Interpreting sound files on the spot
When participants in a judicial process face the examination of an evidentiary sound file in a language other than English, the court, in an effort to be expeditious and conserve resources, may order the court interpreters present in the court room to provide an on-the-spot simultaneous interpretation of the sound file in question. The quality of in-court interpretation of a sound file will almost always fall short of the evidentiary standards that must be met, due to the lack of time, technology, and resources required by the practitioner to perform the task correctly. This paper explains why simultaneous interpreting of a recording in the courtroom is usually an impossible task that should not be ordered by a court, nor attempted by an interpreter.
Transcription/translation (TT) is a highly specialized discipline within the broader range of language services for the judiciary. These critical factors come into play when converting information on a sound file from one language to another:
• Knowledge of the transcription/translation process
• Time
• Technology
• Research tools
Clearly some of these factors are lacking in the courtroom when the judge orders the immediate simultaneous interpretation of a sound file—even when the recording is of short duration, for example, a 911 call. The interpreter present may have knowledge of the TT process, but will lack the other tools listed above, needed to perform the task at hand successfully. It follows that simultaneous interpreting of a recording in the court room will yield at best mediocre results when the life and liberty of a defendant and the pursuit of justice are on the line. A forensic psychiatrist would be remiss, indeed disqualified, if he provided an expert opinion on a patient based upon seeing the patient for the first time in the court room. Along the same lines, forensic TT requires expertise, time, and technology to perform the work required to an adequate standard.
Source: NAJIT.ORG
