WI · jury_instructions
Wis JI-Civil 65
Preliminary Instruction: Use of an Interpreter for a Witness
No matter what language people speak, they have the right to have their testimony
heard and understood. During this trial an interpreter will translate for one or more of the
witnesses. The interpreter is required to remain neutral. The interpreter is required to translate
between English and [insert appropriate other language] accurately.
You must base your decision on the evidence presented in the English translation.
Although some of you may know the non-English language used, it is important that all
jurors consider the same evidence. You must disregard any different meaning of the
non-English words.
You must not give interpreted testimony any greater or lesser weight than you would if
the witness had spoken English.
ADD THE FOLLOWING IF APPROPRIATE:
[Keep in mind that a person might speak some English without speaking it fluently.
That person has the right to the services of an interpreter. Therefore, you shall not give
greater or lesser weight to a person's translated testimony based on your conclusions, if any,
regarding the extent to which that person speaks English.]
History
Wis JI-Civil 65 (2011). ©2011, Regents, Univ. of Wis. Prepared by the Wisconsin Civil Jury Instructions Committee of the Wisconsin Judicial Conference with the University of Wisconsin Law School; posted by the Wisconsin State Law Library with the University's permission.
Provenance
- Source
- wilawlibrary.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-24
- Edition
- 2026-09-24
- Content hash
6a589fb8bbfeeb2a9498aaa6dcb5b10bc9387c845b2aa55bbe37f2316c659f25
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.