![TLS Legal Services logo 2022 V2[84] (2).png](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/dce3e6_906715d411a04cfbb35a51a7e3f5336a~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_85,h_85,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_avif,quality_auto/TLS%20Legal%20Services%20logo%202022%20V2%5B84%5D%20(2).png)
The job offer
I was driving to my mother-in-law’s for a family dinner on Sunday. It was 6pm and I received a call from a client asking if I was available to go to a police job in Manchester. I told them I could be there for 7.30pm. I'd not looked at my phone as I'd been out shopping with my daughter, but the job offer had come in via email 3.5 hours earlier. They'd obviously struggled to find an interpreter. I’d been offered a police job that morning, but had other commitments and had to turn it down. So I was really pleased that another opportunity had come up.
I went home to change from denim shorts into more professional attire, made a flask of tea (police station machine tea is nasty, unless you're lucky enough to get a proper brew from an officer) grabbed my work bag and then joined the rest of my family, threw my dinner down me and off I went. I felt the usual buzz I get when heading to an evening police job. You never know what the night will bring, or what time you’ll get to bed….
The suspect’s right to an interpreter
For context, the role of the interpreter at the police station is governed by PACE Code C 2019. If a suspect or a witness requires an interpreter for interview or the taking of a statement, the police must arrange for one to be present. It is a principle of common law that the defendant must be able to understand the charges made against them and be able to properly defend themselves. The right is also enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights.
New guidelines mean one interpreter for disclosure and a different interpreter for interview
When I arrived at the station, the officer explained that the suspect was in the middle of giving disclosure, with the help of a telephone interpreter. Disclosure is basically a consultation between the suspect and their solicitor where the solicitor establishes the facts from the suspect’s perspective and then advises them whether to answer the police’s questions in interview or whether to answer “no comment”.
After a few minutes, the solicitor stepped out of the room and informed the officer that he couldn't work with a telephone interpreter for disclosure and needed a face-to-face one, or he would have to withdraw from the case. The suspect was returned to his cell while the officer went to seek advice from her sergeant, leaving the solicitor and I in a side room. “It’s too risky,” said the solicitor. “The charge is very serious. This man could end up serving a long custodial sentence. I don’t want to take any chances with miscommunication. I need a face-to-face interpreter, or I will have to hand the case back” he said.
It all seemed a bit crazy because they had me right there- a DPSI law-qualified interpreter with 15 years’ experience under my belt. Yet, I wasn’t allowed to interpret during disclosure and interview. Since qualifying in 2009, I have interpreted in countless custody scenarios for both the duty solicitor and the police in the same case, but the rules have now changed. According to Government guidance on the use of interpreters in criminal investigations, updated 20 February 2024, “it is best practice to use a separate interpreter for legal consultations and best achieved through telephone interpreting services for those solicitor consultations.” This seems strange, given that qualified interpreters are trained to interpret everything that is said by all participants in the first person without any additions, omissions or other misleading factors that alter the intended meaning of the message from the speaker, and remain impartial at all times. Therefore, why should it matter if the same interpreter is used for both conversations? I raised this point with the solicitor, and he agreed. “Anyway,” he said “it’s guidelines, not the law.”
The officer returned some time later and informed the solicitor that they were not able to instruct a face-to-face interpreter or allow me to interpret for disclosure. It would have to be another telephone interpreter. Ironically, at that point, another officer appeared, looking confused, and stated that there was a French interpreter at the main entrance.
“I’ve already got a French interpreter,” said the policewoman dealing with the case. “You’ll have to send them away.”
“Can you not use this interpreter for disclosure?” I asked. “No,” she said. “We have to use a telephone interpreter.” This was too ironic. Solicitor number 1 withdrew from the case and went on to meet with his next client a few doors down, and the other interpreter was sent home (to Peterborough!).
Duty solicitor refuses to use a telephone interpreter, so we wait for a replacement solicitor
Back to the side room I went, while the police requested and waited for another duty solicitor to arrive. As the school holidays had just begun, I was very happy to spend the extra time working on my laptop, which I always take to custody jobs as there’s typically lots of waiting around. The officer came to tell me that the solicitor was due to arrive at 9pm. She joined me with her laptop. I asked if she knew why the guidelines regarding the use of the same interpreter for disclosure and interview had changed. Apparently, it was because during an interview an interpreter had blurted out “that’s not what you told the solicitor”. I was shocked. Who are these “interpreters”? Have they had any training whatsoever?
Curious to know more about the guideline changes, I carried out some research this week. I was unable to find any reference to the incident mentioned by the officer. It seems that the reason is more to do with interpreter health and safety. Although, interpreters should never be left alone with service-users, according to police.uk several instances have occurred recently where interpreters have been left in rooms with suspects, witnesses or victims. The most common example is when a detained person who requires an interpreter, requests a consultation with a solicitor. Very often, the solicitor is not present but rather, uses a telephone to converse with the detained person and the interpreter is asked to stay in the room with the non-English speaking person. It would appear that the roles have been reversed, and now the solicitor is being brought in face-to-face and the interpreter over the phone….
Solicitor number 2 arrives. Telephone interpreter number 2 joins disclosure….and then suddenly leaves
9pm arrived and so did solicitor number 2. The officer and I left the room, the suspect was brought back in and, once again, a French interpreter was contacted to support via the telephone.
"It won't be much longer now" the officer assured me. But moments later the solicitor emerged and announced that the interpreter had left the call because they had an emergency to attend to. The irony level just increased a little more. In spite of everything, allowing me to interpret for disclosure was still not an option.
Telephone interpreter 3 completes disclosure, I interpret for the police interview and another suspect requires a French interpreter
The officer dialled in the third telephone interpreter of the night, and ten minutes later, disclosure was complete. We went straight into the interview room. After half an hour, we were finished. The suspect returned to his cell, and just as I was about to leave, the policewoman informed me that another French-speaking suspect had been brought in, and asked if I would be happy to stay on and interpret for his interview too. Of course the answer was “yes”. I’d not been offered a police job since May, so 3 offers in one day was, to say the least, ironic.
The purpose of working with interpreters is to facilitate communication, to make communicating with those who speak different languages smoother, yet on Sunday evening, the process was anything but smooth.
References
Guidance: Criminal investigations: use of interpreters, Updated 20 February 2024
Notice: Advice regarding Health & Safety of Interpreters during police assignments
Comments