We are excited to share some highlights from our recent Law Division webinar on October 3, 2025, with Jason Knapp, one of our own members, who generously shared his expertise on forensic transcription and translation. We had 109 people registered for this session, showing the high level of interest in this important topic.
What is Forensic Transcription and Translation
Jason described forensic transcription and translation as the process of transcribing audio into written text and then translating it into another language. He noted that terms such as FTCR (Forensic Transcription and Translation of Covert Recordings) and TIE (Translation of Intercept Evidence) refer to the same general process.
The term “forensic,” he explained, indicates that the work must meet evidentiary standards for use in court.
Why This Topic Matters
Forensic transcription and translation play a critical role in legal proceedings. Jason emphasized that even small errors in transcripts or translations can have serious consequences in court. Despite its importance, this field still lacks standardized professional guidelines.
As Jason noted, “we don’t have standards, we don’t have regulations, we don’t have something enforceable and punishable if somebody breaks the rules.” This lack of formal guidelines makes sharing best practices even more important.
Key Challenges and Best Practices
Jason highlighted several key challenges and shared best practices for addressing them:
- Handling audio recordings filled with slang, dialects, hesitations, and false starts.
- Understanding how a “clean” transcript can change the meaning compared to a verbatim record.
- Using a four-column format to clearly present raw audio, literal translation, and the final version.
🔎 Example: Jason played a difficult audio clip and gave us some guidelines on what to do when the audio is very poor quality. He explained that if parts of the recording are inaudible, the transcriber should:
- Add a timestamp and identify the speaker.
- Transcribe everything that can be understood.
- When the audio becomes unclear, mark it clearly — either with a timestamp or with a translator’s note.
- Indicate how long the inaudible section lasts (for example, “inaudible for 3 seconds” or “inaudible for 10 seconds”).
This helps readers of the transcript understand exactly where and how much content is missing, instead of being left wondering.
Language and Cultural Nuances
Jason highlighted how slang, dialect, and code-switching can be especially challenging.
🔎 Example: Jason also shared a very interesting case from Australia. A slang term for heroin was mistranslated, and that wrong translation ended up being accepted as the “official” one in court cases for years. The mistake wasn’t caught right away, and it caused serious problems once it came to light.
This example showed how dangerous mistranslations can be, especially with slang and colloquial language. Jason explained that machine translation and AI often struggle with these expressions — for example, how would you translate “Yo, that’s lit. Nah, fam, chill.” into Spanish, Russian, or Vietnamese? Do you keep it literal, adapt it culturally, or add a footnote?
The answer to these questions is, as Jason reminded us, as with most things in law, it depends. The key point is that translators must always be ready to defend their choices in court, sometimes even as expert witnesses. Judges or attorneys may challenge why a phrase was translated one way instead of another.
Tools and Resources
Jason recommended practical tools like Audacity and Express Scribe for sound editing and transcription. He also highlighted the importance of confidentiality, encryption, and secure file handling when working with sensitive evidence.
Lessons from the Courtroom
This led to an important discussion during the Q&A about what it’s like to be called as an expert witness. Someone asked Jason if he had ever testified. He explained that he has been cited several times, but it never actually came through. Still, he shared a valuable story from a hearing he attended as an observer, where a colleague was called to testify.
🔎 Example: Jason described the situation: the court had accepted a much less experienced translator as an expert—an 18-year-old heritage speaker with only one year of high school Spanish. Her work had no formatting and several spelling and grammatical errors. She did make one material error—translating a key statement to mean exactly the opposite of what it should have meant—which was critical to the case.
When the defense brought in Jason’s colleague, a highly qualified translator, she focused much of her testimony on pointing out the other translator’s spelling mistakes and credentials instead of addressing that serious translation error. Jason explained that this caused the judge and jury to lose interest. In the end, her testimony was largely disregarded.
Jason called this a cautionary tale. His advice for anyone in that position: stick to the facts, stay composed, and don’t let pride get in the way. Credibility comes from focus, neutrality, and professionalism.
Thank You
A big thank you to Jason Knapp for sharing his time, knowledge, and providing such a high-quality presentation to our community. This webinar was a valuable learning opportunity, and we look forward to continuing the conversation in future sessions.
Leave a Reply