-4- In conclusion I wish to point out the vast difference between ordinary court reporting and reporting on a daily copy basis, as in this trial. In any American court a transcript of proceedings is not prepared except if the case is appealed or if an attorney requests a transcript. In the latter case, the court reporter prepares the record and sells it to the attorney at a specified rate per page. Otherwise the reporter files his notes in the Clerk’s office, and he is through for the day. Where a daily copy record of proceedings is required, as in this case, the operation is much more difficult. Not only must a transcript be made every day but it must be ready by a certain time each evening. Accordingly, the reporting is done in relay during which specified time pressure is always on the court reporter to record everything accurately without having to incur the delay of checking an error or omission at recess or of interrupting the trial for repetition of testimony or colloquy; and he must be absolutely correct in relation to the marking and reading of exhibits for fear of mis-leading the Court as to the evidence. Transcription is then done by the reporter immediately that he is relieved in Court. In the States it is done by dictating the notes into a dictaphone for transcription by a force of dictaphone operator. But here there are no such facilities, and the reporters must type it themselves at the greatest speed of which they are capable for they must shortly return to court and the transcript must be ready on time in the order in which it was recorded, else the entire mechanics of turning out the record will be retarded. This imposes a great mental and physical strain on the reporter; and it is so here – even more so because of the lack of the proper facilities for doing the work, and any reference material whatsoever. [signed Jack Greenberg] JACK GREENBERG Chief Court Reporter.