Drawing on representative corpora of transcripts from over 100 English criminal jury trials, this stimulating new book explores the nature of 'legal-lay discourse', or the language used by legal professionals before lay juries. Careful analyses of genres such as witness examination and the judge's summing-up reveal a strategic tension between a desire to persuade the jury and the need to conform to legal constraints. The book also suggests ways of managing this tension linguistically to help, not hinder, the jury.
This study of Anglo-American legal discourse is the first comprehensive discourse analysis of American legal language in its prototypical setting, the trial by jury. With ethnographic data gathered in a civil jury trial, the book compares the discourse processing of the legal participants and the lay jurors in the trial.This study, examining an entire trial, finds that it is constraints at the level of a Foucauldian discursive formation that prevent lay understanding. Those constraints include the allocation of narrative speaking roles primarily to legal speakers in genres in which no sworn evidence is given, the suppression of narrative in ordinary witnesses, a set of restraints on witnesses' use of certain categories of evidentials, the legal topic originating in textual authority unknown to the lay participants, specific distribution of verb forms by legal genre, and a linguistic “burden” accompanying the legal “burden of proof” in the requirement that the lawyer of the moving party also use and explain technical legal terms to the jury at the same time as he or she presents evidence. All of these factors contribute to the incomprehensibility of legal discourse to lay auditors, resulting in the jury making their decision based on a commonsense script of the events precipitating the trial.The study concludes by arguing for a Foucauldian discourse analysis of institutional languages, a social theory powerful enough to account for the power and tenacity of these languages, where traditional linguistic explanation has failed.
... The purpose of this handbook is to acquaint trial jurors with the general nature and importance of their role as jurors; explains some of the language and procedures used in court, and offers some suggestions helpful to jurors in performing their duty ...
Sociolinguists and lawyers will find insight and relevance in this account of the language of the courtroom, as exemplified in the criminal trial of O.J. Simpson. The trial is examined as the site of linguistic power and persuasion, focusing on the role of language in (re)presenting and (re)constructing the crime. In addition to the trial transcripts, the book draws on Simpson's post-arrest interview, media reports and post-trial interviews with jurors. The result is a unique multi-dimensional insight into the 'Trial of the Century' from a linguistic and discursive perspective.
This book explores the techniques and discursive strategies that are typical of the communicative interactions between professionals and laymen in a jury trial. It also investigates the complex relationship that emerges between written and oral communication in different phases of the trial. The analysis takes into account the many nuances that define these dynamics and the various possibilities that the jurors have to intervene in the process, particularly in the light of recent procedural developments. Special attention is devoted to the observation of the specific strategies adopted to illustrate legal ideas and concepts to the jurors according to the speakers' various communicative purposes. By adopting a discourse analytical perspective which combines both qualitative and quantitative approaches, the book highlights the hybridity of the language used in court and the combination of different styles and registers.
The right to a jury trial is a fundamental feature of the American justice system. In recent years, however, aspects of the civil jury system have increasingly come under attack. Many question the ability of lay jurors to decide complex scientific and technical questions that often arise in civil suits. Others debate the high and rising costs of litigation, the staggering delay in resolving disputes, and the quality of justice. Federal and state courts, crowded with growing numbers of criminal cases, complain about handling difficult civil matters. As a result, the jury trial is effectively being challenged as a means for resolving disputes in America. Juries have been reduced in size, their selection procedures altered, and the unanimity requirement suspended. For many this development is viewed as necessary. For others, it arouses deep concern. In this book, a distinguished group of scholars, attorneys, and judges examine the civil jury system and discuss whether certain features should be modified or reformed. The book features papers presented at a conference cosponsored by the Brookings Institution and the Litigation Section of the American Bar Association, together with an introductory chapter by Robert E. Litan. While the authors present competing views of the objectives of the civil jury system, all agree that the jury still has and will continue to have an important role in the American system of civil justice. The book begins with a brief history of the jury system and explains how juries have become increasingly responsible for decisions of great difficulty. Contributors then provide an overview of the system's objectives and discuss whether, and to what extent, actual practice meets those objectives. They summarize how juries function and what attitudes lawyers, judges, litigants, former jurors, and the public at large hold about the current system. The second half of the book is devoted to a wide range of recommendations that w
This magisterial book explores fascinating cases from American history to show how juries remain the heart of our system of criminal justice - and an essential element of our democracy. No other institution of government rivals the jury in placing power so directly in the hands of citizens. Jeffrey Abramson draws upon his own background as both a lawyer and a political theorist to capture the full democratic drama that is the jury. We, the Jury is a rare work of scholarship that brings the history of the jury alive and shows the origins of many of today's dilemmas surrounding juries and justice.
Confronting readers with intellectual and moral dilemmas faced by real jurors, The Jury Crisis explores the near collapse of jury trials in America, examines alternative paths to justice and proposes how to restore trial by jury as the trusted foundation of American democracy.
