Issue 261 Telepresence court January 30, 2014

You may have heard of the word telepresence or even read my article here on my blog about it. For those who don't know what it is, it is the use of a remote operated robot or device where a doctor or a boss in a company can have it move around and conduct day to day business without ever leaving the office. It does have limitations, but for those jobs that don't require a hand's on approach it works. In this case, could the same concept be expanded into the court room?

With respect to prisoners: Right now tax payers pay our government thousands of dollars a year with some of that money going to pay for what goes on in a court room. One of the most expensive aspects of this is the protecting of a prisoner or suspect to and from the jails for prosecution, hearings or business that requires a defendant to be in the court room in general. As such, the telepresence device could be used in the defendant’s stead. This meets with the Constitutional requirement that stipulates that the defendant must be able to face his/her accusers. The robot thankfully does just that via its camera, listening device and speaker for when the defendant wishes to speak. As such, no longer will we have to deal with the cost of transporting potentially dangerous criminals or protecting them while in transport to and from the jail and the court room.

This benefit also expands to defendants who committed crimes in multiple States. So say you have a defendant who committed a crime in both New York and Georgia (or even another country), the telepresence device can be used to have the defendant be present for both hearing and trials in both places and simultaneously if necessary. Again, this saves money as police no longer have to escort the defendant via aircraft or car from one State (or country) to another. This saves countless dollars in just transport costs alone.

Additionally, many juries judge a defendant also on looks. An example is from presidential elections, the younger looking guy usually wins because they are more attractive. In the case of the court room it works the same way, the young/good looking get an edge over the ugly. This technology removes the looks factor to make it harder to make a decision on the person’s guilt based on looks and puts the burden of proof much more squarely on the facts.

With respect to Judges and lawyers: Again, this technology allows for the lawyers or Judges to appear in court without actually being there physically. Say the best lawyer in the country is in Texas, but the trial is in Alaska. The telepresence device can allow that lawyer to be there to defend the client without having to even make the trip. How about the Judge getting into an accident or it’s a special federal court that exists only in one place? This allows the judge to be present even if incapacitated of if he/she needs to be in a specific place at a key specific time. So if you are pulled over for a ticket and want to dispute it, you may be able to dispute the ticket right there on the side of the road with the judge via telepresence.

Conclusion: This is a fun and interesting technology that has many applications. The court room is just one place that can use telepresence that will in turn save the taxpayers allot of money. See you tomorrow for other intriguing applications for this technology.