16.3453, Review: Forensic Ling: Shuy (2005)

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-16-3453. Sat Dec 03 2005. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.

Subject: 16.3453, Review: Forensic Ling: Shuy (2005)

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry at linguistlist.org>
 
Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org) 
        Sheila Dooley, U of Arizona  
        Terry Langendoen, U of Arizona  

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.

Editor for this issue: Lindsay Butler <lindsay at linguistlist.org>
================================================================  

What follows is a review or discussion note contributed to our 
Book Discussion Forum. We expect discussions to be informal and 
interactive; and the author of the book discussed is cordially 
invited to join in. If you are interested in leading a book 
discussion, look for books announced on LINGUIST as "available 
for review." Then contact Sheila Dooley at dooley at linguistlist.org. 

===========================Directory==============================  

1)
Date: 29-Nov-2005
From: Kerry Linfoot-Ham < knkham at yahoo.co.uk >
Subject: Creating Language Crimes 

	
-------------------------Message 1 ---------------------------------- 
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 18:50:14
From: Kerry Linfoot-Ham < knkham at yahoo.co.uk >
Subject: Creating Language Crimes 
 

AUTHOR: Shuy, Roger
TITLE: Creating Language Crimes
SUBTITLE: How Law Enforcement Uses (and Misuses) Language
PUBLISHER: Oxford University Press
YEAR: 2005
Announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/16/16-2441.html 

Kerry Linfoot-Ham, doctoral student, Department of Linguistics, 
University of Florida

OVERVIEW

In the introduction to his book, renowned Forensic Linguist Roger 
Shuy states: ''There is a fine line, perhaps, between giving a 
somewhat better impression than we deserve and being deceptive or 
outright lying'' (p. ix). This habitual conversational strategy is, he 
argues, of heightened interest when it is used to manipulate evidence 
and, at times, to create language crimes. This is the focus of this 
book, which is aimed at (forensic) linguists, criminologists, law 
enforcement officers, (critical) discourse analysts, and anyone with an 
interest in language and the law. 

Despite being a seasoned veteran of linguistics, Shuy manages to 
maintain the level of the book at an introductory style, explaining terms 
that may be unfamiliar to non-linguists, but without being 
condescending. His approach is clear, articulate and, importantly, 
accessible without being monotonous. This is a new field of linguistics, 
but those few others who do have experience in this area will also find 
invaluable techniques and tips for their own investigations. 

CONTENTS

Part I: Language Crimes, Conversational Strategies, and Language 
Power
Chapter 1: How Language Crimes are Created
In the first chapter, Shuy introduces his terminology and focus, as well 
as the three stages of linguistic evidence collection: data gathering, 
the police interrogation, and the trial. He states that, as the law is 
more comfortable dealing with the written word, investigation into 
spoken evidence and its manipulation at all three stages is crucial. 
The focus of his analysis is undercover 'sting' operations and, using 
evidence from real cases, Shuy investigates how cooperating 
witnesses (civilians who agree to wear recording equipment) and 
undercover law enforcement officers may manipulate the uneven 
power distribution over their unsuspecting target to gain the evidence 
for which they are consciously, and actively, searching. He says that 
in these situations, ''...the language strategies used to create the 
illusion of criminality seem to be frequently carried out deliberately'', 
(p. 11).

Chapter 2: Conversational Strategies Used to Create Crimes
''Part of the intelligence analysis in any criminal case begins by 
recognizing whether the crime was actually committed by the target or 
whether an illusion of a crime was created by the person wearing the 
mike'' (p.29). This assertion frames Shuy's intentions throughout the 
rest of his analysis. By identifying eleven conversational strategies 
(e.g. using ambiguity, contaminating the tape, and scripting the target) 
that are commonly employed by undercover officers and cooperating 
witnesses in the information gathering stage of a criminal 
investigation, Shuy shows that it is often just this created illusion that 
may result in a guilty verdict, rather than actual evidence of a crime 
committed.
Shuy states that the undercover operative has a specific goal in mind: 
to record incriminating evidence from a set target. With this agenda in 
mind, the choice of conversational strategies is going to be extremely 
conscious and directed, only at this deliberate end.

Chapter 3: The Power of Conversational Strategies
In the particular situation covered in Shuy's research, i.e. an 
undercover operative taping the speech of a target with the aim of 
recording linguistic evidence of illegality, there is an inherent 
imbalance of power. The agent has control over the situation. 
However, this particular speech event is atypical of regular 
communicative occurrences due to the fact that the target is unaware 
of this imbalance of power and, therefore, will treat the situation in the 
same manner as any other communicative event. Shuy, following 
Sornig (1989) terms this ''manipulative seduction'' (p. 32). During 
manipulative seduction the hidden intent of the seducer is not evident 
to the target, and in this particular situation these intents go beyond 
the two interlocutors and onto the recording's future listeners, i.e. 
judges, lawyers, and - most importantly - a jury. Through manipulation 
of the unknown power differential, it is, Shuy asserts, possible and 
even probable, that undercover agents may use indirectness to their 
advantage. The target may believe that they understand the 
communicative event that is occurring, but their misunderstanding of 
the full range of effects of the situation will certainly cause them to 
react differently than they may have, had they been fully aware of the 
possible outcomes. While these techniques are not limited to 
undercover operations (they also appear in police questioning (cf. 
Heydon, 2005) and courtroom discourse (cf. Cotterill, 2003; Lakoff, 
2000), Shuy maintains that they are particularly powerful, and 
particularly unfair, in this situation.

Part II: Uses by Cooperating Witnesses
Chapter 4: Overlapping, Ambiguity, and the Hit and Run in a 
Solicitation to Murder Case: Texas v. T. Cullen Davis
Even from an anecdotal point of view this case is interesting as Shuy 
tells us that it was a string of coincidences that led to his involvement 
as an expert witness, and this became the launch of his esteemed 
career as a forensic linguist. His analysis shows how the 'hit and run' 
technique was used by the cooperating witness wearing a recording 
device to create an absolute illusion of linguistic evidence. Through 
careful analysis of both the audio- and video-taped evidence, Shuy 
shows that the target was unaware of much of his interlocutor's half of 
the conversation - particularly those parts that explicitly mentioned the 
crime at hand.

Chapter 5: Retelling, Scripting, and Lying in a Murder Case: Florida v. 
Alan Mackerly
This chapter highlights the problems of getting a target to reiterate 
linguistic evidence for the purpose of recording it. By examining a 
case in which the target had allegedly told the cooperating witness 
previously that he had committed murder, Shuy uncovers the 
strategies employed by the cooperating witness to encourage the 
target to repeat his confession. Problems in this kind of undercover 
investigation begin initially with the fact that it may simply seem 
unbelievable to the target that their interlocutor may need to have 
such intrinsic facts repeated. It is absolutely necessary for the purpose 
of prosecution, however, that the linguistic evidence be clearly and 
unambiguously stated and recorded. Shuy's categories 
of 'scripting', 'retelling', and 'planting of false information' are all 
examined to show how this cooperating witness unsuccessfully 
attempted to reach this goal.

Chapter 6: Interrupting, Overlapping, Lying, Not Taking ''No'' for an 
Answer, and Representing Illegality Differently to Separate Targets in 
a Stolen Property Case: US v. Prakesh Patel and Daniel Houston
In this case, Shuy was presented with linguistic evidence from two 
separate targets. One of the targets was easily proven to be guilty of 
the accused crime, but the second is simply implied to be guilty 
through their involvement with the first. Here, both a cooperating 
witness and an undercover DEA agent used a variety of strategies in 
attempts to capture linguistic evidence that the targets were illegally 
selling ingredients that were being used in the manufacture of 
methamphetamines. Whereas the facts were presented less 
ambiguously and the representations of illegality were expressed 
more directly to the first target, the second target was presented with 
language that camouflaged the illegality of his actions, was ignored 
when saying 'no' to illegal requests, and otherwise presented with 
inexplicit words and expressions. Although both targets were 
convicted of the crimes of which they were accused, Shuy's analysis 
makes it clear that this conviction could not have been made had the 
prosecution been required to rely on the linguistic evidence alone.

Chapter 7: Eleven Little Ambiguities and How They Grew in a 
Business Fraud Case: US v. Paul Webster and Joe Martino
In this chapter Shuy analyses in detail a series of conversations 
between a cooperating witness and two businessmen that are being 
investigated in a fraud case at a brokerage company. Shuy identifies 
eleven separate ambiguities that are utilized by the cooperating 
witness in an attempt to draw incriminating linguistic evidence from his 
targets. By giving a detailed description of each ambiguity in turn, the 
author shows not only that the linguistic evidence provided should be 
insufficient for a guilty verdict, but also, by giving examples that would 
have held up to a more strict scrutiny, Shuy illustrates how this 
particular case could have been more clear and unquestionable. 
Despite Shuy's contributions, the defense failed to use his analysis to 
its fullest in court, and the ambiguities were sufficient to persuade the 
jury that the targets were guilty of the crimes of which they had been 
accused. Although the system appears to have failed in this case, 
Shuy's inclusion of this analysis serves to highlight how important such 
forensic linguistic analysis may become as it becomes more usual and 
also more effectively used in the courts.

Chapter 8: Discourse Ambiguity in a Contract Fraud Case: US v. 
David Smith
The use of discourse ambiguity is, Shuy states, usual and effective in 
undercover investigations. This tactic is particularly successful at 
drawing out clarifications from target subjects that may be recorded as 
incriminating linguistic evidence at this stage of the investigation. 
There are, however, a number of reasons why the target may not be 
drawn into the trap, including the facts that they may be either guilty of 
the suspected crime, or innocent of it, or that they may suspect that 
they are being recorded. In the case study detailed in this chapter, 
Shuy exposes the illusion of incriminating linguistic evidence in a fraud 
case against an aircraft engineering company executive. By effectively 
exposing how the target was not explicitly drawn into the cooperating 
witness's strategies, Shuy's testimony on the case proved that, not 
only was the evidence insufficient to convict the executive, but, he 
argues, that the case should never have made it to court. He shows 
that, had the government made better use of expert analysis such as 
that provided by forensic linguists, much time, hardship and money 
could have been saved.

Chapter 9: Contamination and Manipulation in a Bribery Case: US v. 
Paul Manziel
In the case study presented in this chapter, Shuy shows how the 
cooperating witness manipulated the tape physically to create the 
illusion of guilt in his targets, two Texan brothers. In this particular 
situation, the cooperating witness was given complete freedom to turn 
the recording equipment on and off, sometimes in the middle of 
ongoing conversations. Shuy also suspects that the witness 
manipulated the sensitivity of the recording equipment by creating 
static when the target was saying things that would have clearly 
indicated he was not involved in any illegal activity, and that, due to 
people coming and going during long conversations, the targets may 
not have even been present during the recording of crucial linguistic 
evidence. When Shuy's analysis uncovered these techniques, the 
defense attorneys that he was assisting requested to examine the 
FBI's recording equipment in order to assess how such tape 
manipulation could have occurred. When this request was denied - 
citing ''national security concerns'' (p. 97) - the judge suppressed all 
tapes made by the recording device as evidence, effectively blocking 
access to this particular linguistic evidence.

Chapter 10: Scripting by Requesting Directives and Apologies in a 
Sexual Misconduct Case: Idaho v. Mussina
In the complex case presented in this chapter, Shuy analyzed tapes 
recorded by a woman who was accusing a doctor of sexual 
misconduct. The woman had recorded telephone conversations 
between herself and the doctor in order to provide evidence that she 
had been forced into providing unwilling oral sex. During the recorded 
conversations, the woman uses what Shuy calls a ''scripting strategy'' 
to try and get the doctor to incriminate himself. For example, in one 
conversation the woman tries to get the doctor to apologize for what 
she claims he did to her. During the conversation, the doctor does 
indeed apologize, but close analysis shows that the doctor and the 
woman are not sharing the same reference about the reason for the 
apology - and the doctor's reference is shown to be benign with 
regard to the charges in this case. Shuy's analysis of these 
conversations showed how the woman's techniques failed to provide 
any linguistic evidence that the doctor had been involved in sexual 
misconduct against her, and he was subsequently acquitted of the 
charges.

Part III: Uses by Law Enforcement Officers
Chapter 11: Police Camouflaging in an Obstruction of Justice Case: 
US v. Brian Lett
The first chapter illustrating how law enforcement officers may also be 
guilty of creating language crimes concerns a case against a young 
lawyer suspected of obstructing justice. In this case, the undercover 
officer recorded conversations in which he attempted to show that the 
lawyer was willing to steal files pertinent to a case on which he was 
working, and that he was also willing to use influence to remove the 
US Postal Service Inspector that was handing this case. By detailing 
the techniques employed by the undercover officer, Shuy shows 
successfully that any illegality is completely camouflaged, and that 
there is a possible, legal, interpretation for the interactions that take 
place between this agent and the target. The vocabulary choices used 
by the officer are ambiguous, and interjections and other discourse 
markers utilized by the target are shown by Shuy to prove that the 
lawyer did not share the illegal references at which the officer was 
hinting. Shuy's evidence helped the jury in their decision to acquit the 
young lawyer.

Chapter 12: Police Camouflaging in a Purchasing Stolen Property 
Case: US v. Tariq Shalash
Again camouflaging is employed by an undercover officer in this next 
case study. Here a businessman is suspected of dealing in stolen 
goods, and undercover officers attempt to capture linguistic evidence 
of his guilt in a series of undercover sting operations. The ambiguity 
employed by the agents is again the main cause for concern in the 
case. Until the final conversation, the officers fail to be completely 
explicit with regard to the illegal origins of their merchandise, choosing 
instead to euphemize and hint, i.e. to 'camouflage'. Despite the fact 
that his analysis was made available to the defense, Shuy was not 
called upon to testify in this case. The target was convicted of 
purchasing stolen goods.

Chapter 13: A Rogue Cop and Every Strategy He Can Think Of: The 
Wenatchee Washington Sex Ring Case
This chapter details Shuy's involvement in the high-profile Wenatchee 
Sex Ring Case of 1994. In this case, a detective, Robert Perez, began 
investigating claims of sexual misconduct against children in this town 
when a foster child his family had taken in told him that she had been 
abused. The case became a massive witch-hunt, eventually resulting 
in forty-three adults being charged with twenty-nine thousand counts 
of the rape and molestation of sixty children. Perez's investigative 
techniques came under scrutiny quite early on in this investigation, 
and many claims and lawsuits were filed against the authorities, 
stating that a large variety of tactics from the coercive to the downright 
illegal had been employed in the interviewing process. Despite the fact 
that Perez had not recorded any of the interviews, Shuy and a 
colleague were able to analyze the written reports that he had 
submitted and to conclude that there was every likelihood that they 
had been altered, or in many cases completely fabricated, by the 
detective.

Chapter 14: An Undercover Policeman Uses Ambiguity, Hit and Run, 
Interrupting, Scripting, and Refusing to Take ''No'' for an Answer in a 
Solicitation to Murder Case: The Crown v. Mohammed Arshad
In this case, a Pakistani man was convicted of soliciting the murder of 
his daughter's new husband. Shuy was asked to analyze recording 
made by an undercover officer that were used by the prosecution to 
show that Arshad employed an undercover officer to kill his son-in-
law. Through his analysis, Shuy focuses on several strategies that 
were employed by the officer that either disguised the innocence of 
the target, or, he shows, failed to elicit full and unambiguous requests 
for the assassination. Despite the fact the Shuy states ''I am familiar 
with the fact that undercover police often are not explicit in their 
representations of illegality and that the target's efforts to say ''no'' are 
sometimes blocked by the agent'', (p.139), it is nonetheless a 
requirement of the courts that the target themselves express explicitly 
their illegal intentions for linguistic evidence to be incriminating. Shuy's 
analysis shows that this is not evident in this particular case. Shuy 
was, however, unable to testify at the court hearing for Arshad, 
though he intends to provide his expert analysis and opinion at the 
upcoming appeal. It will remain to be seen whether the inclusion of this 
forensic linguistic analysis will be helpful in reversing the court's 
original decision.

Chapter 15: Manipulating the Tape, Interrupting, Inaccurate 
Restatements, and Scripting in a Murder Case: Florida v. Jerry 
Townsend
This rather disturbing case study shows how Florida law enforcement 
agents may have manipulated the recording devices, scripted, and 
provided inaccurate restatements of a suspect's words in the 
interviewing process of a mentally challenged individual. In the late 
1970's, Jerry Townsend was arrested for the murders of several 
prostitutes. He admitted killing five women, but the police continued to 
interview him over a period of five days to ascertain whether he had 
been involved in some other unsolved murders of a similar nature. 
During these five days, only four hours of interview were recorded. 
Shuy's analysis shows massive use of the on/off switch during 
conversations with the target. These were often not overtly audible, 
but the electronic signature may be picked up by sensitive equipment, 
and other instances may be discernable through the analysis of 
background noises. On several occasions, such manipulation 
occurred resulting in two different answers to questions, i.e. the target 
answered a question, the tape was stopped, and when the tape was 
restarted Townsend gave a different answer. Through this type of 
analysis, as well as detailed grammatical discourse analysis, Shuy 
shows that the target was clearly being scripted. After serving twenty-
two years in prison, DNA evidence finally acquitted Townsend of all of 
the crimes. Shuy terms this example of linguistic evidence a ''legal 
fiasco'', (p.164).

Part IV: Conversational Strategies as Evidence
Chapter 16: Eight Questions about the Power of Conversational 
Strategies in Undercover Police Investigations
In the final chapter of this book, Shuy tidies up certain issues 
regarding the usefulness of his analyses, the justification for using 
such strategies, and how the future of forensic linguistic analysis of 
this type may look. While stating that cooperating witnesses and 
undercover police officers employ, mainly, the same strategies, Shuy 
mitigates this by adding that these strategies are also employed 
frequently in everyday conversation. This does not make them any 
less dangerous in the undercover situation - in fact quite the opposite. 
That we are used to these conversational happenings, and that we 
usually deal with them by simply waiting for them to sort themselves 
out, mostly out of a need for politeness (cf. Brown and Levinson, 
1987) and an expectation of conversational cooperation (cf. Grice, 
1967) with our interlocutor will inevitably work against us if we were 
ever to be placed in the position of being recorded by an undercover 
operative. Forensic linguistics are invaluable, Shuy argues, to point 
out these strategies in order for the jury to be able to more readily 
place themselves in the position of the recorded target during the 
court hearing. Juries, Shuy states, ''should not be expected to have to 
guess or infer when they make their decisions'', (p. 183). He 
concluded with the strong fact that ''[c]riminals should be caught and 
punished, but only by using fair and just methods'', (p. 185). This book 
goes a long way to uncovering some of the underhand methods that 
have, until now, been escaping notice at all levels of the criminal 
justice system.

CRITICAL EVALUATION

This book is an excellent, beautifully written example of forensic 
linguistic analysis. The text is accessible to all levels of researcher, 
providing background information for those who may not be formally 
trained in linguistics. It is detailed enough, however, for professional 
linguists to also gain an extraordinary amount of information into this 
new and growing field of Applied Discourse Analysis.

Throughout his analyses, Shuy provides examples of reformulations 
and strategies that law enforcement and cooperating witnesses could 
have used to allay concerns regarding the strategies employed, and 
to dispel doubts that may be cast upon their investigations if they 
should undergo such forensic linguistic analysis. These will be useful 
for all investigative interviewers, and should become a standard 
module for the training of undercover operatives.

This is a new, expanding and important field of linguistics. Shuy's 
contributions to the area in both this book and his previous 
contribution, ''Language Crimes'', 1993, are immeasurable. As new 
investigators come into the field, it is guaranteed that these early 
works will become classic reference texts.

REFERENCES

Brown, P. and Levinson, S. (1987) ''Politeness: Some Universals in 
Language Use''. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cotterill, J. (2003) ''Language and Power in Court''. Hampshire: 
Palgrave Macmillan.

Grice, H. P. (1967) ''Logic and Conversation'', in Cole, P. and Morgan, 
J. (Eds.) (1975) ''Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts'', p. 43-
58.

Heydon, G. (2005) ''The Language of Police Interviewing: A Critical 
Analysis''. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Lakoff, R. (2000) ''The Language War''. Berkeley and Los Angeles: 
University of California Press.

Shuy, R. (1993) ''Language Crimes''. Oxford: Blackwell.

Sornig, K. (1989) ''Some remarks on linguistic strategies of 
persuasion'', in Wodak, R. (Ed.) ''Language Power and Ideology''. 
Amsterdam: John Benjamins, p. 95-114. 

ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Kerry Linfoot-Ham is a doctoral student at the University of Florida. 
Her research interests focus on police-citizen interaction, with 
particular reference to how Pragmatic theories may be utilized to 
describe and account for suspicions of lying of guilt in suspects and 
witnesses, and how these theories may be used in investigative 
interviewing. Her current work involves observation of 'first-contact' 
interviews between uniformed deputies and officers in response to 
calls for assistance, and how the application of linguistic theories may 
maximize and harmonize the interaction.





-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-16-3453