Seems like a bit of a waste of money seeing as we’re hardly short on potential jurors, but ok.
That said, when I did mine, 2 members of the jury had a level of English which was barely even conversational, let alone good enough to properly follow a trial (one didn’t even manage to read out the juror’s oath lol). Even without interpreters, I’m sure most deaf people could lip-read and understand witnesses better than that.
As a policeman, I’m not sure how I feel about this. On one hand, its a good thing to be as inclusive as possible and allow those with disabilities to partake in the justice system, but on the other I have concerns about their ability to interpret evidence. For instance, if a 999 call with the victim clearly in distress is played to the court, subtitles won’t be able to accurately capture the tone the victim is using, or with BWV footage of someone attacking officers the offenders tone and aggressiveness may not be adequately understood.
2 comments
Seems like a bit of a waste of money seeing as we’re hardly short on potential jurors, but ok.
That said, when I did mine, 2 members of the jury had a level of English which was barely even conversational, let alone good enough to properly follow a trial (one didn’t even manage to read out the juror’s oath lol). Even without interpreters, I’m sure most deaf people could lip-read and understand witnesses better than that.
As a policeman, I’m not sure how I feel about this. On one hand, its a good thing to be as inclusive as possible and allow those with disabilities to partake in the justice system, but on the other I have concerns about their ability to interpret evidence. For instance, if a 999 call with the victim clearly in distress is played to the court, subtitles won’t be able to accurately capture the tone the victim is using, or with BWV footage of someone attacking officers the offenders tone and aggressiveness may not be adequately understood.