Tenn. R. Sup. Ct., canon 8
Interpreters shall familiarize themselves as thoroughly as possible with the nature and length of a proceeding beforehand, to assess their ability to deliver adequate services. When interpreters have any reservation about their ability to satisfy an assignment competently, they shall immediately convey that reservation to the appropriate judicial authority even when the proceeding is in progress.
Tenn. R. Sup. Ct., canon 8
Commentary.
If the communication mode or language of the LEP person cannot be readily interpreted, the interpreter should notify the appropriate judicial authority.
Interpreters should notify the appropriate judicial authority of any environmental or physical limitation that impedes or hinders their ability to deliver interpreting services adequately (e.g., the court room is not quiet enough for the interpreter to hear or be heard by the LEP speaker, more than one person at a time is speaking, or principals or witnesses of the court are speaking at a rate of speed that is too rapid for the interpreter to adequately interpret).
Interpreters should notify the presiding officer of the need to take periodic breaks to maintain mental and physical alertness and prevent interpreter fatigue. Interpreters should recommend and encourage the use of team interpreting whenever necessary, such as trials, complex and technical proceedings, proceedings over two hours in length and testimony lasting one hour or more (keeping in mind that the consecutive interpreting mode doubles the length of time of the testimony). See the commentary to Section 3 of Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 42 for additional information.
Interpreters are encouraged to make inquiries as to the nature of a case whenever possible before accepting an assignment. This enables interpreters to match more closely their professional qualifications, skills, and experience to potential assignments and more accurately assess their ability to satisfy those assignments competently.
Even competent and experienced interpreters may encounter cases where routine proceedings suddenly involve technical or specialized terminology unfamiliar to the interpreter (e.g., the unscheduled testimony of an expert witness). When such instances occur, interpreters should request a brief recess to familiarize themselves with the subject matter. If familiarity with the terminology requires extensive time or more intensive research, interpreters should inform the presiding officer.
Interpreters should refrain from accepting a case if they feel the language and subject matter of that case is likely to exceed their skills or capacities. Interpreters should feel no compunction about notifying the court if they feel unable to perform competently due to lack of familiarity with terminology, preparation, or difficulty in understanding a witness or defendant. Court personnel and parties are encouraged to provide interpreters with copies of all documents referred to in a proceeding, such as witness lists, indictment, exhibit lists, criminal complaint, investigative reports, tape transcripts, telephone logs and bank records.
Interpreters should notify the court of any personal bias they may have involving any aspect of the proceedings. For example, an interpreter who has been the victim of a sexual assault may wish to be excused from interpreting in cases involving similar offenses.