Questions in the adversarial courtroom are used strategically by counsel to guide, control and constrain the information presented in evidence. This is achieved partly by the content of the question, but also by the form of the question. Whereas the questions used in examination-in-chief tend to be more open and less constraining (e.g. Wh- questions), those used in cross-examination tend to be more coercive and aggressive (e.g. declaratives, tag questions). This paper reports on the results of empirical research into the way Spanish interpreters interpret English questions into Spanish in thirteen Local Court cases in Australia. The main aim of the study was to ascertain whether interpreters maintain the form as well as the content of the question in their interpretation, and if they do not, the possible reasons why and the implications of their choices.