Vlog: Interpreted ABC News on Wright
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=2935914
As you know, I’ve been corresponding with an ABC News producer, Terry Kelly. At first he got in touch with me to get my opinion about the legal argument Wright’s attorney used to get her waived from the death penaltyunsuccessfully: “it would be cruel and unusual to give her the death penalty considering her inability to hear and communicate effectively enough to convince a jury to spare her life.”  I covered many aspects of this case, including my deep concerns about Wright’s chances for a fair trial due to interpreting issues, a legal angle Mr. Kelly hadn’t thought of. Several examples from the fiasco of Carl Dupree’s murder trial and my personal experiences with legal interpreters were described. The subsequent discussions made him expand the scope of his coverage of the trial to include the issue of interpreting.
My quotes: “Because she is deaf doesn’t mean she should get special treatment. It’s important to have certified legal interpreters and a camera to record all the testimonies given in American Sign Language . There should be two interpreters, working in 20 minutes shifts, and a monitoring interpreter from the other legal team. That way, if there are any mistakes, the interpreters can catch the error. The camera will provide a visual record if there is any doubt regarding the accuracy of the interpreting.” The typed transcription of the deaf people’s testimonies for them to review afterwards for accuracies of the interpreter’s translations was noted afterward by the reporter.
Â
From the ABC producer last night:
“Elizabeth, when the folks at World News heard what we were working on they got excited about it and they’re now working on a segment for tomorrow’s World News with Charles Gibson.”
I am glad to hear that these quotes were used because too many lawyers remain woefully ignorant about the legal pitfalls facing the deaf when they testify due to the inherent limitations of interpreters, i.e, difficulties in translating ASL to English and vice versa, and ignorance of Deaf Culture. No matter how heinous Daphne Wright’s actions were, she is entitled to a fair trial as mandated by the Bill of Rights.
I am touched by the producer’s thoughtful consideration in making the video accessible to deaf people by adding an interpreter. *hands waving in the air*  Is there any way we can make the vlog bigger so we can see the interpreter better? Meanwhile, he will see if he can get the news transcribed for the deaf people who don’t use sign language.
email contact: Mishkazena@aol.com
Copyright Mishkazena (TM) 2007
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=2935914
As you know, I’ve been corresponding with an ABC News producer, Terry Kelly. At first he got in touch with me to get my opinion about the legal argument Wright’s attorney used to get her waived from the death penaltyunsuccessfully: “it would be cruel and unusual to give her the death penalty considering her inability to hear and communicate effectively enough to convince a jury to spare her life.”  I covered many aspects of this case, including my deep concerns about Wright’s chances for a fair trial due to interpreting issues, a legal angle Mr. Kelly hadn’t thought of. Several examples from the fiasco of Carl Dupree’s murder trial and my personal experiences with legal interpreters were described. The subsequent discussions made him expand the scope of his coverage of the trial to include the issue of interpreting.
My quotes: “Because she is deaf doesn’t mean she should get special treatment. It’s important to have certified legal interpreters and a camera to record all the testimonies given in American Sign Language . There should be two interpreters, working in 20 minutes shifts, and a monitoring interpreter from the other legal team. That way, if there are any mistakes, the interpreters can catch the error. The camera will provide a visual record if there is any doubt regarding the accuracy of the interpreting.” The typed transcription of the deaf people’s testimonies for them to review afterwards for accuracies of the interpreter’s translations was noted afterward by the reporter.
Â
From the ABC producer last night:
“Elizabeth, when the folks at World News heard what we were working on they got excited about it and they’re now working on a segment for tomorrow’s World News with Charles Gibson.”
I am glad to hear that these quotes were used because too many lawyers remain woefully ignorant about the legal pitfalls facing the deaf when they testify due to the inherent limitations of interpreters, i.e, difficulties in translating ASL to English and vice versa, and ignorance of Deaf Culture. No matter how heinous Daphne Wright’s actions were, she is entitled to a fair trial as mandated by the Bill of Rights.
I am touched by the producer’s thoughtful consideration in making the video accessible to deaf people by adding an interpreter. *hands waving in the air*  Is there any way we can make the vlog bigger so we can see the interpreter better? Meanwhile, he will see if he can get the news transcribed for the deaf people who don’t use sign language.
email contact: Mishkazena@aol.com
Copyright Mishkazena (TM) 2007
March 9th, 2007 at 9:32 am
MZ, click on the GO BIG below the screen to get the bigger video but blurry a bit. It is better than nothing.
March 9th, 2007 at 10:35 am
Is it Quicktime? It’s not working for me
March 9th, 2007 at 10:46 am
Wow, good job, MZ!
I know the death penalty is a heavy issue (I’m mostly against it and even in this case), but the issue itself is her being deaf.
That alone should not dismiss her from the pardon from death penalty.
It’s not a “disability” where our mental capability is affected!
I am pleased with their in-depth effort in understanding and inputs from the Deaf Community!
Kudos to ABC!
I really hope this will become a model for other courts to follow and improvements start happening for the system of justice for the deaf people!
By the way, before I had the chance to email the producer with my input, it was removed.
Yeah, I’m too slow… oh well.
Great responses, Deaf people!
March 9th, 2007 at 10:57 am
I have mixed feelings about this video.
Why did they ask a HEARING person to speak on behalf of Deaf People??
Andy Imperta may know lot of stuff, but it would be more validated if a Deaf person speak…it’s like having a white person speaking for black community.
March 9th, 2007 at 11:06 am
Thank you so much MZ! I appreciate the producer thinking of our Deaf community by putting an interpreter on Vlog.
I have a concern because why should a hearing person speak for our Deaf community? We have many outstanding Deaf leaders that should speak for our Deaf community.
Even though I have a great respect for NAD but I wish a NAD (National Association for the Deaf) President would speak for our community. NAD has a lot to do to improve its organization in order to recognize in nationally and globally. It is too way passive. If NAD works with Disability organization, Disability organization should refer the producer to the NAD President.
BE PROACTIVE!
Aidan
March 9th, 2007 at 11:12 am
MZ, I agree with your every word and you were as right as rain.
March 9th, 2007 at 11:15 am
It is not Quicktime. It is “Flash” and you need to have Flash Player” if you want to watch that video. You may download the software, Flash Player and it is free. Check http://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/ for more information.
I personally feel that the major problem with our judicial system is judges’ attitudes toward Deaf people. People of the jury definitely need to be educated about ASL and Deaf Culture. I believe that at least of 1/3 of the jury should be ASL fluent and Deaf. I feel like we are still in Post-World War II because we, Deaf people constantly are being treated poorly and our civil rights are publicly abused. - Ron, http://www.savegallaudet.org -
March 9th, 2007 at 11:35 am
Bravo!
I’m glad they took your input and expanded their scope. That is excellent!
March 9th, 2007 at 11:36 am
Saw your quote there and the male guest speaker has agreed to what you said. I thought he did a decent job explaining ASL access and other misc access issues necessary for various non-signers.
It appears to me that many do not know there are various kind of communication needs for deaf and they only adapt assumptions and stereotypical views. Wright clearly needs ASL access and she has that rights, whether we like it or not.
I agree that one should have fair access to two ASL interpreters and such. To those who think otherwise, no, it is not special treatment. It is the law.
The guest speaker knows it is not a perfect system either, but they have a civil duty to accommodate Wright by her request, not via assumptions of others.
March 9th, 2007 at 11:50 am
MZ, it is very sad about Carl Dupree’s death but there is something that puzzled me about either his fist strike or kicking right into a policewoman’s stomach that she was hospitalized (she could have died). I just know that DPS would never have killed him accidentally out of the blue. They never wanted to get involved with death because this would take lots of their time writing reports and talking with the police officers risking going to jail, etc. I understood that Carl was frustrated about his failing grade that day and he may set off fighting illegally with DPS with his well built and very strong body????
He was being restrained the wrong way; I still do not understand all that.
March 9th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Brian, you need the Windows Media Player to view the ABC News video. Guess the Apple does not support this software, am I correct?
Maybe, IamMine will be glad to intrepret this video in her nice vlog
March 9th, 2007 at 12:13 pm
Great job MZ, I have been reading your blogs since protest started and I find your blog have crediability and I always know you have made excellent points on various views. Great job!
May I make additional suggestion?
If there is other deaf witness against the defendant, it is better to have two additional interpreter. two interpreter for defendant and two more for victim and witness against the defendant to ensure the interpreter is not taking sides on either parties.
March 9th, 2007 at 12:26 pm
Har har, Greg!
I’ll leave that up to Aidan!
She’s far more talented than I am!
We still have to work on MZ and her vlogs!
Deb M - good suggestions. Is there a email contact where we can send in our concerns and suggestions?
I also thought more about this - I think this would also be a great opportunity for the Deaf Professionals such as Deaf lawyer, Deaf psychologists, etc… Along with Deaf peers on the jury?
Just some thoughts - I think this would enlighten people who are not exposed to the deaf people and/or the Deaf Culture - how we operate things and they can understand and learn from us.
What do you think?
March 9th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
I have MAC. I can open the window just fine. :o)
Brian will need to download the window player first before he can open it. Hope it helps..
Aidan
March 9th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
Ban death penalty! No matter if this person is deaf or hearing or uneducation or education. Death penalty must be removed.
March 9th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
Where has the NAD spokesperson been?
Hope Aidan will be voted president of the NAD! I adore her outspokenness! She has sensio comune!
March 9th, 2007 at 4:01 pm
KUDOS MZ!!! Im planning to start a private dialogue with my people as this is a topic that is quite interesting to discuss….judging from the comments….wow!
You GO, Girl!
March 9th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
Thanks, guys
Greg, that did the trick! Thanks for the suggestion
Iam, the producer was very interested and receptive. He definitely had the right attitude as he decided on his own about getting an interpreter for the show. Many people wouldn’t have thought about getting one. So I am impressed with Mr. Kelly.
I am not sure why NAD wasn’t involved. The producer had no problem finding and contacting
me.
Mike, I think Imparto did an excellent job, too.
SChevy, yes, Carl kicked the female guard in the abdomen, but I think this occured during the struggle. The guards used a chokehold, a procedure made illegal due to its lethality. The students did try to inform the guards that Carl cannot breath, but instead of listening, the guards threatend the students to shut up or they’ll be arrested. So the guards did have a chance, but they refused to listen.
Deb M, that is the standard procedure. I truly hope the Wright lawyer did contact lawyers working with deaf people. I provided her my civil rights lawyer’s contact information.
Jean, NAD does need an aggressive spokeperson. Aidan would be a good candidate for the spokeperson
Vikee, thanks, there is a similar post several days ago, if you want to check the comments.
March 9th, 2007 at 6:38 pm
Great job, MK!! You have represented well for the deaf community so as long as the quotes are derived from deaf individuals that give out accurate information, I’m pleased..well, almost..
This hearing spokesperson happen to be a president of disability and I think he explained rather well about the deaf and ASL in general. It is just too bad it is not balanced out with a deaf spokesperson in front of the TV screen. That could have been you! Could have given that feedback to ABC to make deaf more visible.
Actually I cannot really judge whether if Wright had a fair trial. We all are not there and there is no deaf representative who can confirm this, right? I am not necessarily talking about because she is deaf but it is possible that there are other issues such as due process. What bothers me is that it is based on hearing people’s perspective on what they see inside the courtroom about Wright and that deaf people make speculation outside the courtroom so it is not fair to judge.
Is there any opportunity to get an deaf neutral eyewitness from the courtroom that we can better understand what really went on behind the scenes?
March 9th, 2007 at 6:41 pm
Oops I mean MZ!!!
March 9th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
The justice courts are unusually harsh on Wright. Many white guys have committed atricious murders on women, yet you don’t see them on death row. Because Wright is black and lesbian, S.F. people are harsh on her? Something stinks high over there!
March 9th, 2007 at 9:57 pm
This is very bad news for Daphne Wright. The court refused to provide a certified deaf interpreter. This is an immediate grounds for an appeal because Wright can argue she cannot understand the interpreters without the assitance of a CDI.
March 9th, 2007 at 11:56 pm
I saw the actual broadcast on World News tonight. It was actually pretty shocking.
They did not use MZ’s quote. They didn’t bother to quote ANY Deaf person! They did put on Professor Jeff Braden, an “expert in deafness and development.” A Hearing expert on Deafness??? You’re f*ing KIDDING me!
Also they used a bunch of B-roll footage of Deaf people unconnected to the case. (Some from the Gally protest.) Isn’t it good to know that your private conversations cab be broadcast on national TV? Did they get release forms from all those people?
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/LegalCenter/story?id=2937917&page=1
This is the transcript (as far as I can tell) of what actually aired.
March 10th, 2007 at 1:41 am
Too bad. Daffy kills innocent woman. Uses a chainsaw to cut her many pieces, then dump them like trash.
March 10th, 2007 at 8:40 am
Her lawyers said she could not get the certified court interpreters. Maybe she acts dumb to save herself from the death penalty. Don’t know what is like inside her mind - she may be full of surprises in the court. The trial will take about 6 weeks. Don’t be surprised the court will be dragged to the district court for the ADA violations of not hiring the certified interpretes. Will see…
Saw her on the ABC News on tv last night. Captioning was not very good.
Sorry we will not see you, IamMine, on your vlog this time.
March 10th, 2007 at 10:13 am
Barb, there are many deaf citizens in that city. Will any volunteer to be a neutral eyewitness? What about CSD?
Greg, if there are ADA violations, then the lawyer should file for an appeal, especially if there is no CDI. I wonder why NAD is quiet, not objecting on the lack of CDI.
Ken, about not using my quote, I can understand the reason because they want to interview people on camera. However you have a good point. Why not interview a Deaf expert, like from Gallaudet or a Deaf lawyer? What about the NAD Law Center?
March 10th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
The ABC-TV News asked the audience the basic question - “Will deaf people get the fair trial?”
Maybe not! No matter how the terps or CART system are excellent. We still face real obsctales like the jurors’ real attitudes toward deaf people or how the trial being accessible to deaf spectators.
Courtroom interpreters ought to have formal training in the judicial system. Not all assigned interpreters to be qualifed certified to the courtroom, especially major trials.
I personally witness the real abyss of questionable quality of courtroom interpreters in DC from time to time.
I was a victim of physical assault by someone hearing at the public facility - Library of Congress pretty long time ago.
The hearing male 40s somewhat stabbed the sharpened pencil in my shoulder area without any reason. Luckily, the Library of Congress police had the video footage of physical assault on me.
The prosecutor in DC informed me that my case against this individual will have the green light as the Library of Congress police force stood behind me 100 percent.
From my personal knowledge of the DC courthouse interpreter coordinator, I requested the Office of the U.S. Attorney to obtain top-quality interpreters of my own choice. They did accomodate my request.
The DC courthouse interpeter coordinator seems was not very happy about this kind of arrangement. That interpreter coordinator is CODA and gay himself. I personally don’t trust him at all.
Another incident with the courtroom interpreters, I was falsely accused by the WMATA police officers to save their own asses from being sued for wrongful arrest.
The local court did provide terps, but not at the last phase of court date with several different judges over time. I vigorously objected to the lack of terp presence to the judge. I was told “Mind your business! “. I almost walked away til my lawyer begged me to return to the courtroom.
I was given a choice of getting the court date to be postponed with terp available or went ahead with the final proceeding of the court arragement.
The court really played emotional and mind games with me like assigning the court case to several different judges conspired with the WMATA police officers and WMATA people and pressured me to plead guilty for what I never done anything unlawful.
My court case had been unnecessarily extended over two years to wear me emotionally and mentally down, because I refuse to plead guilty to the simple assault charge on law enforcement officer. Why would I assault the officer while he slapped my notepad and pen to the floor at the time of arrest.
The police arrest report was very fishy from the beginning. The court-appointed lawyer was not very helpful til I spoke with one of the judge on the federal level for legal advice and other things. I tried to fire my court-appointed lawyer with no luck. I found out that the hiring of criminal lawyer was not really very easy.
For example, the prosecutor repeatedly stated that the arresting officer really do not want to see me ending up in prison. Why he write up the false arrest report in the first place?
The prosecutor instructed terps to leave the premise while the court-appointed lawyer and prosecutor spoke to me without presence of terps at the lawyer galley.
I always thought of the judicial system to be real noble and fair. If not for my strong-willed personality and personal determination to prove myself totally innocent of all the charges against me. Where will I end up in?
The WMATA people have the history of approaching deaf people in wrong way for years like Eduardo Burkhart and other deaf individuals.
The WMATA police officers did grab one of the deaf rider’s arms and lift him up to the place to arrest him without talking up to this person. Someone falsely accused this deaf person without any proof or talk to other people. Luckily, someone came to the rescue of this deaf individual and told the police officers about the related incident on the bus. The police officers suddenly release the deaf person with no questions. Unbelievable!
I strongly believe that there are many injustices within the judicial system for deaf people.
Robert L. Mason (RLM)
March 10th, 2007 at 10:00 pm
Robert,
The same phenomenon occurred at Gallaudet when Jordan and Kelly oppressed the deaf students. They perceived the deaf students as being weak, and they arrogantly assumed they (Jordan and Kelly) would be victorious.
Their arrogance forced the deaf students to go to the extreme of performing nonviolent civil disobedience.
This was all due to the extreme arrogance of Jordan and Kelly. They made the huge error of misjudging and misperceiving the deaf students. They were not weak at all. They were incredibly strong and had justice on their side.
This will be the lesson of history to the hearing and audist world: Deaf people are not weak and they are not disabled.
UFG has proved this to the world for all time and for all history. This is why the UFG protest will prove to be one of the major social events of the 21st Century.
March 11th, 2007 at 12:58 am
Meg:
I understand your comment that Daffy had cutted Darlene in many pieces.
I would like to give you an correction: Daphne cutted Darlene IN HALF (Legs and Torso) NOT in many pieces - I have been following up with this case VERY CLOSELY and am aware of most of what is happening. I have many sources and a good friend who lives in SD.
Right.. Darlene is innocent person and doesnt deserve to be killed.
You weren’t only ones, Many deafies thought that Daffy cut her in many pieces, I had corrected many of them, she cut her IN HALF not peices.
I’m not trying to critcize you but want to let you know the facts.
I had watched this ABC News - I do agree with some of you, and one thing was emphasized that death penalty has nothing do with deafness or disablities - It is focused on the crime that Daphne committed.
Some asked me if I’m support or against Death Penalty. I had told my answer, I couldn’t give a answer or share the opinion. Due to too many religions tells differently about death penalty. There is a hot debate on this issue.
Let court system and the justice take care of Daphne; She is stupid ENOUGH to murder Darlene over jeaousy and rage - She murdered her for NO reasons. Darlene is completely native and innocent.
Hope you would spread the words to other deaf the facts that Darlene was cutted up in half not in many peices.
March 11th, 2007 at 9:28 am
Daffy had a strong history of threatening and violent behavior toward people, including those she perceived as her romantic rivals. She had threatened to kill an innocent person in the past. I was told that her ex girlfriend reportedly had a restraining order against Daffy. Darlene seem like a very nice and caring person who helped her friends and it cost her her life.
March 11th, 2007 at 8:13 pm
If Daffy is going to death penalty, I hope the deaf community must understand and stay strong for each other. Death Penalty For Daffy may spread the deaf community feel the pain. How we can solve the deaf person’s behavior like Daffy? Therefore, We need to help deaf who has behavior problem or domestic abuse or etc, rather than go to jail or sent to prison. I want to see deaf person to improve their behavior. You know what i mean????
March 11th, 2007 at 9:50 pm
Mia:
No I dont know what you mean -Are you saying Daffy should not get death penalty and should not go jail but get help?
Well, Look - Daffy knew which is right and wrong. She COMMIT a horrorfic crime! That’s unexcuable!
I have known deaf who went to prison for their crimes.
Death penalty is focus on what Crime Daffy did - NOT based on her mental or psychological issue. She know what she was doing.
Be careful what you say. From what I know.. Most of Deaf community felt that death penalty is appropriate, some dont think it is right.
South Dakota applies the Death Penatly depending on how bad crime would be.
I met couple deafies who went to prison for Domestic volience. The strong emphasize is that Hearing and Deaf is no differene.
Again, Daffy knew what she was doing, it was premediated murder (That means - Daffy have been PLANNING On murder Darlene!!!) It is not manslaughter case, it’s MURDER 1st degree - Felonious murder, kidnapping, and dismembered Darlene.
March 12th, 2007 at 4:20 pm
I agreed with you, I guess i am neutral and i don’t mean that i want Daffy to die for death penalty, No! The problem who raised the children from loving family after growing up. Daffy changed dramatically or started to changed her behavior from she think her behavior pushed her power like she did kill her.
March 12th, 2007 at 10:25 pm
I want Daffy to spent the rest of her life in prison. In prison, if she makes threats toward guards and inmates, she definitely will be sent to the “hole” (a solitary room) for a long of period time. I want her to feel the pain.