1 / 47

“Have a look in the police interviewroom ”

“Have a look in the police interviewroom ”. Police interviews with an interpreter The Antwerp-project Dirk Rombouts Trafut/Antwerp 19.10.2012. Belgian Newspaper 22.02.12.

ramya
Download Presentation

“Have a look in the police interviewroom ”

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. “Have a look in the police interviewroom” Police interviews with an interpreter The Antwerp-project Dirk Rombouts Trafut/Antwerp 19.10.2012

  2. Belgian Newspaper 22.02.12 “””Chinese restaurant manager, Polish nurse or Russian trucker: today everyone can become a legal interpreter or legal translator.”

  3. Overview questionnaire february 2012 • Criminal Investigation Department/ Antwerp Police (120 police officers) • Weekly needs the services of legal interpreters • 80 police officers (drugs,sex crimes, armed robbery, fictitious marriages, youth crime,homicide) – questionnaire

  4. Overview questionnaire february 2012 • Antwerp police: Total number of interviews conducted in 2011 (i.e. no traffic violations): 75.060 – 3.164 with a legal interpreter • 763 legal interpreters

  5. Overview questionnaire february 2012 • Use of the list (register) of legal interpreters: 16 % only use the digital list 18 % own list of interpreters 64 % both lists

  6. Overview questionnaire february 2012 96 % of the officers almost always use the same interpreters

  7. Overview questionnaire february 2012 Quality of the legal interpreters: 45 % : good 15 % : good to very well 23 % : very well 15 % : Variable (very well for an interview about robbery but bad for an interview about sex crime)

  8. Overview questionnaire february 2012 “Has an interpreter ever cancelled the interview for specific reasons ?” 20 %: yes • Psychological reasons: 18 % • Emotional reasons: 18 % • Intercultural reasons: 18 % • Conflict of interests : 45 % • Without reason: 1 %

  9. Overview questionnaire february 2012 “ Is the interview planned according to the availability of the interpreter ?” 52 % : yes 20 % : no 28 % : sometimes First-line police can’t postpone an interview!!!

  10. Overview questionnaire february 2012 “ Before the start of the interview, does the interpreter explain his/her task to the person to be interviewed?” 65 % : of the interpreters spontaneously inform the interviewee 32 % : said that he or she asks the interpreter to do this 3 % : replied that it was never done

  11. Overview questionnaire february 2012 “ Has an interpreter ever recognized the person to be interviewed upon entering the interview room and as a result cancelled the translation ?” 14 % : yes 86 % : never

  12. Overview questionnaire february 2012 • “What do you think about the effort you have to make during an interview in the presence of an interpreter?” • 3%:less than during normal interview (same language) • 34%: same • 63%: bigger

  13. Overview questionnaire february 2012 • “What do you think about the contact with the person being interviewed in the presence of an interpreter?” • 27%: same contact • 69%: less contact • 2%: more contact • 2%: depends on the interpreter

  14. Overview questionnaire february 2012 • “What do you think about the efficiency of an interview in the presence of an interpreter?” • 41% : less efficient • 49% : equally efficient • 7% : more efficient • 3% : variable

  15. Overview questionnaire february 2012 • “Do interpreters denounce certain aspects of the legal system after the interview?” • 24 % : yes • 61 % of this 24 %: it was about the late payment of the interpreter’s fee

  16. Conclusions (aboutcommunication –contact – efficiency) • Why (always) the sameinterpreters ? • Immediatelyavailable • Knowledge of the legal system • Knowledge of the case • Confidence

  17. Conclusions (aboutcommunication –contact – efficiency) • Quality of the legal interpreters during an interrogation: from good ………….. very good: 83 %

  18. Conclusions (aboutcommunication –contact – efficiency) • Interview with an interpreter is “different” and “laborious” 63 % of the police force: not hindered also 63 % of the police force: greater effort

  19. Conclusions (aboutcommunication –contact – efficiency) • Inform the interpreter of the case. -26% by telephone contact -87% on the police office

  20. Conclusions (aboutcommunication –contact – efficiency) • Too seldom information about: • Estimated duration : 62 % • Interrogation/questioning method: 16 %

  21. Recommendationsfor the legalinterpreter 1°) The description of the interpreter’stask. 2°) Translate everything. 3°) Simultaneous – consecutive – whispering. 4°) Interventionsby the interpreter. 5°) Telephone tap interpreting.

  22. Recommendationsfor the legalinterpreter. 1°) The description of the interpreter’s task. 2°) Translate everything. 3°) Simultaneous – consecutive – whispering. 4°) Interventions by the interpreter. 5°) Telephone tap interpreting.

  23. Recommendationsfor the legalinterpreter. • Before the interview: - neutral - independant • confidentiality • everything will be translated • no personal conversations • adress to the police officer

  24. Recommendationsfor the legalinterpreter 1°) The description of the interpreter’s task. 2°) Translate everything. 3°) Simultaneous – consecutive – whispering. 4°) Interventions by the interpreter. 5°) Telephone tap interpreting.

  25. Recommendationsfor the legalinterpreter • Translate everything (including obscene language, personal threats, promises made, sentences beginning with “I don’t want you to translate this, because ..”. • Keep strictly to the form of the questions ( open-ended closed-ended)

  26. Recommendationsfor the legalinterpreter 1°) The description of the interpreter’s task. 2°) Translate everything. 3°) Simultaneous – consecutive – whispering. 4°) Interventions by the interpreter. 5°) Telephone tap interpreting.

  27. Recommendationsfor the legalinterpreter • Interpreters should interpret consecutively during an interrogation. • Specific task for the police officer = conductor !

  28. Recommendationsfor the legalinterpreter 1°) The description of the interpreter’s task. 2°) Translate everything. 3°) Simultaneous – consecutive – whispering. 4°) Interventions by the interpreter. 5°) Telephone tap interpreting.

  29. Recommendationsfor the legalinterpreter • Questionnotunderstood/long complicatequestion. • Certainexpressions. • The specificterminology of criminalgroups ?? • The intervieweegives a “long answer”. • Threatened (offers/suggestions).

  30. Recommendationsfor the legalinterpreter 1°) The description of the interpreter’s task. 2°) Translate everything. 3°) Simultaneous – consecutive – whispering. 4°) Interventions by the interpreter. 5°) Telephone tap interpreting.

  31. Recommendationsfor the legalinterpreter - Some crucial conversations: translated a second time - Guessing is not an option !!

  32. Recommendationsfor the interrogatingofficer 1°) Prior announcements to the interpreter. 2°) At the beginning of an interrogation. 3°) During the interrogation. 4°) Following an interrogation.

  33. Recommendationsfor the interrogatingofficer 1°) Prior announcements to the interpreter. 2°) At the beginning of an interrogation. 3°) During the interrogation. 4°) Following an interrogation.

  34. Recommendationsfor the interrogatingofficer • Short briefing regarding the case. • Estimated time of the interrogation. • Further inquiries ( house search). • Short briefing type of questioning.

  35. Recommendationsfor the interrogatingofficer 1°) Prior announcements to the interpreter. 2°) At the beginning of an interrogation. 3°) During the interrogation. 4°) Following an interrogation.

  36. Recommendationsfor the interrogatingofficer Allow the interpreter enough time to introduce him/herself = his/her task.

  37. Recommendationsfor the interrogatingofficer 1°) Prior announcements to the interpreter. 2°) At the beginning of an interrogation. 3°) During the interrogation. 4°) Following an interrogation.

  38. Recommendationsfor the interrogatingofficer • Adress the personbeingquestioned. • Nottoocomplicatedquestions (clearending). • Immediateactionafterthreats: record it in official police report, prepare a newpolice report, interrupt and stop the interview • Neverleave the interpreteralone.

  39. Recommendationsfor the interrogatingofficer 1°) Prior announcements to the interpreter. 2°) At the beginning of an interrogation. 3°) During the interrogation. 4°) Following an interrogation.

  40. Recommendationsfor the interrogatingofficer • The interpreter does not need to be debriefed. • Interpreter’s duty ENDS once the questioning has finished.

  41. Best practicesfor high standards interviews with a legalinterpreter • The legal interpreter is not: prison officer

  42. Best practicesfor high standards interviews with a legalinterpreter • The legal interpreter is not: an investigator

  43. Best practicesfor high standards interviews with a legalinterpreter • The legal interpreter is not: a secretary

  44. Best practicesfor high standards interviews with a legalinterpreter • The legal interpreter may not be a member of a criminal organization.

  45. Best practicesfor high standards interviews with a legalinterpreter • Policeofficersshouldsteer the interview and control it. • Lead the interview • Determine the rhythm of the interview • Everyone talk in turn • Policeofficersshouldalways finish theirsentences • Refrainfromasking long questions

  46. Thankyouverymuch !Dirk Rombouts: schonebeke@hotmail.com

More Related