Sample script explainer on interpreters working in court with references. A very useful guide on what and how to say when in court.
Explaining how interpreters work in court (script and main references)
Script: “I have been instructed by the court and for the court – specifically to interpret matters discussed in court. It would therefore be impossible for me to be impartial if I have access to confidential information discussed between counsel and their client outside of court before and after the court sits.”
Main reference source: Advocates Gateway
Par. 6.4 bullet 3
- The court has a responsibility to book appropriately qualified and registered SLIs in cases with deaf witnesses and defendants. The established guidelines on booking court interpreters are designed for the spoken language interpreting and do not fit with BSL interpreting requirements. For example, the general interpreter guidelines require separate interpreters for the defendant (known as court interpreters) and for CPS witnesses, i.e. the court interpreter will sit with the defendant in the dock providing a whispered interpretation.
- However, BSL is a visual language and therefore all parties can watch the same interpreter, avoiding duplication of the interpreting service when both the defendant and the witness(es) are deaf. For this reason, rather than working separately, as court and CPS foreign language interpreters are necessarily required
to do, the BSL interpreting service is best served by having two/three interpreters working (solely) ‘for the court’ and a separate interpreter for the deaf defendant. The court interpreters will interpret everything that is discussed within the courtroom and the defence interpreter will interpret all legally privileged information outside of court. No extra interpreters are required by the CPS unless there are numerous deaf witnesses and an interpreter is required in the Witness Service room.
Par. 6.5 bullet 3, 4
- Where there is a deaf defendant, as has been described above, the defence team will need to ensure they have their own defence team interpreter to interpret legally privileged information and consultations out of court. The defence interpreter will also be able to offer linguistic and cultural advice to the defence team.
- Expert interpreters, court interpreters and/or deaf RIs are the best people to advise on how many interpreters will be needed for each preliminary hearing and/or the trial.
Additional reference material
Separate SLI for Applicant/Witness
Par. 6.4 bullet 3
- The court has a responsibility to book appropriately qualified and registered SLIs in cases with deaf witnesses and defendants. The established guidelines on booking court interpreters are designed for spoken language interpreting and do not fit with BSL interpreting requirements. For example, the general interpreter guidelines require separate interpreters for the defendant (known as court interpreters) and for CPS witnesses, i.e. the court interpreter will sit with the defendant in the dock providing a whispered interpretation.
- However, BSL is a visual language and therefore all parties can watch the same interpreter, avoiding duplication of the interpreting service when both the defendant and the witness(es) are deaf. For this reason, rather than working separately, as court and CPS foreign language interpreters are necessarily required to do, the BSL interpreting service is best served by having two/three interpreters working (solely) ‘for the court’ and a separate interpreter for the deaf defendant. The court interpreters will interpret everything that is discussed within the courtroom and the defence interpreter will interpret all legally privileged information outside of court. No extra interpreters are required by the CPS unless there are numerous deaf witnesses and an interpreter is required in the Witness Service room.
Par. 6.5 bullet 3, 4
- Where there is a deaf defendant, as has been described above, the defence team will need to ensure they have their own defence team interpreter to interpret legally privileged information and consultations out of court. The defence interpreter will also be able to offer linguistic and cultural advice to the defence team.
- Expert interpreters, court interpreters and/or deaf RIs are the best people to advise on how many interpreters will be needed for each preliminary hearing and/or the trial.
Deaf Relay
Par. 6.5 bullet 1 (additional needs)
- In all matters other than the trial, it is usually necessary to book one BSL interpreter (plus a deaf relay or Deaf RI where there are additional linguistic or mental health difficulties) for the court. A second interpreter will be required to interpret for the defendant in conference and for privileged information outside of court.
Two interpreters for a Trial
Par. 6.5 bullet 2
- In a trial BSL interpreters usually work as a team of two or occasionally three. Three interpreters are only required where the defendant is deaf and the trial is estimated to last for more than five days, or if there is a deaf defendant and deaf witnesses, or if there are exceptional difficulties. When there are three court interpreters, one person will be actively interpreting, the second monitoring/assisting and the third resting. The cognitive demands of interpreting are such that after around 30 minutes of continuous interpreting accuracy tends to deteriorate, hence the team approach. The team of two/three court interpreters will be responsible for interpreting everything that is discussed within the courtroom.
“Monitoring” interpreters
Par. 6.9
There are several difficulties for the court in working with BSL, not least that there is no ability for the court to monitor the interpretation process. This is problematic for the deaf person as they are unable to monitor how they are being represented by the voice- over of the interpreter and problematic for the courts in areas of dispute over interpretation. There are various options available to allow greater transparency and improve the ability of all parties to challenge the interpretation. However competent an interpreter may be, the possibility of human error does exist. To minimise this risk:
- the court interpreters will monitor and support each other’s work;
- the interpreter working with the deaf person’s legal team can monitor the court
interpretation process and alert the advocate to any concerns; - the use of a Deaf RI will help to ensure that the deaf person understands and the accuracy of interpretation is monitored – the Deaf RI alerting the court to any difficulties. An intermediary who is deaf will be accompanied by their own interpreter who will provide a ‘back translation’ of what is interpreted;
- in the case of a deaf witness or victim, the defence team may employ an expert interpreter to monitor the interpreting process or the court may consider employing an expert interpreter to monitor the process.;
- the court may consider video-recording the evidence of a deaf person. Not only would this allow for challenges of interpretation but also provide a first-hand recording of evidence which is currently not available (the audio-recording of the interpreter is not a recording of the original signed evidence). This matter was raised in the case of R v IA and Others [2013] EWCA Crim 1308 at the Court of Appeal. It was noted that the fact that the evidence was not able to be videoed was related to the limitations of technical equipment at court Visual recording of the evidence of deaf witnesses and defendants was achieved in a first instance case H and Another at Snaresbrook Crown Court in June 2014.
A cameraman from the deaf television company Remark! filmed the testimony. The footage was available for checking in the event of any dispute as to what had been said. At the end of each court sitting, the recording was transferred to a disc which was sealed and signed by counsel and the officer in the case. This was then placed
on the court file. Many deaf witnesses and defendants feel more comfortable knowing that testimony is being visually recorded and the interpretation can be checked.
Par. 6.9 bullet 1-3
- the court interpreters will monitor and support each other’s work;
- the interpreter working with the deaf person’s legal team can monitor the court
interpretation process and alert the advocate to any concerns; - the use of a Deaf RI will help to ensure that the deaf person understands and the accuracy of interpretation is monitored – the Deaf RI alerting the court to any difficulties. An intermediary who is deaf will be accompanied by their own interpreter who will provide a ‘back translation’ of what is interpreted;
Position of Interpreter in Courtroom
Par. 7.1
- The court may need to allow adjustments to facilitate communication. The visual nature of sign language means that deaf people need a clear unobstructed line of sight to the interpreter, who needs to be positioned at least one metre in front of the deaf person. It is not possible for the interpreter to sit next to the deaf person. Someone who is slightly deaf but still relies on residual hearing or who has a hearing in one ear may require some adjustments to the courtroom to facilitate hearing. In H and Another, deaf defendants sat in front of the witness box (as opposed to the dock) when the co-defendant gave evidence in order to ensure that the defendant was provided with the clearest possible view of the co-defendant’s signing.
Use of Non-Generic Signs
Par. 7.6
- There are general terms which are difficult to convey due to the visual nature of BSL.
Use of specific, descriptive words assists accurate interpretation. For example, there are signs for knife, gun, axe or baseball bat, all of which look different in BSL, but no generic sign for the superordinate term ‘weapon’. Similarly, there is no general sign for ‘assault’ which needs to be put into context. When the questioner uses a general term, the SLI may:
- finger-spell the word (e.g. ‘weapon’) – however, there is a risk that the deaf person will not understand the vocabulary or have sufficient facility in English to understand the spelled word even if they understand the concept.
- ask the court to specify what is meant in order to create a visual picture (e.g. the type of weapon or assault), in order to avoid a leading interpretation – although, this, of course, may not be desired by the questioner;
- change the question into a forced choice e.g. ‘Did you have a weapon?’ may become ‘Did you have a knife or gun?’ This is problematic, not only because the court may be unaware of the altered question but also because the deaf person may answer ‘No’ since they did not have a knife or gun but did have a baseball bat.
(Note that for Police Interviews PACE Code F refers to video-interviewing Deaf suspects/witnesses).