Lawyers' Use of Witness Words in Closing Arguments of Criminal Trials: Application to Interpretation

Laura Felton Rosulek and Risa Shaw

In this presentation we will present research that examined how lawyers use direct and indirect quotations in their closing arguments in criminal trials. For example, lawyers use the quotes of witnesses to the crime as "personal authorities" who legitimate the lawyer's narrative of the crime since the lawyer wasn't present when the crime occurred, and lawyers quote expert witnesses to strengthen the attorneys' technical arguments. The research, 34 closing arguments from 17 trials, shows that lawyers use quoted language in four ways: to re-enact portions of narratives that occurred during trial; to recast the quotes in the lawyer's words as a way of explaining how their meaning fits the lawyer's case; to falsify or contradict the quoted language; and to serve as evidence of the lawyer's argument.

After we present the research, we will provide data (in the form of written transcripts from several different trials) for participants to work with in small groups. We will ask participants to identify lawyers' use of quoted language, and categorize that usage based on the categories presented above. Then participants will be asked to explore the translation/interpretation issues they may face with such material (are these categories useful, is knowledge of what the attorneys are attempting to accomplish with their language use beneficial to the interpreter, and if so, how?), and create translations/interpretations from the transcripts. We will return as a large group to discuss the issues raised by applying this research to translation/interpretation and the significance this research may have for interpreters in closing arguments as well as in other legal settings.