Talk about testimony: courtroom dialogue as racialized interactions

Abstract Within the criminal legal system, judges, jurors, prosecutors, defense attorneys, experts, and law enforcement officers all might employ language or language practices in the courtroom that can evoke racial bias against an accused person, including by using coded language, innuendos, or particular questioning techniques and clarification strategies. In light of recent legislation, including the passage of the Racial Justice Act in California, which prohibits the use of racially biased language against an accused person by courtroom actors, we are at a crucial moment where dialogue between linguists and lawyers is imperative to define racially biased language and how it emerges. In this article, we provide guidance to help identify and address the ways race can be invoked through discursive strategies in the courtroom that do not make explicit mentions of race, and end with recommendations for ameliorating the potential harms that racial bias expressed during such interactions can cause.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Linguistics Vanguard
Published
2024-09-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2024-0118
Primary Topic
Multilingual Education and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Talk about testimony: courtroom dialogue as racialized interactions

Sharese King, Samantha Jacobs
Linguistics Vanguard
Multilingual Education and Policy
article

Talk about testimony: courtroom dialogue as racialized interactions

Sharese King, Samantha Jacobs
article en

Abstract

Abstract Within the criminal legal system, judges, jurors, prosecutors, defense attorneys, experts, and law enforcement officers all might employ language or language practices in the courtroom that can evoke racial bias against an accused person, including by using coded language, innuendos, or particular questioning techniques and clarification strategies. In light of recent legislation, including the passage of the Racial Justice Act in California, which prohibits the use of racially biased language against an accused person by courtroom actors, we are at a crucial moment where dialogue between linguists and lawyers is imperative to define racially biased language and how it emerges. In this article, we provide guidance to help identify and address the ways race can be invoked through discursive strategies in the courtroom that do not make explicit mentions of race, and end with recommendations for ameliorating the potential harms that racial bias expressed during such interactions can cause.

Linguistics VanguardVol. 10(s3)
Berkeley College (US), University of Chicago (US), University of California, Berkeley (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 80%
Multilingual Education and Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Talk about testimony: courtroom dialogue as racialized interactions — Sharese King, Samantha Jacobs · Linguistics Vanguard (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS