Assuming one is going to live with the SAM's, as an interpreter I would be twitchy about being held accountable for complying with the SAM's if I hadn't signed them too. jks. Well, you don't have to sign the criminal statutes or administrative rules that apply with the force of law in order for them to apply to you. They're not a contract. > I would also be twitchy about trying to find counsel versed specifically in interpreter legal issues and I cannot even guess how interpreters would find support about their professional issues even among their peers. jks. I wonder whether there are such counsel. Until now, I can't imagine that it was everan issue. If I were a lawyer I would be twitchy about being held accountable for other people's activities in a language I had no knowledge of and even if the SAM's were in the picture I would try to note this point! jks. No kidding. You'd better get interpreters you can trust! But for what it's worth, if you have no idea what is going on, you can't be held criminally liable because you lack the culpable mental state. In Stewart's case, the theory must be that she knew what was going on and tried to further it. However the mere threat of an expensive and reputationally adamging criminal prosecution is a very big chilling factor, even if they can't make it stick. jks <hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!? <a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com">Yahoo! Mail Plus</a> - Powerful. Affordable. <a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com">Sign up now</a>