Transmit judicial hearings twice as fast

What was done

The fact sheet on PAROLE recalls that 85,000 hours of court hearings are conducted each year and that one hour of hearing is traditionally six to seven hours of transcript. Designed by NATO as a common solution for the internal security forces, the platform primarily serves the filmed hearings of minors victims and judicial listening. The investigator files the audio or video file; The tool transcribes it in a few minutes, distinguishes the speakers, then an integrated editor allows to correct, to reallocate the words and to produce a workable text in the procedure, synchronized with the video. According to the page, one hour of recording is processed in six to seven minutes, 4,000 hours of audio spend each month on the platform, and the transcript work is divided by two (three to four hours per hearing hour). The architecture is fully internal, with unique traceability and authentication, and has ended unframed local initiatives. The fact sheet states that the pilot project continues on a voluntary limited perimeter, with a gradual spread.

Before you start

Tool cited by the source: PAROLE (ANFSI). Fill in the bracketed items: [coller]. Strip confidential data that is not needed and check your tool’s access terms. Features and plans can change.

The method, in three steps.

1. 01

   Gather the context

   Spot the bracketed items in the prompt ([coller]) and prepare what they ask for.

2. 02

   Adapt the prompt

   Copy the prompt below, replace the bracketed items, then paste it into the AI assistant you use. The cited tool (PAROLE (ANFSI)) is not necessarily available to the public..

3. 03

   Reread before using

   Reread the result, correct it if needed and keep the final decision. Caveats are detailed below.

Your starting point.

Replace the bracketed items, then adapt the proposal to your situation. This prompt is written by the iadujour desk It is not a quotation from the source.

Here is an automatic interview transcript, with its speakers: [coller].

Help me read it again without rewriting it:
1. Report passages where the speaker's attribution seems doubtful.
2. Finds the probably poorly recognized words (own names, places, numbers, dates) and proposes a hypothesis in square brackets.
3. Indicates inaudible or cut passages.
Never change the meaning or wording of the words.

What deserves your attention