This article examines aspects of communication relevant to the process of interlingual interpretation, and considers the law’s equivocal attitudes to interpreters. It identifies a tendency by many of the professional figures in the courtroom to consider the interpreter a mere instrument, and by many language-handicapped defendants to view the interpreter as a linguistic and psychological haven. The effects of variations in the physical courtroom setting are considered, and some aspects of interpreter role delineation are reviewed. A number of predicaments typically experienced by court interpreters are described, and their effects on interpreters as individuals analysed. Examples are drawn from a variety of contemporary and historical sources, including case reports and two email discussion forums. Although most of the material comes from the Anglo-Saxon legal tradition, it is argued that the interpreter’s position on the one hand as a humble technical instrument and on the other as the potential saviour in a situation of language handicap is a constant in the legal arena irrespective of time frame or jurisdiction.