Old Bailey records and linguistic analysis

[Joel S. Berson]

If -- especially in the early days -- the Old Bailey records  record
only the names, accusation(s), and verdict, but not the testimony,
possible.  (I have not looked at the Old Bailey site myself.  But
colonial New England case records of the 17th and 18th century are
also similarly short.  One has to go to the Massachusetts archives to
see any records of testimony, depositions.   I think the newspaper
article said that such records from Old Bailey are in the on-line
database, but IIRC not in the computer-searchable portion.

Joel

At 6/19/2014 09:10 AM, Jonathan Lighter wrote:

>Have visited the site many times.
>
>That looks plausible to me.
>
>JL
>
>
>On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 8:33 AM, David Barnhart <dbarnhart at highlands.com>
>wrote:
>
> > ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> > -----------------------
> > Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> > Poster:       David Barnhart <dbarnhart at HIGHLANDS.COM>
> > Subject:      Re: Old Bailey records and linguistic analysis
> >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Did I do the arithmetic correctly?  Is that really only 647+ words per
> > case?
> >
> > Just the ruling in the case of Redskins is 177 pages long.
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> >
>
>
>
>--
>"If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the truth."
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org