Opinion ID: 380919
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Use of Recording Devices and Tape Transcripts

Text: 28 The government provided the two informants with concealed mechanical devices which recorded the conversations and negotiations for drug purchases which they had with several of the appellants. Guilty verdicts on several counts arising from the recordings were returned against Stampede Johnson, Slade and Redd. 29 Following testimony as to how the tape recordings were electronically enhanced to remove background noise, the recording was played for the jury. (Gov't Ex. 10). The prosecution also provided the jurors with a prepared written transcript of the recording. (Gov't Ex. 11). The transcript was not entered into evidence. At the same time the following instruction was given by the trial judge: 30 (T)his paper that has been handed to you is the government's interpretation of what appears on these tapes. However, you will listen to the tapes very carefully and make your own interpretation of what appears on the tapes from what you hear. If you think you hear something differently than the government has interpreted on this paper, then you will follow your own interpretation. (Tr. at 482). 31 The transcript revealed that portions of the tape were largely unintelligible. The prosecution skipped over large portions of this tape and all subsequent tapes entered into evidence, because of sections identified in the transcripts as street, background, or unidentified noise. 5