What detail should NOT typically be found in timestamped annotations?

Timestamped annotations serve as a precise record of relevant moments in a recorded audio or video file, often used in legal contexts such as depositions or court proceedings. These annotations are meant to provide an objective and factual account of the proceedings, allowing for easy navigation and reference to critical parts of the conversation.

The correct answer highlights that personal opinions of the attorney should not typically be included in these annotations. This is because the purpose of timestamped annotations is to document the content of the dialogue rather than the subjective interpretation or stance of the annotator. Including personal opinions could introduce bias or ambiguity, detracting from the neutrality and factual integrity that timestamped annotations are intended to uphold.

In contrast, details such as when recesses begin and end, the identification of key witnesses, and specific phrases used by speakers are essential elements of the record, which help to clarify the context and sequence of events without introducing subjective interpretation. These factual elements ensure that the legal record remains clear, straightforward, and useful for all parties involved.