The Urgency of Forensic Linguistics in a Police Interrogation Process
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/f33xy866Keywords:
: Forensic Linguistics;, Interrogation;, Linguist, Crime, EvidenceAbstract
Forensic linguistic experts identify problems through a speech from speakers in the form of language style, forensic phonetics, and dialectology while writing in the form of fingerprints and analysts to express the contents of their writing. Orally, these problems can be found in utterances of hatred, hoaxes, defamation, and honesty of speakers while writing a letter, notes of suicides, and fingerprints. In the forensic linguistic level, it has the scope to examine every problem in the field of law including pragmatics, semantics, discourse analysis, and phonetics. The focus of this paper is to review the urgency of the role of forensic linguists in the process of analysing the results of police interrogation in Indonesia. Data collection in this study uses the literature study method. The data collected were analysed using descriptive analysis method. In this paper, the things related to the role of linguistic forensics will be presented in the process of interrogation, legal language, and forensic linguistic position itself. Finally, the service of an interpreter and found that the points of view of the interpreter, sociolinguistics and interpreting studies can be an excellent source of knowledge in reading this case. Therefore, in interpreting a text it should highlight the construction of the language thoroughly. It is because each type of document has a different structure and context.
Downloads
References
1. Anesa, P. (2013). Courtroom Discourses: An Analysis of the Westerfield Jury Trial. UNIVERSITA‘ DEGLI STUDI DI VERONA.
2. Ariani, M. G., Sajedi, F., & Sajedi, M. (2014). Forensic Linguistics: A Brief Overview of the Key Elements. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 158, 222–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.078
3. Baldwin, J. (1993). POLICE INTERVIEW TECHNIQUES Establishing Truth or Proof? THE BRITISH JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY, 33(June), 66–72.
4. Bartels, L. (2011). Research in Practice: Police interviews with vulnerable adult suspects. Australian Institute of Criminology -Research in Practice. Australia.
5. Constable, M. (2014). Our Word is Our Bond: How Legal Speech Acts. (R. Conley, Ed.). Stanford: Stanford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000002196
6. Correa, M. (2013). Forensic linguistics: An overview of the intersection and interaction of language and law. Studies About Languages, (23), 5–13. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.sal.0.23.5020
7. Cotteril, J. (2002). Language in the Legal Process. In Criminal justice. New York: PALGRAVE MACMILLAN.
8. Deeb, H., Vrij, A., Hope, L., Mann, S., Granhag, P. A., & Strömwall, L. A. (2018). Police Officers’ Perceptions of Statement Inconsistency. Criminal Justice and Behavior, XX(X), 009385481875880. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854818758808
9. Doringin, B. (2014). Kewajiban Penyidik dalam Menginterogasi Tersangka Menurut KUHAP. Lex Crimen, III(4), 84–92.
10. Elek, B. (2016). To the Recommendation of Using “Linguistic Fingerprints” in the Criminal Procedure“. Comparative Legilinguistics, 28, 134.
https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/cl.2016.28.6.
11. Evans, R. (2010). Policing and Society : An Police interrogations and the Royal commission on criminal Justice. International Journal of Research, 4:1(May), 73–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.1994.9964683
12. Faishal, M. . (2015). TINDAK PIDANA PENCEMARAN NAMA BAIK MELALUI MEDIA
ELEKTRONIK. Universitas Islam Negeri Walisongo.
13. Fielding, N. G. (2013). Lay people in court: The experience of defendants, eyewitnesses and victims. British Journal of Sociology, 64(2), 287–307. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12018
14. Franken, S. (2008). Finding the truth in Dutch courtrooms How does one deal with miscarriages of justice ? Utrecht Law Review, 4(3), 218–226.
15. Galdia, M. (2017). Lectures on Legal Linguistics. New York: Peter Lang Edition. https://doi.org/DOI 10.3726/b11443
16. Goodman-delahunty, J., & Martschuk, N. (2018). Risks and Benefits of Interpreter-Mediated Police. Journal of Criminal Justice and Security, (4), 451–471.
17. Hirsch, A. (2014). Going to the Source : The “ New ” Reid Method and False Confessions. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 11(2), 803–826.
18. Kassin, S. M. (2014). False Confessions: Causes, Consequences, and Implications for Reform. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(1), 112–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732214548678
19. Kassin, S. M., Goldstein, C. C., & Savitsky, K. (2003). Behavioral confirmation in the interrogation room: On the dangers of presuming guilt. Law and Human Behavior, 27(2), 187–
203. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022599230598
20. Kredens, K. (2016). Conflict or convergence?: Interpreters’ and police officers’ perceptions of the role of the public service interpreter. Language and Law= Linguagem e Direito, 3(2), 65–77.
21. Leahy-Harland, S., & Bull, R. (2017). Police Strategies and Suspect Responses in Real-Life Serious Crime Interviews. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 32(2), 138–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-016-9207-8
22. Leo, R. A. (2013). Why Interrogation Contamination Occurs Richard. University of San Francisco Law Research Paper, 11(1), 197.
23. Leonard, R. A. & J. E. R. F. (2017). Applying the Science of Linguistics to Issues of the Law. Hofstra Law Review, 45(3), 881–897. https://doi.org/10.3366/ajicl.2011.0005
24. Lisina, N. (2013). Stylistic Features of Legal Discourse. University of Oslo. Retrieved from http://www.duo.uio.no/
25. Luh, N., Seri, N., & Tan, V. (2016). Forensic Linguistics Analysis of Virginia Woolf ’ S Suicide Notes, 9(1), 52–57.
26. Määttä, S. K. (2015). Interpreting the discourse of reporting: The case of screening interviews with asylum seekers and police interviews in Finland. Translation and Interpreting, 7(3), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.107203.2015.a02
27. MacKeith, G. H. G. and J. (2006). Disputed confessions and the Criminal Justice System. MAUDSLEY DISCUSSION PAPER, (2), 1–20.
28. Moston, S., & Engelberg, T. (1993). Police questioning techniques in tape recorded interviews with criminal suspects. Policing and Society, 3(July). https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.1993.9964670
29. Office, T. H., & Court, U. K. S. (2015). Forensic Language Analysis. Science and Technology, (509), 1–6. Retrieved from www.parliament.uk/post
30. Olsson, J. (2004). What is Forensic Linguistics?, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00044325
31. Pearse, J., & Gudjonsson, G. (1996). Police interviewing techniques at two south london police stations. Psychology, Crime & Law, 3(1), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683169608409795
32. Rajamanickam, R., & Rahim, A. A. (2013). Forensic Linguistic Evidence and its Admissibility in Malaysia. International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS, 13(04), 51–56.
33. Ramezani, F., Sani, A. K., & Moghadam, K. (2016). Forensic linguistics in the light of crime investigation. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 24(1), 375–384.
34. Richardson, B. H., Taylor, P. J., Snook, B., Conchie, S. M., & Bennell, C. (2014). Language style matching and police interrogation outcomes. Law and Human Behavior, 38(4), 357–366. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000077
35. Saimima, I. (2016). Implementasi pasal 27 UU informasi dan transaksi elektronik no 11 Tahun 2008 dalam Kasus Pencemaran Nama Baik di Sosial Media. Jurnal Kajian Ilmiah, 16(3).
36. Shuy, R. W. (2011). Applied Linguistics in the Legal Arena. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
37. Subyantoro. (2019). Linguistik Forensik : Sumbangsih Kajian Bahasa dalam Penegakan HUKUM. Adil Indonesia Jurnal, 1(1), 61–70.
38. Verhoeven, W. J. (2016). The complex relationship between interrogation techniques, suspects changing their statement and legal assistance. Evidence from a Dutch sample of police interviews. Policing and Society, 28(3), 308–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2016.1157594
39. Waskita, D. (2014). Transitivity in Telephone Conversation in A Bribery Case In Indonesia: A Forensic Linguistics Study. Jurnal Sosioteknologi, 13(2), 91–100.
40. Yuwono, U. (2004). Surat Bisnis yang Dituduh Mencemarkan Nama Baik : Bagaimana Linguis Bekerja sebagai Saksi Ahli di Indonesia, 357–374.
41. Zarirruddin, M., & Nordin, F. (2016). Forensic Linguistics and the Detecting of Deviant Teaching in.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
