02 Apr A Matter of Due Process

A Matter of Due Process

By Hilda Shymanik

About six years ago, I met a colleague during a short-lived, recurring five-day full-time freelance assignment, a 40-hour-a-week two-year contract. We were both Mexican and new to that courthouse, as was the coordinator. It was also a courthouse where team interpreting was common, despite ongoing efforts to move toward best practices.

Lady Justice stands as a timeless symbol of fairness, impartiality, and the authority of the law

Because of the solo nature of the work, I didn’t have the chance to collaborate with my paisana (countrywoman) until much later, when we found ourselves assigned to a high-profile felony case involving multiple victims and deeply sensitive sexual content. The case was particularly controversial due to the notoriety of the defendant and his family ties to one of the victims.

During the victim’s testimony, the defense attorney delivered questions in rapid succession, sharp, relentless, and often forceful. Seasoned interpreters know how exhausting this can be. The pace alone is demanding, but when paired with emotionally charged subject matter and aggressive delivery, the challenge intensifies significantly.

I was working in the passive role when my colleague, the active interpreter, asked the judge on a couple of occasions for permission to consult with me. The terminology was complex and highly sensitive, and we needed to ensure both precision and consistency. These brief consultations were essential to maintaining accuracy.

A hub of academic excellence—training the next generation of interpreters and translators

After one such exchange, during the defense’s questioning, the ADA suddenly interrupted. He told the court that he was “somewhat familiar” with Spanish, having grown up in a Hispanic neighborhood, and that he felt we were not interpreting accurately. Both my colleague and I stood firmly by our renditions. The judge promptly admonished the attorney for relying on a vague claim of familiarity rather than expertise.

The judge then excused the jury to address the issue.

Once the jury was out, the defense attorney raised his own objections. He challenged not only our interpretation but also our collaboration. He argued that the passive interpreter should not assist the active interpreter in any way, no whispering, no notes, no input whatsoever. In his view, we were “both interpreting at the same time,” which he claimed was improper.

Then came the most startling moment: he requested that both interpreters be sworn in as witnesses and subjected to questioning. 

We were stunned.

Neither of us had ever encountered anything like this. In that moment, I drew on my professional background, my experience as a NAJIT and the New York Circle of Translators board member, along with my certifications and credentials, to explain the mechanics and ethics of team interpreting. I outlined why brief consultations are not only appropriate but often necessary to ensure accuracy, especially in complex cases.

It made no difference.

The defense attorney pressed on. He demanded to know exactly what we had discussed, what alternative terms we had considered, and how we had arrived at our final choices. He framed it as an issue of due process.

Effective communication and collaboration are key to successful teamwork

At that point, the judge, clearly growing weary of the argument, read portions of the Language Access Plan into the record. Still, she acknowledged that the defense had raised questions worth considering and adjourned the case for the day, as it was already past 4 p.m.

The next morning, the judge returned, having conducted extensive legal research. She cited relevant precedent (which I’ll omit here to preserve anonymity) and ultimately overruled the defense’s objections.

We resumed the trial without further incident.

Afterward, both my colleague and I were commended for how we handled an extraordinarily difficult and unprecedented situation. More than anything, it reinforced how valuable it is to have the support and trust of the judge, the coordinator, and the program manager.

I’d be very interested to hear if others have faced similar challenges. How did you handle them? And if you haven’t encountered this situation, what would you do? I always appreciate hearing about the resourcefulness and strategies others bring to this work.

Keep the Conversation Going

If this topic resonated with you, be sure to check out our previous blog posts for more insights on the realities of our profession, and the evolving world of judiciary translation and interpreting: