随着社会在文化和语言上变得越来越多样化,翻译的证词将成为美国司法系统中更频繁的组成部分。由于翻译过程的复杂性质,解释证词的错误和误解几乎是不可避免的,可能会影响陪审员对审判的看法。由于法院口译员的无意影响或陪审员对被告翻译的证词的偏见,可能会发生错误的判断。与个人的社会身份以及人类将他人归类为一个人内部或小组外部成员的人类倾向有关的心理理论可能会提供一个框架,以理解翻译证词的潜在偏见性质。与翻译证词有关的研究对法律和政策的影响对于美国境内所有人的公平和公正待遇至关重要司法系统。
从美国法院的角度来看,法庭程序的官方语言是英语。当审判参与者不会说或理解英语时,使用法院口译员。法院口译员的任务是完全,公正,准确地重申英语,源自讲者的母语的审判参与者的话语。口译员还将起源于英语的话语融入母语,以便非英语的证人或被告也可以理解诉讼程序。
The number of monolingual and minimally bilingual non-English-speaking individuals who come in contact with the U.S. criminal justice system is increasing. According to the 2005 Annual Report of the Director of the Administrator’s Office of the United States Courts, the number of cases requiring the use of court interpreters increased by 1.5% in 2005, with the Spanish language involved in 94% of these cases. The 2000 U.S. Census indicated that the percentage of Spanish speakers living in the United States increased by 3.2% since 1990; additionally, 10% of the Spanish-speaking population was monolingual. This rise in the monolingual Spanish-speaking population has created a need for Spanish-English interpreters, in particular in the United States.
对翻译证词的看法
Linguistic minority speakers are at a disadvantage in the courtroom. Early research demonstrated that English-speaking individuals perceive unaccented English more favorably than either Black vernacular English or Mexican American accented English. Thus, if linguistic minority witnesses and defendants choose to communicate in English during the court proceedings, they may be perceived less favorably by the jury because of their accented or limited English. Providing translated testimony to counter the linguistic minority speaker’s limited English does not remove this bias.
此外,由于翻译过程中的语言改变,法院口译员对证词的翻译可以塑造法庭上的陪审员观点。口译员倾向于通过使用未合同的单词版本并将零散的语音变成更叙述的形式来延长证词。例如,在西班牙语到英语翻译中,英国口译员经常在演讲者的证词中添加诸如“……嗯,……好,……um”之类的树篱。这些添加的树篱可能反映了口译员在翻译的语言中的性能缺陷;但是,这种补充的证词会导致陪审员认为证人,而不是解释者,不太有利。
Finally, linguistic minority defendants and witnesses are forced to rely on the interpreter to understand the courtroom proceedings. During translation, interpreters may inadvertently alter an attorney’s intended meaning during questioning by weakening the force of leading questions or including additional words. For example, if an interpreter adds words such as “well” or “now” to the beginning of an attorney’s question during cross-examination, the witness may view the attorney as confrontational. Such alterations in the structure of the questions can influence the witness’s perception of the attorney and understanding of the questions, thus altering the resulting testimony.
对陪审员和陪审团的决定的影响
解释的证词本身本身可能会影响刑事案件的结果,这一事实也得到了证明。经验得出的数据表明,陪审员看到的刑事被告在英语口译员的帮助下用英语以外的其他语言作证的被告比用英语作证的被告更负面。例如,1990年代在得克萨斯州法院收集的数据表明,用西班牙语作证的刑事被告与用英语作证的类似被告人相似的被定罪风险要大得多。也就是说,对非英语说话者的负面看法被转变为倾向于投票赞成被告的定罪。即使自己是西班牙语的人在被定罪的陪审团中服役的人也是如此。
在同一司法管辖区收集的最新实验数据表明,被告证词的语言继续影响陪审员对被告的罪恶感的判断,但现在结果的方向已经改变。也就是说,在被告在西班牙语中以英语解释作证的案件不太可能被定罪,其他事情是平等的,而不是在等同于以英语作证的案件中服役的陪审员。但是,当陪审员故意时,当被告的证词的语言似乎没有影响陪审团的决定时,这种影响似乎会减少。这项研究的另一个重要发现是,陪审员的语言使用会在审议之前会影响投票偏好,又会影响审议后的陪审团裁决。西班牙语英语双语似乎比单语英语的人通常更宽容。
语言影响的解释
这些结果提出的一种理论解释遵循社会认同理论。该理论假设个人有动力保持积极的社会身份。此外,假定人类具有普遍和自然的倾向,将他人归类为分类员的组成员或其他一些小组成员。人们可以使用各种策略来保持积极的自我形象,但重要的策略与我们与我们认为是团体内或小组外成员的互动方式和奖励有关。例如,一个人可以通过对小组外部成员更有利的感觉来增加自己的积极自我形象,并通过贬义地奖励那些是小组内成员的人。在法律背景下,那些认为自己与被告最相似的陪审员会期望宽大处理。预计讲西班牙语的陪审员会认为说西班牙语的被告比英语单语言更为相似,因此预计将对讲西班牙语的被告更有利。同样,英国单语陪审员应该更宽容,其他情况是平等的,说英语的被告和对西班牙语者的惩罚性。但是,迄今为止所进行的研究的经验数据不支持此逻辑。相反,无论被告的证词语言如何,讲西班牙语的陪审员都对被告更宽容。 In addition, regardless of their own language use, jurors treat Spanish-speaking defendants more leniently.
另一种假设是,陪审员应激励自己看到自己,并被他人视为与被指控犯罪的人不同。其他事情是平等的,他们应该倾向于定罪被告,以澄清他们与该人不同的事实。
通过以诉讼程序的强制性语言(即英语)以外的其他语言作证,所有陪审员也可以将讲西班牙语的被告视为群体外成员。为了担任陪审员,个人必须能够读写英语。因此,通过用西班牙语作证,被告证明他或她在这方面有着明显的不同。
虽然小组成员可能比小组内成员更受惩罚性的对待,但这种惩罚性待遇可能不会在双语法庭中表现出来。确实,可能发生了恰恰相反。犯罪的委托是社会将犯罪行为定义的。违反规范导致负面制裁(例如,定罪和监禁),但这也取决于观察者(例如陪审员)认识到,违反规范的人能够首先符合期望。
当他们用西班牙语作证时,被告可能被认为是他们不了解的系统中的外国人。陪审员可能会对讲西班牙语的被告表示同情,因为他们将他们视为不了解自己的情况的个人。这种猜测提出了一种新的询问线,以实证追求。也就是说,如果被告被视为对系统的“陌生人”,陪审员可能会提高其标准以承担举证责任,并要求起诉以证明对不完全理解其行为后果的个人的定罪是合理的。。
Community attitudes also may explain the results of the research outcomes to date. Recall that the impact of jurors’ language use has been shown to be greater than that of the defendant’s language of testimony. It may be that jurors’ views of the American judicial system are critical in providing a context for their decisions. So, for example, it may be that more people who serve as jurors today hold more negative attitudes regarding law enforcement and the courts than those who served as jurors in the past, producing a more lenient outcome for defendants.
对法律的影响
Court interpretation plays a pivotal role in the provision of justice to linguistic minorities in the United States. Future empirical research concerning court interpreters and the impact of translated testimony on jurors will provide useful information for the legal system and allow for unbiased due process for all defendants.
至关重要的是,在涉及语言少数群体的所有情况下,对于翻译人员的可用性仍然一致。建立州和联邦培训和认证程序可确保法院以一致和公正的方式处理此类案件。此外,允许在没有认证口译员的地区允许合同口译员和电话口译的计划是为所有被告提供正当程序的重要步骤。除了持续培训法院口译员外,对法官和律师等法律专业人士的培训可能还可以更好地了解与此类案件相关的特殊挑战。这种类型的培训将提高人们对被告权利和联邦认证口译员的责任的认识。
The fact that jurors are prepared to treat defendants who testify in the official language of trials (English) differently from those who do not is disturbing. Regardless of the quality of the interpretation, the fact that interpretation is provided at all seems to be an influential factor in the outcome of cases. At a minimum, courts may need to provide additional instruction to jurors to set aside their beliefs about those who do not testify in English. If jurors are instructed that the language of testimony is not to be included in consideration of the meaning and importance of facts presented in evidence, they may be able to hold their predilections in abeyance, and equal treatment can be given to all defendants.
参考:
- Berk-Seligson,S。(1990)。双语法庭。芝加哥:芝加哥大学出版社。
- Hovland, D. L. (1993). Errors in interpretation: Why plain error is not plain. Law and Inequality: A Journal of Theory and Practice, 11, 473-503.
- Laster,K。和Taylor,V。(1999)。口译和法律体系。澳大利亚新南威尔士州莱希哈特(Leichhardt):联邦出版社。
- tephan, C. W., & Stephan, W. G. (1986). Habla ingles? The effects of language translation on simulated juror decisions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16, 577-589.
返回概述Trial Consulting在法医心理学。