 If you do not consider this to be potentially prejudicial to your client’s interests, consider asking (or asking the police to ask) the suspect further questions to clarify potential ambiguities during the questioning.  Alternatively, ask for an opportunity to consult the record of the interview, once this is typed up, privately with your client, before he signs it. This may, of course, have to be with the same interpreter.  Issues with consecutive interpretation Interpretation at a police station is unlikely to be ‘simultaneous’, as there will rarely be equipment available. It is more likely that each question will be asked and translated by the interpreter for the suspect. The suspect’s answers will then be translated by the interpreter for the investigator. This is known as ‘consecutive interpretation’ There are different techniques: sometimes an interpreter will wait for the speaker to provide part of their answer, ask them to wait, translate that part, and then allow them to proceed, repeating the process over and over. Alternatively, an interpreter may take a note of what is being said by the speaker, and then retell the evidence to the listener. Professional interpreters are trained to render faithfully into the target language exactly what the person says, without synthesising the answer into their own words. However, this is a difficult skill and, as our experts have reported to Fair Trials, many of those providing interpretation at police stations in the EU are not qualified professional interpreters. In addition, whilst police officers may be trained in interrogation techniques and asking clear, focused questions, the suspect, who may be at a police station for the first time, may feel nervous or frightened. There is a possibility that their answers will be confused, verbose, or badly articulated, which may prevent challenges for even the most experienced legal interpreter. There is thus a possibility that an interpreter will convey essentially their own understanding of what was said by the suspect, essentially explaining to the investigator what the suspect has said. Clearly, this impinges upon the suspect’s ability to put forth ‘his version of events’.  Flag up apparent failures to interpret faithfully:  Point out when the length of the interpreted statement differs significantly from the length of the person’s statement.  If you hear a word repeated several times by the client during one statement, and do not hear it the same number of times in interpretation, point this out.  Lexicon In some contexts, police questioning may relate to areas of professional, scientific or technical expertise. Clearly, in this context, the ability of the interpreter to understand the terms used by the speaker in the first place will depend on the extent of their vocabulary in both languages. Even in relatively simple business contexts, terms like ‘income’ and ‘revenue’ may result in more or less incriminating statements depending on how they are translated. However, even in simple contexts, if the interpreter is not sufficiently competent, they may struggle with basic terms. 28