This project focused on the feasibility of deaf signers serving as jurors as in many countries with an adversarial court system, this was not previously possible. The project was conducted in Australia and covered 4 stages: (i) evaluating the translatability of legal discourse and conducting a comparison of deaf and hearing jurors’ comprehension of a judge’s summation, (ii) surveys and interviews with deaf people, interpreters and legal personne, (iii) observations of a real jury empanelment process with a deaf juror and interpreter in Rochester, NY (where deaf people are permitted to serve as jurors), and (iv) a 2-day mock-trial simulation of a criminal case in Sydney involving a deaf juror and interpreters. The body of research evidence from the inter-linked projects confirmed that deaf people can sufficiently comprehend legal discourse interpreted into sign language in order to make informed decisions as jurors and can participate effectively in jury deliberations without detriment. The research also confirmed that legal personnel actually support the principle of deaf people serving as jurors, along with deaf stakeholder groups; and interpreters with experience of working in the court system also feel that it is viable to ensure that deaf jurors have access in sign language in order to execute their civic duty. The mock-trial revealed that there was no negative impact from having a deaf juror and interpreters in the jury deliberation room, and that in fact there were some positive elements (such as influencing jurors to take turns speaking). The project has led to major impact, with law reform in the Australian Capital Territory, England and Ireland which now allows deaf people to serve as jurors, and considerations being made in other Australian states and Scotland. Several deaf people have now served as jurors in these countries.

Reports & publications

•  Napier,J., Russell, D., Hale, S., Spencer^, D., & San Roque, M. (2022). Training legal interpreters to work with deaf jurors. In J. Brunson (Ed.), Teaching legal interpreting (pp.246-281). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
•  Napier, J., Spencer, D., Hale, S., San Roque, M., Shearim, G., & Russell, D. (2019). Changing the international justice landscape: Perspectives on deaf citizenship and jury service. Sign Language Studies, 19(2), 240-266.

• Hale, S., San Roque, M., Spencer, D. & Napier, J. (2017). Deaf citizens as jurors in Australian courts: Participating via professional interpreters. International Journal of Speech, Language & the Law, 24(2), 151-176.
• Spencer, D., Napier, J., San Roque, M., & Hale, S. (2017). Justice is blind as long as it isn’t deaf: Excluding deaf people from jury duty – an Australian human rights breach. Australian Journal of Human Rights, 23(3), 332-350.
• Spencer, D., San Roque, M., Hale, S., & Napier, J. (2017). The High Court considers participation of deaf people in jury duty. Law Society Journal, 33(May), 80-81.
• Napier, J., & Spencer, D. (2017). Jury instructions: Comparing hearing and deaf jurors’ comprehension via direct or interpreter-mediated communication. International Journal of Speech, Language & the Law, 24(1), 1-2
• Napier, J. (2016).Deaf or blind people can’t serve on juries – here’s why law needs to change. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/deaf-or-blind-people-cant-serve-on-juries-heres-why-law-needs-to-change-67418

• Napier, J., & McEwin, A. (2015). Do Deaf people have the right to serve as jurors in Australia? Alternative Law Journal, 40(1), 23-27.
• Napier, J., Spencer, D. & Sabolcec, J. (2009). A shared responsibility in the administration of justice: A pilot study of sign language interpretation access for deaf jurors. In S. Hale, H. Slatyer, & L. Stern (Eds.),Quality in Interpreting: A shared responsibility – Proceedings of the 5^thInternational Critical Link Conference. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

• Napier, J. & Spencer, D. (2008). Guilty or not guilty? An investigation of deaf jurors’ access to court proceedings via sign language interpreting. In D. Russell & S. Hale (Eds.), Interpreting in legal settings (pp.71-122). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
• Napier, J. & Spencer, D. (2007). A sign of the times: Deaf jurors and the potential for pioneering law reform. Reform: A journal of national and international law reform,90, 35-37.
• Napier, J., Spencer, D., & Sabolcec, J. (2007). Guilty or not guilty? An investigation of deaf jurors’ access to court proceedings via sign language interpreting. Research Report No. 14. Sydney: Macquarie University & NSW Law Reform Commission.

Award

Winner of Australian Journal of Human Rights Andrea Durbach Award for best article in human rights scholarship:  Spencer, D., Napier, J., San Roque, M., & Hale, S. (2017). Justice is blind as long as it isn’t deaf: Excluding deaf people from jury duty – an Australian human rights breach. Australian Journal of Human Rights, 23(3), 332-350.