The Tale of Two Interpreters

Tale of Two Interpreters

Today was day four in Judge McCalla’s courtroom. Plaintiff’s call Colonel/ Professor Jose Garcia of Buenos Aires, Argentina who is a paid expert witness to thrash out the particulars about the El Salvadorian military structure/chain of command. Plaintiff’s Attorney Matt Eisenbrandt’s examination of Professor Garcia seems to gloss over the eyes of the nine remaining members of the jury. It’s difficult terrain to navigate, that much is certain. The country’s Code of Military Justice, the chart of the Chain of Command, multiple articles from dusty old armed-forces-regulations-books. Professor Garcia read every last word in Spanish and the translators translated in English. A very time consuming process, that much is certain (again). The plaintiff’s presentation of the materials gets a straight “A” especially with all the high tech gadgets at the courts disposal. More flat screen television monitors than a hip hop impresario’s poker room. Poor Defendant’s Attorney Bruce Brooke brings up his silly maps of Central and South America taken from some poor kid’s geography book and searches for their place under the high tech overhead projector all to tell us that yes! indeed! Argentina is located at the “bottom” of South America. Judge McCalla remarks, “it depends on what part of the universe you are in." Good point. Looks like the top of South America from Antarctica!

Anyway, whatever. The tale of two interpreters simply juxtapositions the mannerisms of the two sharp dressed men hired by the plaintiffs to turn this trial – mostly spoken in Spanish into English. And they both do a hellva job; I’m just so amazed at how completely differently their styles are. It is really quite remarkable.

I’m ashamed to say I don’t know their names, but I do want to meet them before this trial is over. The Judge swore them in the first day of trial and I failed to jot down there names. But believe me, they are a big part of this trial. Why two??? They have to rotate and for good reason. There is a lot of talking. The first interpreter is a younger man, medium build with dark hair and a moustache. From what I can tell he uses a digital recording device held in his palm to record the witness’s answers and then instantly repeats them in English into his microphone as he is listens to the answers through his tiny ear piece. He hits every stop (actually both interpreters do). I mean the pauses, the mis-speaks, the “ahhs”, every little nuance imaginable. You are probably wondering IF I don’t speak Spanish very well how in the hell would I know. Well, I know. I’m listening to the vocal patterns. I’m trained in communications and I’m detail oriented. (Or that’s what I told my employer.) No, seriously, these guys nail it. The other interpreter is an older gentlemen with grey hair and a perfect beard. He is completely different in style. He is emotional in front of the microphone. His English accent sounds of European dissent. He holds the microphone in his hand, and uses it like a performer would. He takes notes on a white note pad. Writing quickly and scratching it out as soon as he is finished translating it. His vocal delivery is forceful not subtle. He invokes. The other interpreter conveys. I wonder about the sub-conscience effect it has on the listening jury. Like having one interpreter over the other at certain passages could give you the upper hand. One can never tell.