In:Common Law in an Uncommon Courtroom: Judicial interpreting in Hong Kong
Eva N.S. Ng
[Benjamins Translation Library 144] 2018
► pp. 129–146
Chapter 8English trials heard by Chinese jurors
Published online: 30 November 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.144.c8
https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.144.c8
Abstract
The previous chapter examined the linguistic disadvantage experienced by non-native English-speaking (NNES) witnesses testifying in English in court and discussed how this might also impact on other audience members who either speak no English or do not have a native command of the English language, including in the latter case Chinese jurors. This chapter takes one step further to explore the comprehension of the NNES Chinese jurors as the “judges of facts” in the Hong Kong courtroom. Drawing on evidence from the two jury trials of my research data, the findings of a previous study, as well as one case of the Court of Appeal in Hong Kong, this chapter provides evidence about the jury comprehension problem in the High Court of Hong Kong. It also discusses how the scenarios presented in particular in Chapters 6 and 7, where juries have to rely entirely on interactions in English due to the use of the chuchotage mode of interpretation or a total absence of interpretation, might impact on the comprehension of the jury and potentially on the administration of justice.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 1.1Concern about jury comprehension
- 1.2Studies of jury comprehension in common-law legal systems
- 2.The issue of jury comprehension in Hong Kong
- 3.The jury system in Hong Kong
- 4.The bilingual Hong Kong courtroom and jury’s access to the interpreted trial discourse
- 5.The survey study by Duff et al. (1992)
- 5.1Background information about the respondents
- 5.2Findings about their comprehension of the court proceedings
- 5.3Comprehension and verdicts
- 5.4Suggestions from respondents
- 6.Observations from the authentic court proceedings
- 6.1Request for exemption from jury service for reason of poor English
- 6.2Witnesses testifying in English and jury’s access to the evidence
- 6.3Legalistic features of jury instructions identified – implications for Chinese jurors
- 6.4Mumbling and fast speech as aggravating factors
- 6.5Reading of the jury oath/affirmation
- 6.6Jury’s comprehension problem of legal terminology
- 7.Appeal against a jury verdict
- 7.1Inconsistency of verdicts and Court of Appeal’s response
- 7.2The jury’s confusion over the verdicts
- 7.3Conviction quashed
- 8.Conclusion and further research
Notes
