As I have expressed in several articles, Hudson City Court can be entertaining, even amusing and perplexing at times. Such was the case yesterday in Judge Connor's court.
It wasn't a very crowded court when things commenced at 9:15, but that doesn't mean things went quickly or smoothly. Half of the 16 defendants needed a court interpreter since they could not speak or understand the English language. Judge Connor kept referring to the 2 interpreters as "translators," as he does regularly. Translators work with written text, interpreters work with the spoken word.
Anyhow, 3 men of Bengali descent needing an interpreter had been given tickets by the NY State DEC for illegal fishing in the river. The first guy had kept a striped bass he caught that was an inch over (or under?) the limit. A few jokes were thrown around by the Assistant DA Carl Whitbeck, Judge Connor, and Public Defender Michael Howard. The look on Connor's face was one of "Why am I dealing with this?" He gave the defendant an ACOD, or Adjournment in Contemplation of Dismissal, which meant that there would be no fine and the ticket would be dropped as long as the defendant didn't engage in any illegal fishing for a year. This case took about ten minutes, with lots of interpreting and waiting going on, as well as laughter.
The second Bengali man had been caught by DEC for using an illegal fishing hook. Michael Howard had to explain to the judge what a snag hook is and how it is used to illegally catch fish. Through the interpreter, the defendant claimed that he was not aware that the hook he was using was illegal. He was also given an ACOD by Connor.
The third Bengali requiring an interpreter was also ticketed by DEC, but the details were not made known in the courtroom. He, too, was given an ACOD.
It seems really odd that Hudson City Court is adjudicating tickets issued by DEC for illegal fishing. I think Judge Connor feels the same way.
An elderly woman was then called to take a seat in front of the judge. She immediately began speaking to Judge Connor, trying to make her case that she had done all she could do to try to take care of the speeding ticket she had been issued (38 mph in a 20mph zone). Connor asked her to stop speaking, but she continued, obviously flustered, nervous, and intimidated by the court environment. Then Connor told her to stop speaking, but she continued, not at all listening to the judge. It was comical and a bit sad. Over the next few minutes, Judge Connor and the Court Officer must have told the woman to stop speaking 15 times before she finally did. At one point, the well-intentioned woman looked to be on the verge of tears.
Connor explained to the woman that she could plead guilty to the speeding ticket; email the County DA's office for a plea deal; or schedule a trial. This did not help matters - she just continued to talk, mentioning how she was "the most anti-speeder person you will ever meet." She was told to take a seat in the back and talk to the public defender, which she finally did.
Then Connor called up one of 5 Spanish speaking defendants, all of whom required a court interpreter. The first defendant was an elderly woman who had been given a traffic ticket for Improper Passing. Without much delay, she was offered a plea deal (reduced charge) right then and there, thanks to the Assistant DA Carl Whitbeck, even though Connor repeatedly tells defendants that "the DA's office no longer offers plea deals in court." It turns out that if you do not speak the English language, you will have your traffic ticket reduced in Hudson City Court. But if you are unfortunate enough to speak the English language, you will not be offered a reduced charge in Hudson City Court.
The second Spanish-speaking defendant requiring an interpreter had been caught driving while intoxicated. He also had 4 traffic tickets. That case was adjourned to next month (not an ACOD, though). The third defendant was caught driving without a license. The fourth had a felony DWI with a BAC of .28, over three times the legal limit. He also had an interlock violation, which meant this was not his first DWI offense. The fifth defendant was also caught driving without a license. Those cases were also adjourned to next month, when, presumably, the interpreter will be needed again.
The woman with the speeding ticket was eventually brought back up, and Judge Connor allowed her to speak. She said that soon after receiving the speeding ticket she had tried her best on a computer at home to apply for a reduced charge with the DA's Office but found it too difficult to do. "I could not understand the instructions," she told the judge. Connor turned to Whitbeck and asked, "Do you think we can make an exception here and offer a plea deal?" Whitbeck agreed, and the woman was offered a reduced charge, which she pled guilty to. She thanked everyone in front of her profusely and repeatedly, then left the courtroom. Boy, she could talk!
One thought about the court interpreters, who certainly aren't doing their work pro bono: It seems to me that if a defendant comes in front of a court and claims to not speak the English language, a condition of any resolution should be that if that defendant returns to the court for a future offense, they have to show that they are making an effort to learn the English language. Shouldn't the expectation be for defendants to learn the common language and not rely on interpreters to get things done in court?
Should taxpayers be paying for court interpreters that are needed for people who don't bother to learn the English language? Half of the defendants in Tuesday's court could speak and read little to none of the English language. Should we continue to give them a pass for not learning English, to continue to be required to provide them with court interpreters, and continue to offer them reduced charges in court when nearly everyone else is told by the city judges that this is no longer done?
No comments:
Post a Comment