There are many challenges associated with ethnographic court research. What options do researchers have when they want to understand a trial, but were unable to attend in person?

In this blog post, we reflect on alternative sources of courtroom data in three legal jurisdictions- England and Wales, Germany and Sweden- the processes associated with obtaining these data, and the impact these alternatives may have on the research we can conduct.

England and Wales (Chloe Squires)

Court transcripts can be a useful alternative when you are unable attend a case in person. In England and Wales, court transcripts can be requested for most legal cases and can be acquired in various forms. For example, the whole case, sentencing remarks, or differing sections of the trial can be requested (see HM Courts & Tribunal Service, 2026), each detailing different sections of the case. Sentencing remarks are most commonly sought by researchers, as these documents detail the sentence imposed by the judge, and their reasons for imposing such sentence.

The process begins with locating a relevant trial which is relevant for your work. Locating these details are similar to locating a trial to observe in-person (see Squires, 2025), though without the time sensitive restrictions.

Once the details of the case have been identified, the correct documentation must be completed (see GOV.UK, n.d) and submitted to the court in which the trial was held. This application will be processed by court staff before, in most cases, being passed to the judge who presided over the case to grant or deny permission of the request. This results in one of three outcomes:

Firstly, and most commonly, the judge approves the application, which is then passed on to the relevant transcription company. The relevant section of the case recording is passed from the court to the transcription company, and you will receive a quote for completing the transcription. Charges are processed by ‘folio’, which consists of 72 words. Transcription services may charge up to £2.25 per folio, a cost which can quickly mount up. In 2024, a victim of sexual assault was quoted £22,000 to obtain a transcript of her trial in which her alleged attacker was found not guilty of rape (Stonehouse, 2024). These significant costs pose challenges to accessing even these alternative data for courtroom observation and legal analysis.

Secondly, the judge approves the application and provides the relevant documents free of charge. This may be because the requested element of the transcript is already available to them (for example, sentencing remarks had been written by them and therefore easy to share), or the transcription had been paid for previously by someone else. This is less common, but it is a welcome surprise when it happens.

The third potential, and least common, outcome is that your application is rejected, and you are not able to obtain the transcript.

However, the process of obtaining court transcripts is costly and often time consuming and are limited in the insights that they can deliver. Transcripts cannot account for the full experience of in-person courtroom observations, such as capturing emotion, tone of language, or other interactions which individual researchers often have in the courtroom environment. They also cannot be provided for ongoing cases, only those in which the sentence has been passed , meaning that their insights are quickly dated.

Many struggle to tackle this challenge of obtaining court transcripts, even journalists who work in the court (Elmhirst, 2024). Some victims can request sentencing remarks free of charge, and other cases are made available online for free (see Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, n.d), but accessing this resource is often a challenge, regardless of your relationship to or interest in the case.

Germany (Nicole Bögelein)

Though court transcripts are a useful alternative in England and Wales, there are no transcripts of court proceedings in Germany.

In criminal proceedings before regional and higher regional courts, a record of procedural formalities is kept (e.g., that a witness testified and at what time). However, there is no such thing as substantive records of the testimony of witnesses and experts, as well as the statements made by the defendant – these are simply not documented (Bundesministerium der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz, 2023).

In lower courts, short paraphrases of what was said during the case may be recorded. However, these minutes are not accessible for researchers.

There is a debate about whether records/transcripts should be produced: during the NSU-trial (National Socialist Underground), transcripts were demanded by different actors due to the historical meaning of a neo-Nazi group being able to kill ten people within a decade in Germany and going unnoticed, but were denied by the court (Arnold & Heghmann, 2023). Following the trial, Section 169, 2 Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz [Judicature Act] was introduced, allowing audio recordings to be made for hearings in limited instances, such as research or archival purposes in cases of outstanding historical interest and documenting historical or landmark cases. To date, this has only happened once (Legal Tribune Online, 2020): The attack on a synagogue and subsequent killing of two people in Halle, Germany. To apply for these recordings, one must state reasonable interest to the court.

An initiative to legally implement digital recordings in higher courts was discontinued due to change of government (Bundesrat, 2024). Nevertheless, these recordings would only be made available to researchers once a binding rule has been made. So, while they may have provided some additional context retrospectively, they would not be an alternative to learning about ongoing cases - much like in England and Wales. So, they are not even in terms of timeliness an alternative to courtroom ethnography.

Other efforts have been made to share details from the courtroom. Journalists or other observers sometimes produce and provide minutes of the cases they have been present for. For example, “NSU WATCH” provides minutes of each day of the hearing (NSU-Watch, 2013), a public broadcasting service does so too (Bayerischer Rundfunk, n.d.). The Halle Synagogue trial has also been recorded by an NGO together with the media (VBRG, 2021). Finally, there is an academic initiative at the University of Marburg; students– as part of their degree programme – go into courts and take minutes. Unfortunately, again, the protocols are only available once a binding ruling has been made (Philipps-Universität Marburg, n.d.).

Sweden (Nina Törnqvist)

Like Germany, there are no court transcripts in Sweden. Yet, in my experience the biggest challenge as a courtroom ethnographer has not been finding information about cases when they are finished, but to find them in the first place. In my research projects, courtroom interactions have been at the core of the project’s objectives and without being there in person observing the legal professionals’ performances essential parts of the study would have been lost. To secure access and information about upcoming cases of relevance, I and my colleagues have spent a great deal of time building good relationships with the prosecution offices’ and court’s personnel (i.e. heads of division, judges, prosecutors, clerks, court administration). This approach has generally been very successful. For example, courts and prosecution chambers have contacted us when they had cases coming up that we might be interested in observing. Getting in contact with a gatekeeper that is genuinely interested in your research is, of course, central here.

Another option for finding cases of interest is to rely on the schedules of upcoming trials that individual courts post one to two weeks in advance. In addition, when entering a court, there are screens displaying the cases of the day and the offenses they cover. All of these options provide routes to observing courtroom proceedings which mean that seeking alternative means to understanding trials is not often required.

However, in trials, as well as in life in general, unforeseen events occur. In one case I observed, I was unable to attend the last day of the trial due to a funeral I wanted to go to. In this case, the judge arranged for me to follow the trial via video link from another court. This kind of accommodating attitude is not something I would take for granted, but this act illustrates the strength of trustful relations in ethnography and demonstrates how institutional trust produce flexible access.

Thankfully, there are other ways of covering part of trials that you cannot observe in full. While there are no court transcripts in Sweden, it is possible to obtain the trial’s audio recordings, enabling researchers to gain knowledge about what happened during a day of the trial. These recordings include all oral examinations and cross-examinations and can also be very beneficial to complement your fieldnotes taken in the courtroom (Flower, 2020). Lastly, written judgements in Sweden usually summarize the key points of all testimonies given, so collecting judgements and other legal documents can also give some insight into what was said in the courtroom.

Overall, the Swedish courts that I have been in contact with to collect legal documents have been very helpful and accommodating. The principle of public access is very strong in Sweden and courts are obliged to handle matters promptly (The Swedish Parliament, 1949).

Conclusions

In conclusion, these different sources of data are useful to provide insight into court processes which researchers are unable to attend in person. However, the methodological impact of these data sources must be considered too. How helpful these different alternatives would be depends on your research question and method.

In Sweden, the audio recordings could offer insight into what was being said, but do not let you in on facial expressions, body language and legal decision-making. In England and Wales, transcripts are useful to explain the content and context of the trial, the arguments made, and the evidence put forward they cannot capture the full range of the courtroom experiences, such as work which looks at emotions and backstage interactions. In Germany, where only minutes produced by journalists or researchers are available, you only get a second-hand impression of the case.

Despite these issues, we argue that these alternatives are useful to keep up with the basic routine of a case that is long, you cannot visit every single day, or at all. Ethnography is an immersive technique, but it also allows for flexibility. As with all court-based research, this is a case of trial and error.

References

Arnold, J., & Heghmann, M. (2023). Der NSU-Prozess Deutschland 2013–2018 [The NSU trial in Germany 2013–2018]. Lexikon der politischen Strafprozesse, Stiftung Kurt Groenewold. https://www.lexikon-der-politischen-strafprozesse.de/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/NSU-Prozess.pdf

Bayerischer Rundfunk. (n.d.). Zschäpe & Co. vor Gericht: Die NSU-Protokolle. https://www.br.de/nachricht/nsu-prozess/nsu-prozess-saalinformationen-ueberblick-100.html

Bundesministerium der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz. (2023). Digitale Dokumentation der strafgerichtlichen Hauptverhandlung an Land- und Oberlandesgerichten [Digital documentation of criminal trials at district and higher regional courts]. https://www.bmjv.de/DE/themen/digitales/digitalisierung_justiz/hauptverhandlungen/hauptverhandlungen_node.html

Bundesrat. (2024). Gesetz zur digitalen Dokumentation der strafgerichtlichen Hauptverhandlung und zur Änderung weiterer Vorschriften (Hauptverhandlungsdokumentationsgesetz, DokHVG) [Act on the digital documentation of criminal trials and on the amendment of other provisions]. https://www.vermittlungsausschuss.de/SharedDocs/beratungsvorgaengeva/DE/20wp/603-23.html

Courts and Tribunals Judiciary. (n.d.). Judgments. https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/

Elmhirst, S. (2024, July 11). The Old Bailey’s dying art of the court reporter and justice. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/news/article/2024/jul/11/old-bailey-dying-art-court-reporter-justice

Flower, L. (2020). Interactional justice: The role of emotions in the performance of loyalty. Routledge.

GOV.UK. (n.d.). Apply for a transcript of a court or tribunal hearing. https://www.gov.uk/apply-transcript-court-tribunal-hearing

HM Courts & Tribunals Service. (2026). Guidance for requesting a transcript. GOV.UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/order-a-transcript-of-court-or-tribunal-proceedings-form-ex107/guidance-for-requesting-a-transcript

Legal Tribune Online. (2020, December 21). Halle attacker sentenced to life imprisonment. https://www.lto.de/persistent/a_id/43796

NSU-Watch. (2013). Sitzungstermine NSU-Prozess am OLG München [Hearings for the NSU trial at the Munich Higher Regional Court]. https://www.nsu-watch.info/2013/05/sitzungstermine/

Philipps-Universität Marburg. (n.d.). Verfahren vor dem OLG Frankfurt gegen Heinrich XIII. Prinz Reuß et al. | „Reichsbürger-Prozess“ (2024) [Proceedings before the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court against Heinrich XIII, Prince Reuss, et al. | “Reichsbürger Trial” (2024)]. https://www.uni-marburg.de/de/icwc/trial-monitoring/verfahren/deutschland/verfahren-gegen-die-gruppe-um-heinrich-xiii-prinz-reuss

Squires, C. (2025, September 1). Open justice and obscured access: Barriers to courtroom research in England and Wales. In Court Blog. https://www.in-court.org/blog/20250901-open-justice-and-obscured-access-barriers-to-courtroom-research-in-england-and-wales/

Stonehouse, R. (2024, January 23). ‘Shock’ as victim’s family quoted £22k for rape trial transcript. BBC News. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-68033275

The Swedish Parliament. (1949). Freedom of the Press Act (SFS 1949:105). Ministry of Justice.

Verband der Beratungsstellen für Betroffene rechter, rassistischer und antisemitischer Gewalt e.V. (VBRG). (2021). Vollständige Dokumentation zum Halle-Prozess in Englisch, Türkisch, Russisch und Deutsch [Complete documentation on the Halle trial in English, Turkish, Russian, and German]. https://verband-brg.de/vollstaendige-dokumentation-zum-halle-prozess-in-englisch-tuerkisch-russisch-und-deutsch/