Are Capita linguists no longer required to swear/affirm before interpreting?
I went to a hearing in Stoke on Trent at the end of January and after a couple of hours my job with the solicitor was finished but I noticed they had a French interpreter/linguist there who claimed she was on the “register” but when I checked on the NRPSI website, and her name did not show up. We only had a few seconds to chat but within that short amount of time, she managed to complain that the hearing was only going to be one hour or so. She also told me that she did not want to work for Capita but that she was desperate to do so. She said she was doing translations as well but I guess that was not working so well for her may be... as she was "desperate" to work today...
Anyway, I took the time to observe, as she was the one hired by the Court, and noted a few points:
No introduction or affirmation were required from her, the judge did ask for her to check that the "defendant" and the interpreter could understand each other.
The discussions involved the barrister recalling the background to the judge and a gentleman from the Home Office and of course, the judge.
I noted that the interpreter put her arm behind the back of the client so that she could be closer to her and "whisper" whilst the various persons were talking.
Sometimes she would not interpret what the judge was asking... some technical terms were not translated such as "appellant", "screening interview", "submission". She talked about "corruption" when the words "bribes" were used... but I thought that overall, she did what she could...
The linguist did seem a bit "under pressure".... may be because I was there observing... and as time went, she seemed a bit less focused and her interpreting was becoming more "summarised" than accurate... but overall again, I thought she did ok.
