Two lawyers, Tom and Robert, meet in Robert’s office. They discuss a forthcoming meeting of the 'Trial Issues Group' before being joined by Inspector García from the International Crime Unit. All three are working on the Illiescu (Bo) case. This meeting is conducted through an interpreter.

This clip contrasts monolingual communication between the two lawyers and their communication with the police inspector using an interpreter. The clip also demonstrates how the interpreter clarifies his role and remit before the meeting starts.

1. What ground rules do you think must apply in order for interpreters to carry out their work effectively and appropriately?
2. What aspects of communication do you think might be lost in an interpreted situation?

1. How did the features of communication differ when Tom and Robert talked to each other and then to Mr. Garcia using an interpreter?
2. To what extent do you think that communication between the two parties using the interpreter was successful?