Cover not available

Article published In: Australian Review of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 40:1 (2017) ► pp.71–91

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Storytelling in legal settings

A case study from a Crown Prosecutor’s opening statement

 | University of Sydney
Published online: 1 December 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.40.1.05lip
Abstract
A number of linguistic studies on courtroom discourse deal with witness examinations, however counsels’ opening statements have been given relatively little attention. Drawing on the analysis of a Crown Prosecutor’s opening statement in a murder trial held at the Supreme Court of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia, and using the Systemic Functional Linguistics framework (Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar (2nd ed.). London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar), this study highlights the ways in which the prosecutor constructs his narrative of the crime in his opening statement in order to persuade the jurors of his views. Specifically, the analysis highlights the ways in which the narrative is made persuasive through its specific rhetorical organization and over-specification of orientational information, as well as more credible through quotations from participants with personal experience in the related events. It also shows the ways in which the prosecutor seeks to engage the jurors through his use of second-person pronouns, as well as his differentiated use of the crime participants’ names. Finally, this study highlights the dialogic and heteroglossic characteristics of the adversarial legal process, in that it both refers to what was previously stated and tries to anticipate the response of the jury, whose voice comes as the last word through their verdict.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Data
  • 3.Theoretical framework
  • 4.Findings
    • 4.1The narrative and its rhetorical organization
    • 4.2Orientational information
    • 4.3Transitivity analysis
    • 4.4Agency: ergative analysis
    • 4.5Prosecution’s use of first- and second-person pronouns
    • 4.6Use of crime participants’ names
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (33)
References
Bennet, W. L., & Feldman, M. S. (1981). Reconstructing reality in the courtroom. London, New York: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caffarel, A. (2006). A systemic functional grammar of French: From grammar to discourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chaemsaithong, K. (2014). Interactive patterns of the opening statement in criminal trials: A historical perspective. Discourse Studies, 16(3), 347–364. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015a). Communicating with silent addressees: Engagement features in the opening statement. Language & Communication, 431, 35–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015b). Positioning self and others in the courtroom: Person markers in the opening statement. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 51(1), 1–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, L. (2005). Transitivity in media texts: Negative verbal process sub-functions and narrator bias. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 43(1), 33–51. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cochran Jr., J. L., & Rutten, T. (1996). Journey to justice. New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cotterill, J. (2003). Language and power in court: A linguistic analysis of the O. J. Simpson trial. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eades, D. (2010). Sociolinguistics and the legal process. Bristol, Buffalo, Toronto: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eggins, S. (1994). An introduction to systemic functional linguistics. London: Pinter Publishers Ltd.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Felton Rosulek, L. (2008). Manipulative silence and social representation in the closing arguments of a child sexual abuse case. Text and Talk, 28 (4), 529–550. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). The sociolinguistic creation of opposing representations of defendants and victims. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, 16 (1), 1–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). Dueling discourses: The construction of reality in closing arguments. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbons, J. (2003). Forensic linguistics: An introduction to language in the justice system. Malden, MA; Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar (2nd ed.). London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heffer, C. (2005). The language of jury trial: A corpus-aided analysis of legal-lay discourse. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hobbs, P. (2008). It’s not what you say but how you say it: The role of personality and identity in trial success. Critical Discourse Studies, 5(3), 231–248. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huisman, R. (2014). Modality and the Law. Annual Review of Functional Linguistics, 51, 7–21.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackson, B. S. (1988). Narrative models in legal proof. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 1(3), 225–246.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labov, W., & Waletzky, J. (1967) Narrative analysis: Oral versions of personal experience. In J. Helm (Ed.), Essays on the verbal and visual arts (pp. 12–44). Proceedings of the 1966 Spring Meeting of the American Ethnological Society. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lilley, L. S. (1999). Opening statements: Lasting impressions. In J. Schuetz & L. S. Lilley (Eds.), The O. J. Simpson trials: Rhetoric, media, and the law (pp. 36–57). Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lundquist, W. I. (1982). Advocacy in opening statements. Litigation, 8(3), 23.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maley, Y., & Fahey, R. (1991). Presenting the evidence: Constructions of reality in court. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 4(10), 3–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2008). Genre relations: Mapping culture. London,Oakville: Equinox.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mazzocco, P., & Green, M. C. (2011). Narrative persuasion in legal settings: What’s the story? The Jury Expert, 23(3), 27–34.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Barr, W. M. (1982). Linguistic evidence: Language, power and strategy in the courtroom. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Queensland Law Reform Commission. (2009). A review of jury directions. Report No 66. Retrieved from [URL]
Snedaker, K. H. (1991). Storytelling in opening statements: Framing the argumentation of the trial. In D. R. Papke (Ed.), Narrative and the legal discourse: A reader in storytelling and the law. Liverpool: Deborah Charles Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Dijk, T. A. (1988). News as discourse. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Leeuwen, T. (1996). The representation of social actors. In C. R. Caldas-Coulthard & M. Coulthard (Eds.), Texts and practices: Readings in critical discourse analysis (pp. 32–70). London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wagenaar, W., van Koppen, P. J., & Crombag, H. F. M. (1993). Anchored narratives: The psychology of criminal evidence. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Chaemsaithong, Krisda
2024. Membership categorization devices in courtroom opening and closing speeches. Social Semiotics 34:5 ► pp. 747 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue