That tape, along with the already infamous one of President Clinton testifying in the Monica S. Lewinsky scandal, will likely mean a cash bonanza for the dozen or so Washington companies hired by lawyers to capture the words, squirmings and brow-moppings of witnesses on the small screen. Video depositions have been around for about 15 years, experts say, though they have become vastly more popular since the early 1990s as lawyers increasingly realize that a picture can be worth a fortune in jury awards, and instrumental in swaying judges, too. Today, about 25 percent of lawyers use tape. I expect that number to rise to 75 percent in the next five years. Video typically figures in more mundane cases than the head-turners vexing the two Bills.
Cameras often record wills likely to be challenged in court.
And when a trial may drag on for years, lawyers hire videographers to ensure that witnesses get a chance to tell their stories while still fresh in their minds. Taping is now also part of trials, such as sexual-harassment cases, in which attorneys are challenging witnesses' credibility. In part, the popularity of taping stems from rules, adopted by federal and state courts in the early 1990s, that allow lawyers to record depositions without seeking the permission of a judge. Today, lawyers typically need only notify a witness that a video camera will be taping the proceedings. But the court's rule writers are primarily responding to market forces, law firm experts say.