March 22, 2012
Inequality before the Law? It’s Reality
[…]
The relay interpreter arrived not only late but also dressed most inappropriately for a court case. They too had no idea of the indictment, defendant, stage of proceedings etc. The relay interpreter immediately declared that they had never worked in a court before. The defence lawyer had immediate and very serious concerns about the communication provision for their client. Representations were made immediately to the court. Meanwhile, as it is a small community, it was quickly discovered that the relay interpreter had a fairly substantial court career with a number of both recent and historic criminal convictions – with even further cases pending!
The relay interpreter admitted, to the hearing interpreter, that there were many reasons why they must not and should not work in court or other legal settings. The relay interpreter stated it had ‘been a mistake’ to accept the job from the agency, but that no CRB clearance had been requested and no proof of experience had been required. The relay interpreter, instead of reporting to the usher, decided to leave the building with no explanation to the court whatsoever.
The hearing interpreter entered the courtroom and explained to the judge that they had no choice but to withdraw from the assignment. The withdrawal was put on the following grounds that: 1. they had been falsely warned to the assignment; 2. they were unable to function effectively alone; 3. they would not be able to perform the task satisfactorily unto the language need and complexity of the case and 4. that it would put justice in too greater jeopardy. The interpreter further disclosed to the court the full details of the concerns pertaining to the equally inappropriate and dangerous relay interpreter. […]
Read more here: http://interpreteranon.wordpress.com/2012/03/22/inequality-before-the-law-its-reality-23-2/ & http://interpreteranon.wordpress.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment