for you.
I could write a lot here about the technical aspects, tricks, and challenges of doing depositions this way. And, yes, they are typically more expensive than a traditional videotaped deposition with a single camera.
For now, I want to talk about why I do it this way.
When it comes to trying cases successfully, you must view the proceedings from the perspective of your audience -- the jury. You must be considerate of the jury. I think trial lawyers often lose sight of this reality, which is a huge mistake.
The fundamental problem with traditional one-camera video depositions is that they are painfully boring to watch. What a juror sees is a head in a box talking ("blah-blah-blah"). After a while, the testimony starts sounding to the jury like Charlie Brown's teacher ("wah-wah-wah"). The background isn't even interesting. It is typically some grey screen that the videographer was taught to erect behind the witness's chair. What the jury hears is a voice off the screen (the lawyer) asking questions and the head in the box (the witness) answering them in front of a boring grey background. Why? Well, because "we've always done it that way!"
It is no wonder why judges and lawyers speak of jurors falling asleep during boring video depositions being shown one after the other in court.
The entire purpose of the three-camera setup is to address this problem. The purpose is to be considerate of the jury. Does a three-camera set up solve the problem? No. Nothing can solve it entirely. And that, my friend, is why I do not like video depositions. But it is certainly an improvement.
Think of a typical 60 Minutes interview. The goal of a three-camera deposition is to create an end product for the jury that looks as close to that as possible, and I often explain to videographers that this is the precise effect I am after.
When done properly, a good three-camera deposition is short, to the point, easy to follow, and interesting to the audience. One second the lawyer's face is shown asking a question, and a split second later the witness's face is shown answering it. When done well, it is kind of like watching a tennis match. The action is always moving and playing out on the screen, and it is more like watching a conversation in person in court as opposed to the single "head in the box" perspective.
So, there you have it. Being considerate of the jury is why I do it. If you've never tried doing a three-camera deposition, I am sure you have numerous questions, not the least of which is the cost. If so, send me an email or give me a call. I'd be happy to discuss those topics with you or answer any questions.
