Cover not available
Part of
Interpreting Technologies – Current and Future Trends
Edited by Gloria Corpas Pastor and Bart Defrancq
[IVITRA Research in Linguistics and Literature 37] 2023
► pp. 72–108

Chapter 4
‘I am his extension in the courtroom’

How court interpreters cope with the demands of video-mediated interpreting in hearings with remote defendants

 | University of Surrey, United Kingdom |
 | University of Surrey, United Kingdom |
 | University of Surrey, United Kingdom |
 | University of Surrey, United Kingdom |
The rapid growth of video-mediated interpreting (VMI) during the Covid-19 pandemic has shifted the focus of research from investigating the feasibility of VMI to developing a better understanding of the factors that can contribute to sustaining it. Within legal settings, a range of challenges has been identified, some of them specific to the actual configuration of VMI that is used (especially the distribution of participants). In this study we examine one particular configuration in which a defendant takes part in the proceedings via video link from prison whilst all other participants including the interpreter are physically present in the courtroom. Drawing on observation and interview data, with a focus on extradition court hearings, we examine the complexities of VMI in this configuration, its main challenges, and the associated strategies employed by the interpreters to cope with the demands of VMI.
Keywords: court interpreters, extradition hearings, legal settings, mitigation strategies, mixed-methods research, non-verbal interaction, video-mediated interpreting (VMI)
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Design of the study and methodological approach
    • 2.1Selection of the fieldwork locations
    • 2.2Participant recruitment
    • 2.3Observations
    • 2.4Interviews
    • 2.5Data analysis
  • 3.VMI-related challenges and interpreters’ mitigation strategies
    • 3.1Technological aspects
    • 3.2Visual ecology
    • 3.3Social presence and alienation
    • 3.4Scheduling and pace of the hearings
    • 3.5Effectiveness of the communication
    • 3.6Modes of interpreting in VMI
      • 3.6.1Use of simultaneous mode
      • 3.6.2Use of consecutive mode
      • 3.6.3Macro-strategies
  • 4.Aspects that compensate for VMI-related challenges
    • 4.1Visibility of defendant’s reactions
    • 4.2Length and complexity of the hearings
    • 4.3Familiarity with the type of hearing
  • 5.Positive aspects of VMI
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 9 October 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ivitra.37.04sin
References (42)
References
Angermeyer, Philipp Sebastian. 2010. “Interpreter-mediated interaction as bilingual speech: Bridging macro- and micro-sociolinguistics in codeswitching research”. International Journal of Bilingualism, 14 (4): 466–489. [Online] Available at DOI logo
Authority of the House of Lords. 2015. House of Lords Select Committee on Extradition Law – 2nd Report of Session 2014–15. London. [Online] Available at [URL] (Accessed: 24 June 2019).
Balogh, Katalin, and Erik Hertog. 2012. “AVIDICUS comparative studies – Part II: Traditional, videoconference and remote interpreting in police interviews.” In Videoconference and remote interpreting in criminal proceedings, edited by Sabine Braun and Judith L. Taylor, 119–136. Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar
BID (Bail for Immigration Detainees). 2008. “Immigration bail hearings by video link: a monitoring exercise by Bail for Immigration Detainees and the Refugee Council”. [Online] Available at [URL]
Braun, Sabine. 2012. “Recommendations for the use of video-mediated interpreting in criminal proceedings”. In Videoconference and remote interpreting in criminal proceedings, edited by Sabine Braun and Judith L. Taylor, 301–328. Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar
. 2013. “Keep your distance? Remote interpreting in legal proceedings: A critical assessment of a growing practice”. Interpreting, 15 (2): 200–228. [Online] Available at [URL]
. 2014. “Comparing traditional and remote interpreting in police settings: quality and impact factors”. In Traduzione e interpretazione per la società e le istituzioni, edited by Caterina Falbo and Maurizio Viezzi, 161–176. Trieste: Edizioni Università di Trieste.Google Scholar
. 2018. “Video-mediated interpreting in legal settings in England.” Translation and Interpreting Studies, 13 (3): 393–420. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Braun, Sabine, Davitti, Elena, and Sara Dicerto. 2018. “Video-mediated interpreting in legal settings: Assessing the implementation”. In Here or there – Research on interpreting via video-link, edited by Jemina Napier, Robert Skinner and Sabine Braun, 144–179. Washington: Gallaudet University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Braun, Sabine, Taylor, Judith L., Miler-Cassino, Joanna, Rybinska, Zofia, Balogh, Katalin, Hertog, Erik, vanden Bosch, Yolanda, and Dirk Rombouts, D. 2012. “Training in video-mediated interpreting in criminal proceedings: modules for interpreting students, legal interpreters and legal practitioners. In Videoconference and remote interpreting in criminal proceedings, edited by Sabine Braun and Judith L. Taylor, 119–136. Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar
Braun, Sabine, and Judith L. Taylor (Eds.) 2012a. Videoconference and remote interpreting in criminal proceedings. Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar
. 2012b. “Video-mediated interpreting: an overview of current practice and research”. In Videoconference and remote interpreting in criminal proceedings, edited by Sabine Braun and Judith L. Taylor, 33–68. Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar
Bryman, Alan. 2004. Social Research Methods (2nd edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Davitti, Elena, and Sabine Braun. 2020. “Analysing interactional phenomena in video remote interpreting in collaborative settings: implications for interpreter education”. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 14 (3): 279–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Devaux, Jérôme. 2016. “When the role of the court interpreter intersects and interacts with new technologies”. In Intersect, Innovate, Interact, edited by Pauline Henry-Tierney and Dinithi Karunanayake, CTIS Occasional Papers 7, 4–21. Centre for Translation and Intercultural Studies: Manchester. [Online] Available at [URL]
EU Council/European and Commission. 2013. Guide on videoconferencing in cross-border proceedings. Belgium: General Secretariat of the Council. Expert Series.Google Scholar
Fielding, Nigel, Braun, Sabine, Hieke, Graham, and Chelsea Mainwaring. 2020. Video Enabled Justice Evaluation. Sussex Police & Crime Commissioner. [Online] Available at [URL].
Fowler, Yvonne. 2007. “Interpreting into the ether: a study of video link and court interpreters”. In Proceedings of the Critical Link 5 conference. Sydney. [Online] Available at [URL]
. 2013. Non-English-speaking defendants in the magistrates court: a comparative study of face-to-face and prison video link interpreter-mediated hearings in England. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Aston University, United Kingdom. [Online] Available at [URL].
. 2016. “Court interpreting in England: what works? (and for whom?)”. Language and Law/Linguagem e Direito, 3 (2): 135–168. [Online] Available at [URL].
. 2018. “Interpreted prison video link: The prisoner’s eye view”. In Here or there: Research on interpreting via video link, edited by Jemina Napier, Robert Skinner and Sabine Braun, 183–209. Washington: Gallaudet University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Jessica P. Belisle, and Jan Svennevig. 2021. “Creating space for interpreting within extended turns at talk”. Journal of Pragmatics, 182: 144-162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Licoppe, Christian. 2015. “Video Communication and ‘Camera Actions’: The Production of Wide Video Shots in Courtrooms with Remote Defendants”. Journal of Pragmatics: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language Studies (76): 117–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Licoppe, Christian, and Maud Verdier. 2013. “Interpreting, video communication and the sequential reshaping of institutional talk in the bilingual and distributed courtroom”. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 20(2): 247–275. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Licoppe, Christian, and Clair-Antoine Veyrier. 2017. “How to show the interpreter on screen? The normative organization of visual ecologies in multilingual courtrooms with video links”. Journal of Pragmatics 107: 147–164. DOI logo.Google Scholar
. 2020. “The Interpreter as a Sequential Coordinator in Courtroom Interaction: ‘Chunking’ and the Management of Turn Shifts in Extended Answers in Consecutively Interpreted Asylum Hearings with Remote Participants”. Interpreting: international journal of research and practice in interpreting 22 1: 56–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Locatis, Craig, Williamson, Deborah, Gould-Kabler, Carrie, Zone-Smith, Laurie, Detzler, Isabel, Roberson, Jason, Maisiak, Richard, and Michael Ackerman. 2010. “Comparing in-person, video, and telephonic medical interpretation”. Journal of General Internal Medicine 25(4): 345–350. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maguire, Moira, and Brid Delahunt, B. 2017. “Doing a Thematic Analysis: A Practical, Step-by-Step Guide for Learning and Teaching Scholars”. AISHE-J 9: 3351.Google Scholar
Miler-Cassino, Joanna, and Zofia Rybinska. 2012. “AVIDICUS comparative studies. Part III: Video-mediated interpreting in criminal proceedings: from practice to research”. In Videoconference and remote interpreting in criminal proceedings, edited by Sabine Braun and Judith L. Taylor, 117–136. Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar
van de Mortel, Thea F. 2008. “Faking it: social desirability response bias in self-report research”. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing 25 (4): 40–48. [Online] Available at [URL] (Accessed: 24 April 2019).
Moser-Mercer, Barbara. 2003, “Remote interpreting: Assessment of human and performance parameters”. [Online] Available at [URL]
. 2005. “Remote interpreting: The crucial role of presence”. Bulletin Suisse de Linguistique Appliquée 81: 73–97. [Online] Available at [URL]
Mouzourakis, Panayotis. 2006. “Remote interpreting: a technical perspective on recent experiments”. Interpreting 8 (1): 45–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Napier, Jemina, Skinner, Robert, and Graham H. Turner. 2017. ‘“It’s good for them but not so for me’: Inside the sign language interpreting call centre”’. Translation & Interpreting 9 (2): 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ng, Eva. 2013. “The atypical bilingual courtroom: An exploratory study of the interactional dynamics in interpreter-mediated trials in Hong Kong”. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Aston University. [Online] Available at [URL]
Petrides, Konstantinos. 2009. Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue): Technical Manual. [Online] Available at: [URL].
Pöchhacker, Franz, and Miriam Shlesinger (Eds.). 2002. The interpreting studies reader. London: New York.Google Scholar
Roziner, Ilan, and Miriam Shlesinger. 2010. “Much ado about something: Stress and performance in remote interpreting”. Interpreting 12 (2): 214–247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Singureanu, Diana (2023). Managing the demands of video-mediated court interpreting: strategies and the role of emotional intelligence. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Surrey. DOI logo
Thaxton, Ronnie. 1993. “Injustice Telecast: The Illegal Use of Closed-Circuit Television Arraignments and Bail Bond Hearings in Federal Court”. Iowa Law Review 79: 1–44.Google Scholar
Townsley, Brooke. 2007. “Interpreting in the UK Community: Some Reflections on Public Service Interpreting in the UK”. Language and Intercultural Communication 7 (2): 163–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar