Court Transcript

No. Court Transcript produces a working draft for a qualified transcriptionist or reviewer to check, correct, and certify through whatever process the court requires. Audio quality, overlapping speech, and legal terminology all need human judgment, and a certified record carries obligations an automated draft cannot meet.

With separation enabled, each distinct voice is returned as its own speaker turn, so the bench, counsel for each side, and a witness do not merge into one block. Labels arrive as numbers and can be renamed in the editor to the bench, the prosecution, the defense, or a named witness before the draft goes to review.

Every turn carries the time at which it was spoken, counted from the start of the recording. A reviewer can move straight to the objection or the answer in question instead of replaying a session from the beginning. That shortens the review of a long day and makes it easier to check a single line against the audio.

Overlapping speech is the hardest case for any recognizer, and a court record is full of it. Court Transcript returns the best available text, but a passage where two voices speak at once should be marked for a human to resolve by ear. Reviewers usually flag those moments and return to them with the audio.

Common audio and video containers, including MP3, M4A, WAV, MP4, MOV, and WebM, can be uploaded, and a link to a hosted recording works too. Court recordings often arrive as proprietary formats from a recording system, which have to be exported to a standard format before upload.

Dictawave passes audio to the speech recognition provider named in its privacy notice and does not keep the uploaded audio after the job finishes. A firm or court handling sealed material should still confirm that this processing matches its own retention and confidentiality rules before any upload.

A session is processed in the order it is submitted, and a recording of a few hours usually returns a draft within a working session rather than overnight. Splitting a day into morning and afternoon submissions keeps the queue short and lets a reviewer start on the first part while the second is still running.

Plain text can be copied or exported for a case management system or a word processor, and SRT is available when a recording needs captions. Speaker labels and timestamps survive in the text, so a reviewer can keep the structure while adapting the draft to the format a court or a firm requires.