The Role of a Sign Language Interpreter in a Police Custody Interview

A police custody interview can be stressful for anyone, but communication barriers can add serious risks for a Deaf or hard-of-hearing person. Questions may be misunderstood, rights may not be fully explained, and a person’s answers may be recorded inaccurately if communication support is delayed or poorly arranged. A qualified sign language interpreter helps create a reliable channel between the person in custody and police.

In Australia, this work commonly involves Auslan, although some Deaf people use other signed systems, spoken communication, captions, writing, gestures, or a combination of methods. The interpreter’s role is to support accurate, impartial communication while respecting Deaf culture, legal safeguards, and the particular pressures of a police station or watch house.

Access To Communication In Police Custody

A person who is Deaf should be able to understand why they have been detained, what is happening during questioning, and what decisions they are being asked to make. Police may need to communicate information about cautioning, bail, legal representation, identification procedures, searches, or the consequences of answering questions. Written notes alone may not provide equivalent access, particularly for people who use Auslan as their first or preferred language.

The need for an interpreter should be identified at the earliest stage, rather than after an interview has already begun. Police should ask the person how they communicate and should avoid assuming that lip-reading, speech, texting, or writing will be sufficient. A Deaf person might appear to understand some spoken English while missing crucial legal detail, especially in a noisy station, under fluorescent lighting, or when several officers speak quickly.

Australian police services operate under state and territory laws and policies, so procedures vary between places such as New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, and Western Australia. The practical standard remains clear: communication must be meaningful, and an interview should not proceed where a person cannot properly understand or participate.

Impartiality And Professional Boundaries

An interpreter conveys the meaning of what is signed or spoken without adding, omitting, softening, or answering on behalf of either party. This includes interpreting police questions, the person’s responses, requests for clarification, emotional statements, pauses, and relevant non-verbal communication. If an expression has several possible meanings, the interpreter should make the ambiguity visible rather than silently choosing an interpretation that could affect the evidence.

The interpreter is not a police advocate, legal adviser, support worker, or investigator. They should not explain whether a person should answer a question, comment on the strength of the case, or offer personal opinions about police conduct. When legal advice is needed, the interpreter facilitates communication between the person and their lawyer. In a custody interview, maintaining this boundary protects the integrity of the process and the interpreter’s credibility.

Family members, friends, children, police employees, or another detainee should not be treated as substitutes for an independent professional interpreter. These arrangements can compromise confidentiality and place pressure on the Deaf person. A qualified interpreter with suitable legal experience is better placed to manage sensitive language, preserve impartiality, and recognise when communication has broken down.

Preparing For The Interview

Good interpreting begins before the recording starts. The interpreter should receive practical information about the setting, the expected duration, the communication preferences of the Deaf person, and whether a lawyer or an additional interpreter will attend. They should not be given confidential investigative material that is unnecessary for the assignment, but a basic briefing can help them prepare for names, locations, technical terms, and the sequence of events.

Police should arrange a room with clear sightlines, adequate lighting, minimal background noise, and enough space for the interpreter to be visible to the Deaf person and the interview camera. Officers should face the Deaf person when speaking, use ordinary language, and address the person directly rather than directing every statement to the interpreter. Looking at the interpreter is natural, but the Deaf person remains the participant in the conversation.

Long interviews may require breaks, particularly when the interpreter is working between Auslan and spoken English at a high level of concentration. In complex matters, two interpreters may work as a team and alternate to maintain accuracy. Professional development in legal and police contexts is essential, and interpreter workshops can help practitioners build skills in ethics, Deaf cultural awareness, and demanding communication environments.

During Questioning And Recording

At the beginning of the interview, the interpreter may establish how the process will work: one person speaks or signs at a time, everyone pauses when clarification is needed, and the interpreter will interpret in the first person where appropriate. Police should allow the interpreter to finish conveying a message before asking the next question. Rapid interruptions, overlapping speech, or side conversations can make a signed or spoken exchange impossible to follow accurately.

If the Deaf person misunderstands a question, the interpreter should indicate this and request clarification. They may also need to explain a cultural or linguistic difference, such as a sign that does not have a direct English equivalent. The interpreter should avoid turning a complex question into a simpler one without making that change clear, because the form and precision of a question can matter in a recorded interview.

Police should record the use of an interpreter and any significant communication difficulty. Where video is used, the camera position should capture the Deaf person’s signing and the interpreter’s work as far as practicable. A written transcript may not show the full linguistic context of Auslan, including spatial reference, facial grammar, role shifting, or signs that rely on visual information. If a dispute later arises, the original recording and the interpreter’s professional records may be important.

Protecting Fairness After The Interview

The interpreter’s responsibilities continue through accurate completion of the assignment. They should report any material problem, such as poor visibility, equipment failure, fatigue, an inability to understand a regional sign, or pressure to continue when communication is no longer reliable. A qualified interpreter does not conceal uncertainty to make an interview appear smooth.

Lawyers, police, courts, and corrections staff should also recognise that Deaf people are a diverse group. Some are fluent in Auslan and English; others have limited formal language, acquired deafness later in life, cognitive disability, mental health concerns, or experience with Aboriginal or culturally specific communication practices. A person who uses a different signed language or relies on tactile signing may need a specialist interpreter or Deaf interpreter alongside the Auslan interpreter.

For Deaf people in Australia, equitable justice depends on more than booking someone who can sign. It requires an interpreter with appropriate credentials and legal competence, respectful police practice, accessible technology, suitable interview conditions, and enough time for genuine understanding. When these elements are in place, the interpreter helps ensure that a custody interview reflects the person’s actual account rather than the effects of an avoidable communication failure.