Become A Member | Forum | Profiles | Personals | Classifieds | See Who's Online ...
 
View Topic
  Message Boards : General Discussion : View Topic : 158 Posts, Page 2 of 11
  HomeNewNoticesHot TopicsPollsStatsBlogs Login / Register
 
Should Deaf People Serve On A Jury?
 
 Poll Choices 20 Total Votes
60.00% / 12 Votes
35.00% / 7 Votes
5.00% / 1 Vote
 You Need To Be Logged In To Vote In Polls ...
 
# 16 : Wednesday 29-9-2010 @ 18:40
 
 
Someone said :
An interpreter does not simply translate: they interpret. They add their own understanding, they exemplify.

If there is a recording, they interpret the voice quality and feelings.

Yes, this is another issue to be considered. They are exhorted not to exemplify but sometimes due to the nature of sign languages, you HAVE to be exact. For instance the phrase 'he hit her'.

In English, that is enough. this is not specific enough for the interpreter. in what way did he hit her? how did he hit her? with what? His fist? His baseball bat? What? Just a small example.
Reply
 
 Recent Message Board Topics
Have You Ever Walked Out From A Film At The Cinema?
Non Random Thoughts..
President Trump / Oompa Loompa News
Any Convincing Tg,Tv,Crossdressers Going To Dolan’s Dock Road Limeri..
Can We Cope With Weather?
Funny Pictures To Brighten Your Day - Funny Edition
What Song Are You Listening To Now?!?!
80's Music
 
Hey! If you enjoy shooting the breeze with like-minded people, check out
our Message Boards
• Advice • Coming Out
• Computers • Current Affairs
• Discussion • Food & Drink
• Going Out • Humour
• Health • Music
• Newbies • Sexual Issues
# 17 : Wednesday 29-9-2010 @ 18:41
 
 
Someone said :
No more than a woman would be influenced by a female defendant...

Yeah that's true.
Reply
 
# 18 : Wednesday 29-9-2010 @ 18:44
 
 
Someone said :
Could that influence the decision?? A fellow deaf person etc..

No. I can see how this could happen, but if deaf jurors could be selected from outside the area, they could not be influenced either ay. they would understand exactly what was being signed, rather than for someone who hasn't a clue about Deaf culture and making erroneous assumptions based on facial expressions, and having to listen to the voicing of the interpreter.
Reply
 
# 19 : Wednesday 29-9-2010 @ 18:46
 
 
Someone said :
No. I can see how this could happen, but if deaf jurors could be selected from outside the area, they could not be influenced either ay. they would understand exactly what was being signed, rather than for someone who hasn't a clue about Deaf culture and making erroneous assumptions based on facial expressions, and having to listen to the voicing of the interpreter.

But then the Judge would need to be also deaf to avoid her to be excluded from the "inside" information?

And then the Supreme Court, if involved in an appeal, should too?
Reply
 
# 20 : Wednesday 29-9-2010 @ 18:46
 
 
hence the complications.
Reply
 
# 21 : Wednesday 29-9-2010 @ 18:55
 
 
Let's ask the question from a different point of view.

Should we have a Polish-speaking Jury to judge a Polish person?

Should an Irish citizen of Turkish birth and who does not master spoken English be allowed to get a translator to fulfill their duty?

If someone needs assistance to be a Jury, I am of a mind to declare that they are not able to be a Jury.

As a defendant I would be uneasy with the idea that a 13th person has an input in judging me.
And I would also be uncomfortable that one member of the Jury depends on a third party to understand the case and share their opinion with other jurors.

Being a juror is not a right, it is a duty...
Reply
 
# 22 : Wednesday 29-9-2010 @ 18:59
 
 
What does the OP think

I don't think I should be allowed to serve because of my hearing.
Reply
 
# 23 : Wednesday 29-9-2010 @ 19:00
 
 
that's very true. Yes, it is a duty.

The Polish example still ignores one fact. The English speaking Jurors may not understand Polish, but they can ascertain the tone of voice when the Polish defendant is answering questions.

Deaf people cannot do that. They can only judge by looking at the person, but they also have to look at the interpreter to see what is being said.

Interpreters are not allowed to inject their own opinions when interpreting, anyway. They are there just to relay what is being said/signed.

The 13th person has an input in judging you? If the interpreter is doing the job properly, he/she has no input whatsoever.
Reply
 
# 24 : Wednesday 29-9-2010 @ 19:03
 
 
Someone said :
What does the OP think

I don't think I should be allowed to serve because of my hearing.

My apologies.

Here is what I think, honestly.

I would love to serve as a juror, but given the state of the interpreting services, and my preference for the written word over the signed word, means I would prefer to have a written record of what is being said, so I can read what is being said.

However, justice must be served, not to please me so I can try my hand at being a juror, but to see the case being tried properly. If it was an all-deaf jury, and the defendant and plaintiff deaf, and all signers, I would have no problem serving as a juror.

As it is, in all likelihood, I would need an interpreter. I'm not sure.
Reply
 
# 25 : Wednesday 29-9-2010 @ 19:12
 
 
Someone said :
[...]The 13th person has an input in judging you? If the interpreter is doing the job properly, he/she has no input whatsoever.

If...
As you said, that is not going to happen, and we cannot have the fate of innocent people hanging in the balance of an "if".
Reply
 
# 26 : Wednesday 29-9-2010 @ 19:12
 
 
Someone said :
My apologies.

Here is what I think, honestly.

I would love to serve as a juror, but given the state of the interpreting services, and my preference for the written word over the signed word, means I would prefer to have a written record of what is being said, so I can read what is being said.

However, justice must be served, not to please me so I can try my hand at being a juror, but to see the case being tried properly. If it was an all-deaf jury, and the defendant and plaintiff deaf, and all signers, I would have no problem serving as a juror.

As it is, in all likelihood, I would need an interpreter. I'm not sure.

I see, as I said I did jury duty and believe me when I say you wouldn't love it.

But I know its the fact you are not allowed is what is important to you.

So you never know someday you may serve and in the height of the boredom of it You will say Jaysus I should have taken heed at what 4john said.
Reply
 
# 27 : Wednesday 29-9-2010 @ 19:44
 
 
Someone said :
I see, as I said I did jury duty and believe me when I say you wouldn't love it. But I know its the fact you are not allowed is what is important to you.

Please read what I wrote again. I stated that I hesitate to serve on Jury duty as I am not sure it would be in the best interests of justice, given the situation.

THAT is more important to me than being able to serve Jury duty. Please do not think you know what I am thinking. Just read what I said again. Carefully.
So you never know someday you may serve and in the height of the boredom of it You will say Jaysus I should have taken heed at what 4john said.

Read what I wrote again. Please.
Reply
 
# 28 : Wednesday 29-9-2010 @ 19:54
 
 
I'd trust you as a Juror Intrepid if I was on trial for something !
Reply
 
# 29 : Wednesday 29-9-2010 @ 19:56
 
 
I wouldn't do jury duty myself because i'm a bit unstable .
Reply
 
# 30 : Wednesday 29-9-2010 @ 20:35
 
 
Sorry Treps I didn't actually mean anything derogative, I should have put smileys in.
Reply
 
Prev 1234567891011Next