Adam Pechtel is a practicing lawyer of the Washington State Bar devoted to protecting the dignity and respect of his clients. As an attorney advising employees who have been cheated out of wages or wrongfully discharged, or protecting the constitutional rights of the accused, it’s Pechtel’s responsibility to present the strongest argument possible.
Examining 2,000 hours of phone calls
Crafting a strong argument requires finding the rights facts. In order to do this, Pechtel must pour through relevant case material and pinpoint key pieces of evidence. In a recent case, Pechtel was presented with almost 2,000 hours of recorded phone calls and tasked with finding pivotal details hidden within them. Combing through that amount of recorded evidence was a daunting task.
A more efficient way to review evidence
Pechtel knew that not all 2,000 hours of phone calls would be useful to him. Still, attempting to randomly listen to portions of recordings and pull out useful information would take far too much time and was not a feasible mode of operation. Converting those audio recordings into a text format to make it digestible — using transcriptionists — would also require a huge upfront cost. This is a tough position to be in. Luckily, Pechtel came across Deepgram.
Instead of reviewing the phone calls internally or paying a contractor, Deepgram could review the recordings for 70x less and limit Pechtel’s review to the recordings that were likely to be relevant to the issues in the case.
Placing focus where it matters
With it’s Deep Search functionality, Deepgram allowed Pechtel to zero in on the phone calls that contained important key words and phrases. In this case, those terms included “DNA,” “birth certificate,” and “citizen.” By processing the case’s phone calls and surfacing important places for Pechtel to review with associated probabilities, Pechtel saved significant time and money.
“There’s tremendous value in knowing that I only need to review the most important material. I can focus on putting together the right argument for my client, rather than getting wrapped up in sifting through evidence.”
— Adam Pechtel, Attorney at Law