Police interviews with an interpreter The Antwerp-project Dirk Rombouts Trafut/Helsinki

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

 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

 Antwerp police: Total number of interviews conducted in 2011 (i.e. no traffic violations): – with a legal interpreter  763 legal interpreters

 Use of the list (register) of legal interpreters: 16 % only use the digital list 18 % own list of interpreters 64 % both lists

96 % of the officers almost always use the same interpreters

Why officers prefer a specific interpreter (multiple answers) - 34 % interpreter’s legal knowledge - 59 % qualified (certified) interpreter - 50 % decide according “waiting time” - 17 % look at the interpreter’s knowledge/file - 90 % continuous availability of the interpreter

17 % interpreter doesn’t mind working extra hours 40 % the basis of the interpreter’s sound knowledge of legal terminology

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)

Initial telephone conversation with the interpreter: only 29 % of the police officers give a summary/facts Summary/facts before the interview at the police station: 87 % : yes 13 % : no

“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 %

“Do you give a rough estimate of the duration of the interview during telephone call with interpreter ?” 62 % : yes 32 % : no 6 % : sometimes

“ 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!!!

 “Do you inform the interpreter about the interviewtechnique to be used ?”  16 % : yes  84 % : no

“ 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

“ 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

 “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

 “Do you feel hindered in your communication during an interview in the presence of an interpreter?”  63 %: never  34 %: sometimes  3 % : always

 “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

 “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

 Interview with an interpreter is “different” and “laborious”  Police officers pay attention to : - making contact (is the fertilizer that makes an interview grow …) - the rhythm and tempo of the interview

 “During interview – interpreter is threatened by the interviewee or interviewee makes certain promises to the interpreter. Reaction of the police officer?”  - record it in official police report  - prepare a new police report  - interrupt and stop the interview  - reprimand the interviewee  - contact the prosecutor/investigative judge

 “ After the interview, does the interpreter sometimes give confidential information or additional information about the interview or the interviewee?”  69 % : yes  31 % : no

 “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

 Interpreter: strictly define his/her task:  Neutral  Independent  Confidential  Everything will be translated  No personal conversations  Adress the police officer

 Interpreter: respect the silence observed by the interviewee after the police officer asked a question  Certain interview technique

After the interview: No additional information about the case/the person. A police officer who asks this kind of additional information oversteps his/her bounds.

TRANSLATE EVERYTHING !!!! - Obscene language - Personal threats - Promises - Sentences beginning with “ I don’t want you to translate this, because ….”

 Interpreters should know the specific terminology ( terms, actions and objects related to criminal offences)

 Legal interpreter who is threatened during an interview should STOP  He/she is victim of new facts (threats) = complaint

 Interpreter contacted by the police  Ask about the nature of the criminal fact  Interpreter decides

 Telephone taps  Strict rules  If there are doubts about certain words/sentences: guessing is not an option

 The legal interpreter is not: prison officer

 The legal interpreter is not: an investigator

 The legal interpreter is not: a secretary

 The legal interpreter is not: a cigarette dispenser

 Police officers should steer the interview and control it.  Lead the interview  Determine the rhythm of the interview  Everyone talk in turn  Police officers should always finish their sentences  Refrain from asking long questions