JET-WG National Webinar March 17, 2005 Hosted by the Federal Judicial Center

1. JET-WGNational Webinar March 17, 2005Hosted by theFederal Judicial Center The Administrative Office/Department of Justice Joint Working Group on Electronic Technology in the Criminal Justice System

2. Panelists • Tony Gallagher, JET-WG Chair and Federal Defender, District of Montana • Hon. John Hughes, District of New Jersey • Barbara Sale, Chief, Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Maryland • Curt Bohling, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Western District of Missouri • Ken Withers, Senior Education Attorney, Federal Judicial Center

3. Agenda • Overview of JET-WG Report and Recommendations • Open Mike: “View from the trenches” • Establishment of local working groups • Supporting materials on the FJC web site • Open mike: “Where do we go from here?”

4. The Working Group’s Report Underlying premises of the report • Virtually all legal, business and technical data resides on computers • Computers have become so commonplace that most criminal cases today involve some computer-stored information • All practitioners– and all judges– must understand how to deal with digital information

5. The Working Group Genesis of the Working Group • AO Director’s January 1998 Report on Costs and Recommendations for the Control of Costs of the Defender Services Program • Proposes initiatives to reduce or control costs of litigation • Requires coordination and cooperation between AOUSC and the Department of Justice

6. The Administrative Office/ Department of Justice Joint Working Group on Electronic Technology in the Criminal Justice System is the direct outgrowth of that 1998 AO report.

7. The Working Group Early efforts • Initial meeting in June 1999 • “Tripartisan" working group

8. The Working Group Mission Statement • “To advance the fair administration of justice in the exchange and use of electronic data in a cooperative and cost-effective manner for all parties when required by the rules, when consistent with local custom and practice (compatible with privilege), or mandated by court order.”

9. Highlights of the Working Group’s recommendations General recommendations • Continue a working group • Bring investigative agencies into the planning process • Form local working groups • Promote local and national training for all participants in the system

10. Highlights of the Working Group’s recommendations General recommendations • Avoid blanket rules • Digitize information in a format readable by all parties

11. Highlights of the Working Group’s recommendations Discovery Stage • Parties should evaluate whether digitization is appropriate as early as possible • Discoverable electronic data should not be degraded • Discoverable data should be produced to the opposition, subject to ethical rules, cost sharing arrangements, and work-product principles

12. Highlights of the Working Group’s recommendations Pre-trial Stage • Hold "meet and confer" sessions similar to those used in civil practice • Give notice to the Court as soon as possible of the proposed use of electronic evidence

13. Highlights of the Working Group’s recommendations Pre-trial Stage • Hold timely pretrial conferences to resolve issues related to electronic discovery and presentation • Make automation specialist(s), if any, available to answer any questions from the Court

14. Highlights of the Working Group’s recommendations Trial Stage • Courtrooms should be appropriately equipped so parties and the Court have access to digital resources and can use them in presentations • Courtrooms should be able to accommodate hardware supplied by the parties • methods to preserve electronic evidence and presentations for appellate review should be developed

15. Cooperation/common interests Trial Lawyers • Must develop familiarity with • Computer hardware • Programming techniques • Principles governing the structure of stored data • Operation of data processing systems

16. Cooperation/common interests Judges • Must become familiar with computer technology's impact on the court culture • Also must • Maximize the use of electronic data • Develop ways of dealing with technology and electronic data

17. Cooperation/common interests Ultimate goal • “The creation of fair, efficient, and cost- effective ways of integrating technology into the Criminal Justice process, while ensuring the successful operation of the constitutionally-based adversary system of justice by which both federal criminal laws and federally guaranteed rights are enforced.”

18. The report of the Joint Working Group is a first step in reaching that goal.

19. Questions and Comments • Does the Report address real issues in your district? • Are there any important technology issues not addressed in the Report? • How does district “culture” affect these issues?

20. Questions and Comments • Are district working groups being established? • How do they get started? • Who is on these groups? • What are they doing?

21. Questions and Comments • What is the continuing role for the National Working Group?

22. Draft Protocols and Checklists • Protocol for District Working Groups • Checklist and Questionnaire for Case Evaluation • Protocol for “Meet and Confer” • Training Checklist

23. Where do we go from here?

24. JET-WGNational Webinar March 17, 2005Ken Withers: kwithers@fjc.govor 202-502-4065 The Administrative Office/Department of Justice Joint Working Group on Electronic Technology in the Criminal Justice System