In State v. Rosa, 170 Conn. 417, 365 A.2d 1135, cert. denied, 429 U.S. 845 (1976), a defendant who did not understand much English gave a statement to a Spanish-speaking police officer, who then translated the defendant's words into English for a second police officer who was acting as a stenographer. Id., at 421-22. That second officer spoke only English. Id., at 426. After the statement had been typed in English, it was read back in Spanish to the defendant who, after making some corrections to it, signed all the pages of the statement. Id., at 421-22. At trial, the defendant moved to suppress the written statement, and the court granted his motion, "not based upon the credibility or truthfulness of the accused and the police officers, but based on the procedure employed in the taking of the statement." Id., at 422. The Court, in affirming the defendant's conviction, held that the written statement was not made involuntarily and did not taint the defendant's subsequent oral statements. The court observed that the written statement was properly excluded since it was not authenticated. Id., at 426-27.