Vol. VII, No. 2 - Spring 1998

Charlotte's Corner

In Part II, we found materials in the “Legal Documents” section of the Court TV web site relating to firearms smuggling, the Cali drug cartel operations, and the Timothy McVeigh and O. J. Simpson trials and discussed how to use them for consecutive interpretation training. Another informative and highly useful tool for training in consecutive and/or simultaneous interpretation is the transcript of President Clinton’s Video Deposition in connection with the Whitewater trial (http://www.courttv.com/library/government/whitewater/deposition.html). This document is about fifty five pages long, rich in financial and legal terminology and non-contextual information (financial entities, proper names, quantities of money, etc.).

A lengthy and highly topical evaluation of Paula Jones’ case against President Clinton can also be found in the “Cases in the News” section. Interestingly enough, this article comes from “The American Lawyer,” an affiliate of Court TV, and maintains that the case against the President is much stronger than Anita Hill’s case against Clarence Thomas (who might, as fate would have it, sit in judgment of the President if the case goes before the United States Supreme Court). A recent addition to the Court TV web site is the text of Monica Lewinski’s sworn affidavit in which she denies having had sexual relations with the President: “I have the utmost respect for the president, who always behaved appropriately in my presence. I have never had a sexual relationship with the president. He did not propose that we have a sexual relationship. He did not offer me employment or other benefits in exchange for a sexual relationship. He did not deny me employment or other benefits for rejecting a sexual relationship.”

Of late, cases which are political in nature and involve high level government officials have multiplied exponentially. Here is a chance to train students and colleagues alike with cases straight out of the sizzling headlines. Many of them can be found under “Government Documents” (http://205.181.114.35/library/government/). For instance, House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s troubles are outlined in the “House Ethics Report on Gingrich,” a document which gives the public version of the findings of the House of Representatives on ethical violations by the House Speaker. The House of Representatives voted to reprimand Gingrich and impose a $300,000 penalty. The “Ethics Committee Report on Senator Packwood,” also found under this category, outlines the resolution regarding the Senator, who faces multiple charges of sexual harassment against female acquaintances. “Trade Sanctions on Japanese Cars” includes a chronology summarizing the history of Japan’s closed auto market and outlines the trade sanctions taken by the United States against Japanese car makers (lots of financial terminology in context). The “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” ruling gives the text of the U. S. District Court’s summary judgment, which found that plaintiff’s rights to equal protection and free speech were violated by the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, and ordered that a California Army National Guard lieutenant be reinstated. Other texts, such as “Same Sex Marriages Bill,” and “California Proposition 187 Ruling” can also be found here, as well as the text of the proposals for tort and criminal justice reforms in the Republican Party’s “Contract With America.”

In a lighter vein, yet just as useful for training purposes, is the sub-category “Cases Involving Newsmakers” (http://www.courttv.com/library/newsmakers/). Here one gleefully discovers such improbable and delightful civil cases to interpret as “Steven Spielberg: The Doughnut Case.” Sprinkled with civil and financial terminology, the case pits Spielberg against film producer Denis Hoffman, who in 1968 lent $10,000 to the then young and unproven director. In thanks, Spielberg subsequently lent Hoffman money to launch a gourmet doughnut (oxymoron?) business. In this 1995 complaint, Spielberg claimed that Hoffman continued to demand tens of millions of dollars from him as a result of the 1968 agreement. To add insult to injury, Hoffman never repaid the loan on the doughnut business. Other cases in this group include both the palimony lawsuit filed against Jack Nicholson by actress Susan Anspach and the palimony lawsuit filed by Ruth Tyrangiel against Bob Dylan; cases involving Disney studios; Leona Helmsley; F. Lee Bailey, and others.

For simultaneous interpretation practice, documents abound at the Court TV Web site, such as a 26-page “Brief of the United States,” filed December 12, 1995 arguing that the death penalty is constitutional and that the Attorney General acted within the scope of her discretion in seeking the death penalty against McVeigh and Nichols. The brief was in response to the defendants’ motion to strike the notices of intent to seek the death penalty and can be found at http://www.courttv.com/casefiles/oklahoma/documents/deathbrief.html. Another interesting document is in “Casefiles,” the indictment “of one Theodore Kaczynski” in connection with four of the bombing attacks linked to the Unabomber.

This concludes today’s web on the WWW in Charlotte’s Corner. Please remember that a byte in time saves nine, so we would be most grateful to all of you if you were to share with us any useful URL you may have discovered. We will try to include them in Charlotte’s Corner, and will most certainly give you credit for your contribution. Please send your information, or any questions you may have, to Dr. Alexander Rainof, either by mail (1021 12th street, #101, Santa Monica, CA 90403); by e-mail (arainof@ucla.edu); or by fax (310-395-1885), or through my Web site (http://www.electriciti. com/~trey/alexis/) which has an e-mail link. With your help, Charlotte’s Corner will be terrific.