Judge used Google translate to speak to African asylum seeker
Eritrean national Abdoela Berhan, who gave his age as 34, appeared before magistrates on charges of assault and criminal damage.
But the defendant told the court that he could not speak any English.
District judge Orla Austin said she could not take his pleas or outline the circumstances of the case if Mr Berhan could not understand what was being said.
The court clerk said they could not source a translator who spoke the same African language so had to adjourn the case to try to find one.
But they needed to inform Mr Berhan of his bail conditions and the date for when he needed to return to court.
Ms Austin typed the bail conditions and instructions for returning to court into Google translate on her laptop.
The clerk then approached the dock and held up the device to the defendant so he could read it.
The case highlights the difficulties UK courts face in dealing with immigrants who cannot speak English.
Ministry of Justice (MoJ) figures for 2023 showed £59.2 million was spent on interpreters in three years. The majority of this was for foreign criminals in court hearings, although some was also for witnesses or tribunals.
The figures also showed that since 2020, the MoJ's translation bill increased from £16m to £22m a year. A spokesman said this was because courts are hearing more cases since the pandemic.
Mr Berhan is alleged to have assaulted a Subway assistant manager on Nov 30, punched a woman in the face at a nightclub on Dec 7 and smashed a window at the hotel where he's living in Bournemouth, Dorset, on Feb 19.
His case was adjourned until May.
Eritrea is a one-party state and has not held elections for several years. According to international organisation Human Rights Watch, it has one of the worst human rights records in the world.
It has no official language but the main working languages are Tigrinya, Arabic and English. Eritrea is one of top 10 nationalities applying for asylum in the UK and has a very high acceptance rate.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
3 hours ago
As clock ticks down, judge pauses removal of 8 migrants detained in Djibouti
A day after the U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for the Trump administration to complete the removal of eight migrants currently detained in the African nation of Djibouti, a federal judge temporarily paused their removal Friday, setting off a race against time before the men were scheduled to be placed on a flight to South Sudan Friday evening. The migrants, who were convicted in the United States of violent crimes, were given notices of removal and placed on a flight from the U.S. to the East African country of South Sudan in May -- but after U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy blocked the administration's attempt to deport the group without giving them a sufficient chance to contest their removal, the group disembarked in Djibouti, where they are currently detained in a U.S. military facility in legal limbo. In an unsigned opinion on Thursday, the Supreme Court explained that since it lifted Judge Murphy's due process requirements for third-country removals last month, the government can no longer be held to account for allegedly violating the requirements, clearing the way for the administration to remove them to South Sudan -- a country with which the men have no ties. On Friday afternoon, hours before the men were scheduled to board a plane for South Sudan, U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss issued an administrative stay in a new case filed on behalf of the eight men. "We are not seeking to challenge a removal order," an attorney representing the men said at a hearing Friday in Washington, D.C. "We are seeking to challenge the act of sending petitioners to a place where they may be tortured, harmed or definitely imprisoned." Judge Moss ordered the stay to allow the parties to seek relief from the District of Massachusetts, where Judge Murphy made his original ruling, and where judge Moss said he said he would transfer the case. Attorneys representing the government said they would immediately seek relief from the Supreme Court. Justice Department lawyers claimed during Friday's hearing that they had spoken with State Department officials during the break and that they had received assurance from South Sudan that upon their deportation there, the men would be granted an immigration status "in accordance with South Sudan's national laws and immigration procedures" that would allow them to remain in the country "temporarily." But the lawyers did not have any information about whether or not they would be detained. "We certainly haven't asked for them to be detained, and our understanding is that there's no reason to think that they will be, but that last part is obviously speculation," a DOJ lawyer said. Judge Moss echoed the plaintiffs' lawyers concerns that the men could face torture and be harmed if they were deported to South Sudan. "I think, like all of us, I do not want to see anything happen to any of these plaintiffs in this case, or to anybody involving violent acts or bodily harm or anything of that nature," the judge said. "Obviously it goes without saying that even when somebody has been convicted of having committed a terrible crime, after that person has served their sentence for it, our government, nor anybody else should be in the business of inflicting pain and suffering on other human beings, simply for the sake of doing so." "And I think it seems to me almost self evident that the United States government cannot take human beings and send them to circumstances in which their physical well-being is at risk simply either to punish them or to send a signal to others that if you come into the country and commit a crime, not only are you going to get prosecuted in the United States for that, but you're going to be sent to some horrible situation," he said.
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
Google in Danger of Paying $314 Million to Smartphone Users in One Major US State
In 2019, nearly 14 million citizens of California filed a class action lawsuit in the state against Google. The reason for the class action suit was that "Google collected information from idle phones running its Android operating system for company uses like targeted advertising, consuming Android users' cellular data at their expense." Now, a jury has decided on the outcome of this lawsuit, saying that Google has to pay $314 million to the users, per The Guardian. "A jury in San Jose, California, said on Tuesday that Google misused customers' cellphone data and must pay more than $314.6m to Android smartphone users in the state, according to an attorney for the plaintiffs." The lawsuit states that Alphabet Google performed "mandatory and unavoidable burdens shouldered by Android device users for Google's benefit" while also "sending and receiving information" while being idle. Google spokesperson Jose Castaneda did say the company plans to appeal the lawsuit verdict while the company also said no users were harmed through this incident. On the contrary, this isn't the only such case for Google. Another case was brought to the court on behalf of the remainder of the states, although that specific case has a trial date in April 2026. Google also claims that users consented to such rules in the privacy policies regarding this case, and with the company planning to appeal, it could be time before this gets some in Danger of Paying $314 Million to Smartphone Users in One Major US State first appeared on Men's Journal on Jul 2, 2025
USA Today
10 hours ago
- USA Today
Former Arsenal player Thomas Partey charged with five counts of rape
Thomas Partey, who formerly played for English Premier League soccer club Arsenal, has been charged with rape and sexual assault, London's Metropolitan Police said on Friday. Partey, a Ghana international, was charged with five counts of rape and one count of sexual assault, with the charges relating to three women and the offences reported to have taken place between 2021 and 2022, the statement said. Partey's management did not immediately respond to a request for comment. He is due to appear at London's Westminster Magistrates' Court on Aug. 5. Partey, 32, was signed by Arsenal from Atletico Madrid for 50 million euros ($59 million) in October 2020 and became a key member of Arsenal's first team. He was first arrested in July 2022, though he was not named at the time and continued to play for Arsenal while investigations were ongoing.
