Geo was invited to a meeting of the Interpreter Implementation Committee of the Vermont Supreme Court. I tagged along. Purpose of the task force is to initiate planning to train interpreters of various languages for the Court.
The interpreter serves all sides in the hearing. Although it may be convenient for the interpreter to stand at the defendent's table, this may not be the best idea. The defendent may be surprised and upset that the interpreter, who knows his or her language and culture, is not advocating for the defense. The interpreter needs to be neutral, like a disinterested third party. However, is neutrality really possible? Is there risk of bias in the proceedings when the interpreter meets with the defendent outside of the courtroom?
Legal interpretation is a specialized skill. The plan is for standardized trainings in various locations in Vermont. Interpreters can be trained, but they cannot be "qualified" and they will not be "certified."
After the meeting Geo and I discovered a fabulous Bar-B-Q restaurant in Montpelier - Finkerman's. (Well, it was discovered long before we did.) We feasted on gumbo soup (sans okra) with lots of chicken and sausage, jalapeno grits, candied mashed sweet potatoes, and slices of cornbread with BBQ pulled pork. For dessert we had bourbon pecan pie with caramel sauce and a mountain of freshly whipped cream. Geo said it was absolutely El Paso quality. For sure we will return. When is that next interpreter meeting again?
2 comments:
Just as an aside, I am interested in learning sign language. Is anyone else and how can we do this?
Peace
JK
Yes, there are programs for signing. I think the pay is $35.00 per hour, and minimum is 2 hrs. You and Sean can both do this. Your Dad has all the info. We'll check it out for you.
Post a Comment