Language and power in court: A linguistic analysis of the O.J. simpson trial

Language and Power in Court: A Linguistic Analysis of the O.J. Simpson Trial

Volumn , Issue , 2003, Pages 234-243

  Cotterill, Janet ^a  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84995894411     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1057/9780230006010     Document Type: Book

References (212)

1. Abraham, H. J. (1998) The Judicial Process, 7th edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Akutagawa, R. (1952) Rashomon and Other Stories. Tokyo: Charles Tuttle Co.
3. Alexander, S. L. (1996) ‘The impact of California v. Simpson on cameras in the courtroom’, Judicature, 79: 169-72.
4. Alvord, J. C. (1998) Cover review of M. Lief et al. (1998) Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury: Greatest Closing Arguments in Modern Law. New York: Touchstone.
5. Aronsson, K. (1991) ‘Social interaction and the recycling of legal evidence’, in N. Coupland, H. Giles and J. Wiemann (eds), ‘Miscommunication’ and Problematic Talk. London: Sage, 215-43.
6. Atkinson, J. M. and Drew, P. (1979) Order in Court: The Organisation of Verbal Interaction in Judicial Settings. London: Macmillan.
7. Baldwin, J. and McConville, M. (1979) Jury Trials. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8. Beach, W. A. (1985) ‘Temporal density in courtroom interaction: constraints on the recovery of past events in legal discourse’, Communication Monographs, 52, 1-18.
9. Bell, A. (1984) ‘Language style as audience design’, Language in Society 13: 145-204.
10. Bennett, L. and Feldman, M. S. (1981) Reconstructing Reality in the Courtroom.London: Tavistock.
11. Bernstein, B. (1990) Class, Codes and Control Vol. 4: The Structuring of Pedagogic Discourse. London: Routledge.
12. Berry, M. (1981) ‘Systemic linguistics and discourse analysis: a multi-layered approach to exchange structure’, in R. M. Coulthard and M. Montgomery (eds), Studies in Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 120-45.
13. Blackwell, S. (1996) ‘Corrective measures: some aspects of transcription in the British legal system’, in H. Kniffka, S. Blackwell and R. M. Coulthard (eds), Recent Developments in Forensic Linguistics. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 255-76.
14. Boon, A. (1993) Advocacy. London: Cavendish.
15. Boyarsky, B. (1995a) ‘Will Simpson jury believe abuse is a prelude to murder?’, LA Times, 22 January, B1.
16. Boyarsky, B. (1995b) ‘The O.J. Simpson murder trial: how jurors’ reason could decide case’, LA Times, 30 March, A20.
17. Brodsky, S. (1982) ‘The mental health professional on the witness stand: a survival guide’, in M. Nietzel and R. Dillehay (eds), Psychological Consultation in the Courtroom. New York: Pergamon Press, 269-76.
18. Brodsky, S. (1999) The Expert Expert Witness: More Maxims and Guidelines for Testifying in Court. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
19. Brooks, P. (1996) ‘The law as narrative and rhetoric’, in P. Brooks and P. Gewirtz (eds), Law’s Stories: Narrative and Rhetoric in the Law. New Haven: Yale University Press, 14-22.
20. Brooks, P. and Gewirtz, P. (eds) (1996) Law’s Stories: Narrative and Rhetoric in the Law. New Haven: Yale University Press.
21. Brown, P. and Levinson, S. C. (1987) Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage, 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. Bruner, J. (1986) Actual Minds, Possible Worlds. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
23. Bruner, J. (1990) Acts of Meaning. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
24. Bruner, J. (2002) Making Stories: Law, Literature, Life. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
25. Buchanan, E. (1995) ‘Perspectives on the Simpson verdicts: if there’s too much pain rewrite the ending: crime novelists, unlike reporters, get to prescribe whatever justice they desire, in or out of court’, LA Times, 6 October, B6.
26. Bugliosi, V. (1996) Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O.J. Simpson Got away with Murder. New York: Island Books.
27. Burrell, I. and Verkaik, R. (2002) ‘Anger as crime plans sweep away “safeguard”’, The Independent, 14 November.
28. Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. and Coulthard, R. M. (eds) (1996) Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge.
29. Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. and Moon, R. (1999) ‘Curvy, hunky, kinky: using corpora as tools in critical analysis’, paper presented at Critical Discourse Analysis Conference, University of Birmingham, April.
30. Cambridge International Dictionary of English (1995) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. Clark, M. (1997) Without a Doubt. New York: Viking.
32. Cochran, J. L. Jr (1996) Journey to Justice. New York: One World Ballantine Books.
33. Collins COBUILD English Dictionary (1995) London: HarperCollins.
34. Conley, J. M. and O’Barr, W. M. (1990) Rules versus Relationships: The Ethnography of Legal Discourse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
35. Conley, J. M. and O’Barr, W. M. (1998) Just Words: Law, Language and Power.Chicago: Chicago University Press.
36. Cooley, A., Bess, C. and Rubin-Jackson, M. (1995) Madam Foreman: A Rush to Judgment? Los Angeles: Dove Books.
37. Cotterill, J. (2002) '“Just one more time”: aspects of intertextuality in the trials of O. J. Simpson’, in J. Cotterill (ed.), Language in the Legal Process.Basingstoke: Palgrave, 147-61.
38. Coulthard, M. (1985) Introduction to Discourse Analysis, 2nd edition. London: Longman.
39. Coulthard, M. and Brazil, D. (1992) ‘Exchange structure’, in M. Coulthard (ed.), Advances in Spoken Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge, 50-79.
40. Cross, R. Sir (1975) An Outline of the Law of Evidence. London: Butterworths.
41. Curzon, L. (1986) Law of Evidence, 2nd edition. London: Pitman.
42. Danet, B. (1980) '“Baby” or “fetus”? Language and the construction of reality in a manslaughter trial’, Semotica 32: 187-219.
43. Danet, B. and Bogoch, B. (1980) ‘Fixed fight or free-for-all? An empirical study of combativeness in the adversary system of justice’, British Journal of Law and Society 7: 36-60.
44. Den Boer, M. (1993) ‘Do trials have real winners? - on the harmonisation of interpretations and the construction of pseudo-consensus in legal discourse’, International Journal for the Semiotics of Law VI, 18: 293-304.
45. Drew, P.(1985) ‘Analysing the use of language in courtroom interaction’, in T. A. van Dijk (ed.), Handbook of Discourse Analysis - Volume 3: Discourse and Dialogue. London: Academic Press, 133-47.
46. Drew, P. (1992) ‘Contested evidence in courtroom cross-examination: the case of a trial for rape’, in P. Drew and J. Heritage (eds), Talk at Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 470-520.
47. Duncan, S. (1972) ‘Some signals and rules for taking speaking turns in conversations’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6: 341-9.
48. Dunstan, R. (1980) ‘Context for coercion: analysing properties of courtroom questions’, British Journal of Law and Society, 7: 61-7.
49. Dyer, C. (2000) ‘Anyone know what the judge is on about?’, The Guardian, 17 July.
50. Eades, D. (1996) ‘Verbatim courtroom transcripts and discourse analysis’, in H. Kniffka, S. Blackwell and R. M. Coulthard (eds), Recent Developments in Forensic Linguistics. Frankfurt am Mein: Peter Lang, 241-54.
51. Ehrlich, S. (2001) Reproducing Rape. London: Routledge.
52. Ehrlich, S. (2002) '(Re)contextualising complainants’ accounts of sexual assault’, Forensic Linguistics 9 (2) 193-212.
53. Evans, K. (1993) The Golden Rules of Advocacy. London: Blackstone.
54. Fairclough, N. (1989) Language and Power. London: Longman.
55. Firth, J. (1957) ‘A synopsis of linguistic theory, 1930-1955’, Studies in Linguistic Analysis. Special Volume, Philological Society, 1-32.
56. Frank, J. (1949) Courts on Trial: Myth and Reality in American Justice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
57. Gaines, P. (1999) '“Miss Nicole Brown Simpson”: The Remaking of a Domestic Violence Victim’. Unpublished manuscript.
58. Gaines, P. (2002) ‘Negotiating power at the bench: informal talk in sidebar sessions’, Forensic Linguistics 9 (2): 213-4.
59. Garfinkel, H. and Sacks, H. (1970) ‘On formal structures of practical actions’, in J. C. McKinney and E. A. Tiryakian (eds), Theoretical Sociology. New York: Appleton Century Crofts, 338-66.
60. Gee, D. J. and Mason, J. K. (1990) The Courts and the Doctor. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
61. Genette, G. (1980) Narrative Discourse, trans. J. Lewin. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
62. Gewirtz, P. (1996) ‘Victims and voyeurs: two narrative problems at the criminal trial’, in P. Brooks and P. Gewirtz (eds), Law’s Stories: Narrative and Rhetoric in the Law. New Haven: Yale University Press, 135-61.
63. Gibbons, J. (1994) Language and The Law. London: Longman.
64. Gill, A. M. (1999) ‘Race and money matter: justice on trial’, in J. Schuetz and L. S. Lilley (eds), The O.J. Simpson Trials: Rhetoric, Media and the Law.Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 139-60.
65. Goatly, A. (1997) The Language of Metaphors. London: Routledge.
66. Goffman, E. (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor Books.
67. Goffman, E. (1974) Frame Analysis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
68. Goffman, E. (1981) Forms of Talk. London: Basil Blackwell.
69. Goldberg, H. M. (1996) The Prosecution Responds. Secausus, NJ: Birch Lane Press.
70. Goodwin, C. and Goodwin, M. H. (1997) ‘Contested vision: the discursive construction of Rodney King’, in B.-L. Gunnarsson, P. Linell and B. Nordberg (eds), The Construction of Professional Discourse. London: Longman, 292-316.
71. Graffam Walker, A. (1986) ‘The verbatim record: the myth and the reality’, in S. Fisher and A. Todd (eds), Advances in Discourse Processes Volume XIX: Discourse and Institutional Authority: Medicine, Education and Law. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 205-23.
72. Greene, E., Schooler, J. W. and Loftus, E. (1988) ‘Expert psychological testimony’, in S. M. Kassin and L. S. Wrightsman (eds), The Psychology of Evidence and Trial Procedure. London: Sage, 201-28.
73. Grice, P. (1975) ‘Logic and conversation’, in P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds), Speech Acts (Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3). New York: Academic Press, 41-58.
74. Grove, T. (1998) The Juryman’s Tale. London: Bloomsbury.
75. Hall, J. G. and Smith, G. D. (1997) The Expert Witness. Chichester: Barry Rose Law Publishers.
76. Halliday, M. A. K. (1985) Introduction to Functional Grammar, 2nd edition. London: Edward Arnold.
77. Hans, V. P. and Vidmar, N. (1986) Judging the Jury. New York: Plenum Press.
78. Harris, S. (1984) ‘Questions as a mode of control in magistrates’ courts’, International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 49, 5-28.
79. Harris, S. (1988) ‘Court discourse as genre’, in R. P. Fawcett and D. J. Young (eds), New Developments in Systemic Linguistics, Vol. 2: Theory and Application.London: Pinter, 94-115.
80. Harris, S. (1989) ‘Defendant resistance to power and control in court’, in H. Coleman (ed.), Working with Language: A Multidisciplinary Consideration of Language Use in Work Contexts. Berlin: de Gruyter, 131-64.
81. Harris, S. (1994) ‘Ideological exchanges in British magistrates courts’, in J. Gibbons (ed.), Language and the Law. London: Longman, 156-70.
82. Hastie, R. and Pennington, N. (1996) ‘Perceptions and decision making: the jury’s view: the O.J. Simpson stories: behavioral scientists’ reflections on The People of the State of California vs. Orenthal James Simpson’, Colorado Law Review 67. University of Colorado Press, 957-74.
83. Hastie R., Penrod, S. D. and Pennington, N. (1983) Inside the Jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
84. Heffer, C. (2002) '“If you were standing in Marks and Spencers”: narrativisation and comprehension in the English summing up’, in J. Cotterill (ed.), Language in the Legal Process. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 228-45.
85. Heritage, J. (1985) ‘Analyzing news interviews: aspects of the production of talk for an overhearing audience’, in T. A. van Dijk (ed.), Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Volume 3: Discourse and Dialogue. London: Academic Press, 95-117.
86. Heritage, J. and Watson, D. (1980) ‘Aspects of the properties of formulations in natural conversations: some instances analysed’, Semiotica, 30: 245-62.
87. Hunston, S. (1999) ‘Corpus Evidence for Disadvantage: Issues in Critical Interpretation’, paper given at the BAAL/CUP Applied Linguistics Seminar: ‘Investigating discourse practices through corpus research: methods, findings and applications’, University of Reading, May 1999.
88. Hyam, M. (1990) Advocacy Skills. 3rd edition. London: Blackstone.
89. Hymes, D. (1972) ‘Models of the interaction of language and social life’, in J. Gumperz and D. Hymes (eds), Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 35-71.
90. The Independent (2000) ‘Let’s shed some light on the mysteries of the jury room’, Editorial, 25 August 2000.
91. Jackson, B. (1995) Making Sense in Law: Linguistic, Psychological and Semiotic Perspectives. Liverpool: Deborah Charles Publications.
92. Jeans, J. W. (1975) Trial Advocacy. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Company.
93. Kassin, S. M. and Wrightsman, L. S. (eds) (1988) The Psychology of Evidence and Trial Procedure. London: Sage.
94. Kennedy, T. (1995) Mistrial of the Century: A Private Diary of The Jury System on Trial. Los Angeles: Dove Books.
95. Kerr, N. (1982) ‘Trial participants’ behaviors and jury verdicts: an exploratory study’, in V. J. Konecni and E. B. Ebbeson (eds), The Criminal Justice System.London: Freeman, 261-90.
96. Kerr, N. and Bray, R. (eds) (1982) The Psychology of the Courtroom. New York: Academic Press.
97. Kerr-Thompson, J. (2002) '“Powerful”/“powerless” language in court: a critical re-evaluation of the Duke Language and Law Programme’, Forensic Linguistics 9 (2): 153-67.
98. Knox, M. (1995) The Private Diary of An O.J. Juror. Los Angeles: Dove Books.
99. Komter, M. L. (2002) ‘The suspect’s own words: the treatment of written statements in Dutch courtrooms’, Forensic Linguistics 9 (2): 168-92.
100. Krishnamurthy, R. (1996) ‘Ethnic, racial and tribal: the language of racism?’, in C. R. Caldas-Coulthard and R. M. Coulthard (eds), Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge, 129-49.
101. LA Times (1995) ‘The Simpson legacy: LA Times special report: trial and error’, Special Section, 8 October, S-5.
102. Labov, W. (1972) Language in the Inner City. Philadelphia: Philadelphia University Press.
103. Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980) Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
104. Larry King Live (2000) Christopher Darden and Johnnie Cochran Discuss The O.J. Simpson Trial, aired 12 June 2000; transcript available at: http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0006/12/lkl.00.html
105. Laurence, C. and Hiscock, J. (1995) ‘Experts expect four-week wait for O.J. verdict’, Daily Telegraph, 3 October, A3.
106. Levinson, S. C. (1988) ‘Putting linguistics on a proper footing: explorations in Goffman’s concepts of participation’, in P. Drew and A. Wootton (eds), Erving Goffman: Exploring the Interactional Order. Oxford: Polity Press, 161-228.
107. Lief, M., Caldwell, H. M. and Bycel, B. (1998) Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury: Greatest Closing Arguments in Modern Law. New York: Touchstone.
108. Lilley, L. S. (1999) ‘Opening arguments: lasting impressions’, in J. Schuetz and L. S. Lilley (eds), The O.J. Simpson Trials: Rhetoric, Media and the Law.Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 36-57.
109. Lind, E. A. and Ke, G. Y. (1985) ‘Opening and closing statements’, in S. M. Kassin and L. S. Wrightsman (eds), The Psychology of Evidence and Trial Procedure. London: Sage, 229-53.
110. Lindquist, W. (1982) ‘Advocacy in opening arguments’, Litigation, Vol 8(3): 127-42.
111. Linell, P. (1998) ‘Discourse across boundaries: on recontextualisation and the blending of voices in professional discourse’, TEXT, 18(2): 143-57.
112. Lloyd-Bostock, S. (1988) Law in Practice: Applications of Psychology to Legal Decision Making and Legal Skills. London: Routledge.
113. Louw, B. (1993) ‘Irony in the text or insincerity in the writer?: The diagnostic potential of semantic prosodies’, in M. Baker, G. Francis and E. Tognini-Bonelli (eds), Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 157-76.
114. Luchjenbroers, J. (1997) '“In your own words…": questions and answers in a Supreme Court trial’, Journal of Pragmatics, 27: 477-503.
115. McCabe, S. and Purves, R. (1974) The Shadow Jury at Work. Oxford: Blackwell.
116. McElhaney, J. (1976) ‘An introduction to direct examination’, Litigation, 2(2): 47-61.
117. Malcolm, J. (1996) ‘The sidebar conference’, in P. Brooks and P. Gewirtz (eds), Law’s Stories: Narrative and Rhetoric in the Law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 106-9.
118. Maley, Y. (1994) ‘The language of the law’, in J Gibbons (ed.), Language and the Law. London: Longman, 11-50.
119. Maley, Y. (2000) ‘The case of the long-nosed potoroo: the framing and construction of expert witness testimony’, in S. Sarangi and R. M. Coulthard (eds), Discourse and Social Life. London: Longman, 246-70.
120. Maley, Y. and Fahey, R. (1991) ‘Presenting the evidence: constructions of reality in court’, International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, IV (10), 3-17.
121. Matoesian, G. (1993) Reproducing Rape: Domination through Talk in the Courtroom. Cambridge: Polity Press.
122. Matoesian, G. (1997) '“I’m sorry we had to meet under these circumstances”: verbal artistry (and wizardry) in the Kennedy Smith rape trial’, in M. Travers and J. F. Manzo (eds), Law in Action: Ethnomethodological and Conversation Analytic Approaches to Law. Aldershot: Darmouth Publishing, 137-82.
123. Matoesian, G. (2001) Law and the Language of Identity: Discourse in the Kennedy Smith Rape Trial. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
124. Megargee Brown, P. (1987) The Art of Questioning: Thirty Maxims of Cross-Examination. London: Macmillan.
125. Mellinkoff, D. (1963) The Language of the Law. Boston: Little, Brown.
126. Mildred, R. H. (1982) The Expert Witness. London: George Godwin.
127. Montalbano, W. D. (1995) ‘Verdict: trial watchers cite race, celebrity or wealth as factors’, LA Times, 4 October, A1.
128. Napley, D. Sir (1983) The Technique of Persuasion, 3rd edition. London: Sweet and Maxwell.
129. Nietzel, M. and Dillehay, R. (eds) (1982) Psychological Consultation in the Courtroom. New York: Pergamon Press.
130. O’Barr, W. M. (1982) Linguistic Evidence: Power and Strategy in the Courtroom. New York: Academic Press.
131. O’Barr, W. M. and Conley, J. (1990) ‘Litigant satisfaction versus legal adequacy in small claims court narratives’, in J. N. Levi and A. Graffam Walker (eds), Language in the Judicial Process. New York: Plenum, 97-131.
132. O’Neill, A. W. (2000) ‘Judge refuses to stop production of CBS-TV’s Simpson miniseries’, LA Times, 7 September, B3.
133. People v. Orenthal James Simpson (1995) Trial transcripts available at: http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/trials/Simpson/walraven.html#-transcripts
134. Petrocelli, D. (1998) Triumph of Justice: The Final Judgment on the Simpson Saga. New York: Crown Publishers.
135. Philips, S. U. (1987) ‘The social organisation of questions and answers in courtroom discourse’, in L. Kedar (ed.), Power through Discourse. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 83-113.
136. Philips, S. U. (1998) Ideology in the Language of Judges: How Judges Practice Law, Politics, and Courtroom Control. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
137. Presumed Innocent (1990) Director: Alan J. Pakula; Screenplay: Frank Pierson, Alan J. Pakula; Novel: Scott Turrow. Warner Bros.
138. Ptacek, J. (1999) Battered Women in the Courtroom. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
139. Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., Mack, D. and Wrightsman, L. S. (1981) ‘Opening statements in a jury trial: the effect of promising more than the evidence can show’, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 11: 434-44.
140. Rantala, M. L. (1996) O.J. Unmasked: The Trial, the Truth and the Media. Chicago: Catfeet Press.
141. Renoe, C. E. (1996) ‘Seeing is believing: expert testimony and the construction of interpretative authority in an American trial’, International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, Vol. IX, 26: 115-37.
142. Rice, E. Jr (1997) The O.J. Simpson Trial. San Diego, CA: Lucent Books.
143. Ross, A. (1997) ‘If the genes fit, how do you acquit?’, in T. Morrison and C. Brodsky Lacour (eds), Birth of a Nation’hood: Gaze, Script and Spectacle in the O.J. Simpson Case. New York: Pantheon Books, 241-72.
144. Sales, B. (ed.) (1977) Psychology in the Legal Process. New York: Spectrum.
145. Sarangi, S. and Coulthard, M. (eds) (2000) Discourse and Social Life. London: Longman.
146. Scheppele, K. L. (1989) ‘Telling stories’, Michigan Law Review, 87(8): 2073-98.
147. Schiffrin, D. (1994) Approaches to Discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.
148. Schmalleger, F. (1996) Trial of the Century: People of the State of California vs. Orenthal James Simpson. London: Prentice-Hall.
149. Schuetz, J. (1999a) ‘Telelitigation and its challenges to trial discourse’, in J. Schuetz and L. S. Lilley (eds), The O.J. Simpson Trials: Rhetoric, Media and the Law. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1-18.
150. Schuetz, J. (1999b) ‘Final summation: narratives in contrast’ in J. Schuetz and L. S. Lilley (eds), The O.J. Simpson Trials: Rhetoric, Media and the Law. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 100-21.
151. Schuetz, J. and Lilley, L. S. (eds) (1999) The O.J. Simpson Trials: Rhetoric, Media and the Law. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
152. Searle, J. (1969) Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
153. Shakespeare, W. (1963) Julius Caesar, eds W. and B. Rosen. London: Signet.
154. Shuy, R. (1986) ‘Some linguistic contributions to a criminal court case’. in S. Fisher and A. Todd (eds), Advances in Discourse Processes Volume XIX: Discourse and Institutional Authority: Medicine, Education and Law. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 234-51.
155. Sinclair, J. McH. (1987) Looking up: An Account of the COBUILD Project in Lexical Computing. London: Oxford University Press.
156. Sinclair, J. McH. (1991) Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. London: Oxford University Press.
157. Sinclair, J. McH. and Coulthard, R. M. (1975) Towards an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used by Teachers and Pupils. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
158. Solan, L. (1993) The Language of Judges. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
159. Spence, G. (1989) With Justice for None. New York: Times Books.
160. Stenström, A.-B. (1994) An Introduction to Spoken Interaction. London: Longman.
161. Stern, H. J. (1993) Trying Cases to Win: Cross-Examination. Aspen: Aspen Publishers.
162. Stone, M. (1995) Cross-Examination in Criminal Trials, 2nd edition. London: Butterworths.
163. Storey-White, K. (1997) ‘KISSing the Jury: the advantages and limitations of the “keep it simple” principle in the presentation of expert evidence to courts and juries’, Forensic Linguistics 4(2): 280-7.
164. Stubbs, M. (1995a) ‘Collocations and semantic profiles: on the cause of the trouble with quantitative methods’, Functions of Language, 2(1): 1-33.
165. Stubbs, M. (1995b) ‘Corpus evidence for norms of lexical collocation’, in G. Cook and B. Seidlhofer (eds), Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics.London: Oxford University Press, 245-56.
166. Stygall, G. (1994) Trial Language: Differential Discourse Processing and Discourse Formations. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
167. Stygall, G (2001) ‘A different class of witnesses: experts in the courtroom’, Discourse Studies, 3(1): 327-49.
168. Tannen, D. (1993) Framing in Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
169. Tannen, D. (1996) Talking From 9 to 5. London: Virago.
170. Tarlow, B. (1995) ‘Perspectives on the Simpson verdicts: issues that overshadow guilt or innocence: the jury has spoken; now we must address troubling problems of the “message” and “messenger”’, LA Times, 4 October, B9.
171. Taslitz, A. E. (1999) Rape and the Culture of the Courtroom. New York: New York University Press.
172. Tiersma, P. (1999) Legal Language. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
173. Toobin, J. (1996) The Run of His Life: The People vs. O.J. Simpson. New York: Touchstone.
174. Toolan, M. J. (1988) Narrative: A Critical Linguistic Introduction. London: Routledge.
175. Toolan, M. J. (ed.) (2002) Critical Discourse Analysis: Critical Concepts in Linguistics. London: Routledge.
176. Travis, A. (2002) ‘Victims now priority of justice system’, The Guardian, 14 November.
177. Verkaik, R. (2000) ‘New law will force juries to give reasons for verdicts’, The Independent, 22 August, A1.
178. Vinson, D. (1985) ‘How to persuade jurors’, American Bar Association Journal, Vol. 71: 36-51.
179. Wagenaar, W., van Koppen, P. and Crombag, H. (1993) Anchored Narratives: The Psychology of Criminal Evidence. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
180. Walker, A. G. (1987) ‘Linguistic manipulation, power and the legal setting’, in L. Kedar (ed.), Power through Discourse. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing, 57-83.
181. Walker, L. E. (1979) The Battered Woman. New York: Harper and Row.
182. Walraven, J. (1997) The Best of the O.J. Sidebars - O.J. Simpson web-site: http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/trials/Simpson/walraven.html#transcripts
183. Walter, B. (1988) The Jury Summation as Speech Genre. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
184. Watson, R. (1997) ‘The presentation of victim and motive in discourse: the case of police interrogation and interviews’, in M. Travers and J. F. Manzo (eds), Law in Action: Ethnomethodological and Conversation Analytic Approaches to Law.Aldershot: Darmouth Publishing, 77-99.
185. Webster, T. M., King, H. N. and Kassin, S. M. (1991) ‘Voices from an empty chair: the missing witness inference and the jury’, Law and Human Behavior, 15, 31-43.
186. Wellman, F. L. (1998) The Art of Cross-Examination, 4th edition. New York: Dorset Press.
187. Wodak, R. (1985) ‘The interaction between judge and defendant’, in T. A. van Dijk (ed.), Handbook of Discourse Analysis - Vol. 4: Discourse Analysis in Society.London: Academic Press, 181-91.
188. Woodbury, H. (1984) ‘The strategic use of questions in court’, Semiotica, 48(3/4): 197-228.
189. Young, W., Cameron, N. and Tinsley, Y. (1999) Juries in Criminal Trials: A Discussion Paper. Preliminary Paper 37, November, Wellington: New Zealand Law Commission.
190. Arenella, P. (1995) ‘The Fuhrman files’, in In Pursuit of Justice - The People vs Orenthal James Simpson. Los Angeles: LA Times, 47-53.
191. Barak, G. (1996a) Representing O.J.: Murder, Criminal Justice and Mass Culture. New York: Harrow and Heston.
192. Barak, G. (1996b) ‘Media, discourse and the O.J. Simpson trial: an ethnographic portrait’, in G Barak (ed.), Representing O.J.: Murder, Criminal Justice and Mass Culture. New York: Harrow and Heston, 104-22.
193. Bosco, J. (1996) A Problem of Evidence: How the Prosecution Freed O.J. Simpson.New York: William Morrow and Co.
194. Burnett, A. (1999) ‘Jury decision-making processes in the O.J. Simpson criminal and civil trials’, in J. Schuetz and L. S. Lilley (eds), The O.J. Simpson Trials: Rhetoric, Media and the Law. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 122-38.
195. Chancer, L. S. (1996) ‘O.J. Simpson and the trial of the century? Uncovering paradoxes in media coverage’, in G. Barak (ed.), Representing O.J.: Murder, Criminal Justice and Mass Culture. New York: Harrow and Heston, 78-103.
196. Dershowitz, A. M. (1996) Reasonable Doubts: The Criminal Justice System and the O.J. Simpson Case. New York: Touchstone.
197. Ducille, A. (1997) ‘The unbearable darkness of being: “fresh” thoughts on race, sex and the Simpsons’, in T. Morrison and C. B. Lacour (eds), Birth of a Nation’hood: Gaze, Script and Spectacle in the O.J. Simpson Case. New York: Random House, 293-339.
198. Fuhrman, M. (1997) Murder In Brentwood. New York: Zebra Books.
199. Furno-Lamude, D. (1999) ‘The media spectacle and the O.J. Simpson case’, in J. Schuetz and L. S. Lilley (eds), The O.J. Simpson Trials: Rhetoric, Media and the Law. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 19-35.
200. Ganer, P. M. (1999) ‘The credibility of O.J. Simpson: “If the shoes fits …"’, in J. Schuetz and L. S. Lilley (eds), The O.J. Simpson Trials: Rhetoric, Media and the Law. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 78-99.
201. Higginbotham, A. L. Jr, François, A. B. and Yueh, L. Y. (1997) ‘The O.J. trial: who was improperly playing the “race card”?’, in T. Morrison and C. B. Lacour (eds), Birth of a Nation’hood: Gaze, Script and Spectacle in the O.J. Simpson Case. New York: Random House, 31-56.
202. Lange, T. and Vannater, P. (1997) Evidence Dismissed: The Inside Story of the Police Investigation of O.J. Simpson. New York: Pocket Books.
203. LA Times (1995a) In Pursuit of Justice: The People vs. Orenthal James Simpson. Los Angeles, CA: LA Times.
204. Schiller, L. and Willwerth, J. (1996) American Tragedy: The Uncensored Story of the Simpson Defense. New York: Avon Books.
205. Simpson, O. J. (1995) I Want To Tell You. Boston: Little, Brown.
206. Spence, G. (1997) O.J. - The Last Word: The Death of Justice. New York: St Martin’s Press.
207. Uelman, G. F. (1996) Lessons from the Trial: The People vs. O.J. Simpson. Kansas City: Andrews and McMeel.
208. http://www.courttv.com/casefiles/Simpson
209. http://www.cnn.com/US/OJ/index.html
210. Scotland: Lord Cooper in Davis v. Edinburgh Magistrates (1953).
211. United States: Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. 113 S Ct 2786 (1993).
212. Frye v. United States 293 F1013 (DC Cir 1923).