What should a reporter do when instructed to strike something from the record?

• A. Delete it permanently
• B. Transcribe it as usual
• C. Summarize the information instead
• D. Mark it as a deletion in the transcript

Answer: (B)

When instructed to strike something from the record, the reporter must adhere to the conventions of court reporting, which entail accurately reflecting what occurs during a proceeding while also honoring the requests of the presiding judicial authority. The correct action is to mark the information accordingly, ensuring there is a clear record of what was discussed.

Marking it as a deletion serves several purposes: it maintains the integrity of the transcript by recording that a statement was made, thereby preserving the context and flow of the dialogue. This is critical, particularly in legal settings where the transcripts may be reviewed later; they need to capture all that transpired, even if certain parts are no longer considered part of the official record.

In contrast, simply deleting the content permanently would lead to a lack of transparency regarding what was discussed, which could have repercussions in legal proceedings. Transcribing it as usual would not adhere to the instruction to strike it from the record, and summarizing the information instead could distort the original context, leading to potential misinterpretations. Thus, marking it as a deletion ensures clarity and accuracy in the reporting process.