Data for the evaluation came from observations and interviews during a March 1985 site visit to the Jefferson County Circuit Court in Louisville, Ky. The system has four fixed, wall-mounted color cameras in the courtroom and one camera in Judge Higgins's chambers, along with six voice-activated microphones in the courtroom and one microphone in chambers. A computer-programmed sound mixer controls the switching among cameras and microphones. The system has operated extremely well to date and has been well received by all participants in the proceedings before Judge Higgins. Transcripts have already been prepared from the videotape record for some cases, Kentucky appellate courts have agreed to hear videotaped matters, but conclusions have not yet been reached about the suitability of videotape records for appellate review. The system has about the same costs as the other methods, but its benefits are far greater. Videotape without transcription should be the preferred approach, followed closely by videotape with transcription. Other alternatives, in order of prefernce, are sound recording, use of per-diem reporters, the use of computer-aided transcription (CAT) with machine shorthand, traditional manual or machine shorthand, and machine shorthand without CAT. The Kentucky courts should stop further commitments to CAT and should move toward statewide use of videotaping. 1 figure, 7 tables, 37 footnotes.