More updates from Meidas:
“After the jurors were sworn, Judge Merchan introduced Trump as “Mister Donald Trump” while Trump frowns.”
“Judge: “The defendant in this case is MISTER Donald Trump, who is seated to my right.”
Trump’s frown is fixed in place. The defense lawyers stand up and turn to greet the jurors. Trump is slow, last to do so.”
“Reporter Maggie Haberman reported earlier in the day that Trump appeared to have fallen asleep, prompting #SleepyDon to trend for the remainder of the day on Twitter. Then later in the afternoon he appeared to fall asleep for a second time.”
Huh. I stand corrected. But again, that was one specific detail, read back, not copies of the whole trial’s transcripts. Sounds like the jury needed that particular point clarified and the judge okayed it. The judge could also have told the jurors that their memories controlled.
Reporters do readbacks to juries during deliberations all the time, at least in the courts where I worked. As always, I imagine it depends on the venue.
In some jurisdictions, jurors can ask for a portion of the transcript read back to them during deliberation. For obvious reasons, it’s discouraged. I’ve sat through it once or twice. It’s tedious. Absent agreement, they can’t just do a small portion, but have to read the whole witness. In most places I’m familiar with, it’s not an option at all, and the jury is told that at the beginning. They can at least take notes these days.
He can be removed and watch from another room. It is a high threshold.
So, as Procrustus confirmed, it depends on the venue.
No, not the written up transcript.
I believe so, as he was read his “Parker Warning”
MERCHAN: You have the right to be present during the trial and to assist your attorneys….do you understand?
TRUMP: “Yes."
MERCHAN: If you disrupt the proceedings, you can be excluded from the courtroom and committed to jail based on your conduct and the trial will continue on in your absence…do you understand?
TRUMP: “I do.”
MERCHAN: If you do not show up there will be an arrest…do you understand?
TRUMP: “I do.”
That’s the Citizen Capet moment I have longed for.
Right, the official transcripts usually are produced when one or the other party requests their production for an appeal. One or more parties can also request daily rough copy but have to pay separately for it, and I’m not sure what venues allow that to be done by the official reporter only, or allow a freelance reporter hired by the requesting party to sit in and produce an unofficial, never official rush transcript.
It didn’t happen that often, but it did happen enough that it wasn’t extraordinary.
Judges definitely prefer for jurors to rely upon their own recall and notes. We always permitted jurors to take notes. The bailiff would collect their notebooks at the close of each session and safeguard them in my evidence locker until the next session.
Sometimes, though, there would arise a dispute in the jurors’ deliberations about exactly what a witness had said and in what context. The judges I worked with would either 1) call everyone back into open court and have the reporter read back the entire testimony; or 2) Obtain a stipulation from all sides that the court reporter was entrusted to do the total readback in the jury room with only the jurors and the bailiff present.
Depending on the witness that was being read back, it takes almost as long as the original testimony took. Everyone loved it! /s
Now that Aspenglow has weighed in, I do remember where I’ve seen it done has always been California courts.
I’ve learned so much from you and others on the Board about how different every jurisdiction is in how they run their cases. Lots of things are similar, but there are also many variations. Thank you for always being willing to share your expertise – I love discussing it!
Just like the mods keep this place from being the Wild West, the Dopers here with actual legal experience are – most sincerely – invaluable on these threads, keeping many of us from flailing wildly.
And where the Venn Diagram overlaps? Well, that’s just gravy 
Were the attorneys’ objections and the judge’s rulings (not the sidebars, though) read back, too? Depending on how hard the opposing attorney(s) felt like fighting the questions, that could take up a lot of the readback.
FYI, here’s the language from our pattern introductory instruction:
All proceedings in this trial are recorded [by the court reporter] [through electronic means]. Deliberating juries are rarely, if ever, given access to transcripts or recordings of trial testimony. For this reason, you must pay close attention as the testimony is being presented.
Having had to sit through more side bars than I would have liked in the jury box, the other pattern I noticed had to do with questioning a witness. A lawyer would ask a question, objection upheld and told to ask in a different way, try again to be objected to again, then a side bar at which point the lawyer doing the questioning often would drop it completely.
Yep, the whole banana. Excluding sidebars, as you note.
On the rare occasions when the required readback was that extensive, the whole jury usually ended up loathing the jurors who caused it to happen.
Usually the readback required was quite narrow and didn’t take very long, under an hour. Mercifully.
Yeh, the attorney was likely trying to make a point that s/he wasn’t supposed to go into.