Forensic Linguistics Can Words Help Solve a Crime

Forensic Linguistics: Can Words Help Solve a Crime? Margaret van Naerssen, Ph. D. Smithsonian Institution September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005

Forensic Sciences September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 2

What I’ll Cover • What Forensic Linguistics is /is Not • How several types of cases might be approached and • Provide examples from various areas September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 3

Stereotypes Not Study of Dead Languages Not Speaker of Many Languages www. un. org September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 4

An International Leader in Forensic Linguistics Analyzed • Taped conversations • Taped speeches • Taped interviews • Written documents Consulted on 500+ cases Testified as expert witness • 52 times • criminal & civil cases • 26 states • Impeachment trials in US Senate & House of Repres. • International Criminal Tribunal trials September 21, 2005 Roger Shuy, Ph. D Prof Emeritus, retired Georgetown Univ. Now in Montana Sociolinguistics http: //www. rogershuy. com © van Naerssen 2005 5

An International Leader in Forensic Linguistics • International Association of Forensic Linguists, founding president • Forensic Linguistics: The International Journal of Language and Law, founding editor • Expert witness reports on -150 cases -3 terrorist trials, Northern Ire. -academic plagiarism, Hong Kong -twice in Court of Appeal 1998 Derek Bentley Appeal guilty verdict overturned after 46 years September 21, 2005 Malcolm Coulthard Prof. of English Language & Linguistics University of Birmingham, UK Discourse Analysis (written, spoken) © van Naerssen 2005 6

Linguistics? Scientific study of human language from various perspectives September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 7

Language As a Product of Human Evolution • • Evolution of relevant anatomical parts Survival & social needs Long-term language changes, language death Long-term impact of environment & culture Rudolph Zallinger, ASCENT OF MAN from “Early Man” (1965). Courtesy of Time. Life books. http: //www. learner. org/channel/courses/biology/archive/images/1678. html September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 8

Language as a Window into the Mind Structured system of mental representations • Cognitive development, language & thought • Language development: first & additional languages • Study of meaning (semantics) September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 9

Language as a Means of Communication & Social Interaction written oral non-verbal September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 10

Applied Linguistics Application of theories & knowledge from linguistics to help solve problems in the real world Draws from other academic disciplines including anthropology, psychology, sociology, education, testing & statistics, etc. September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 11

Forensic Linguistics can be broadly defined as the interface between language & the law in judicial & law enforcement settings language September 21, 2005 law © van Naerssen 2005 12

Ballistics • targets • projectiles • residue September 21, 2005 Forensic Entomology • types of insects • time/ life cycle • quantity http: //folk. uio. no/mostarke/forens_ent/forensic_en tomology. html © van Naerssen 2005 13

Looking for Patterns Like experts in other Forensic Sciences--Linguists look for patterns and inconsistencies in patterns September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 14

Linguistic Resources Analysis of recorded speech • • • Conversation analysis using transcripts Language testing and analysis Other analyses What tools are available? Am I the right person to do this? Do I need more language samples & related information? Is it appropriate for me to collect this? September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 15

Conversation Analysis • Examine the turns in a conversation • Who? says what? when? • Who introduces a new topic? How frequently is new topic re-introduced by same person? • How does the other person respond? • Do the speakers appear understand each other? • Do speakers overlap? • What is the speaker doing with language? and so on…. September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 16

THE LEGAL QUESTION Did the Russian immigrant, Mr. K, lie in his insurance claim interview & in his claim application in order to collect money for roof damage repairs resulting from a snow storm on February 5? September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 17

Perjury? Insurance Fraud? September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005

4 Grounds for Perjury 1. Did the person understand the questions? 2. Did the person intend to deceive? 3. Did the person actually try to deceive? 4. Was the deception related to another charge in the case? September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 19

Direct Linguistic Evidence Needed of oral interactions? Available? No direct evidence Transcript of insurance Interview *** Handwritten police reports of 2 home visits September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 20

Matching Patterns oral interaction : Written records insurance interview transcript of insurance interview language testing interview September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 21

Findings 1. No significant differences in patterns of English use across testing & insurance interviews. 2. Limited control of the past tense (understanding & speaking) –only simple past 3. If specific time not mentioned, he seemed to guess the time was Feb. 5, the day of the snowstorm damage. Have you ever…? While you were living in the house…? September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 22

Common Q-ing Strategy Earlier ? • • FEB 5 OK Later + Future ? Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 5 Q 6 Q 7 Q 8 September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 23

First Condition for Perjury FAILS Did the person understand the question(s)? Highly unlikely Mr. K accurately understood many of the relevant questions September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 24

No Evidence of Fraud September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 25

General Knowledge vs Expert Knowlege Expert can’t testify on what is considered common or general knowledge September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 26

General Knowledge • • • Identify main bone structures Diagnose medical condition? No! Expert Knowledge Native-speaker judges, jury, lawyers • Speak language naturally • Have feel for meaning of a word Linguistic experts should add more September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 27

Help in Investigations or in Trials • Provide investigative tools • Assist in a legal case (investigation or trial) • Linguistic analysis, ALONE, frequently doesn’t solve a case or win the argument in court • Can’t get inside of head September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 28

Forensic Linguistics can be broadly defined as the interface between language & the law in judicial & law enforcement settings language law *Research-based* *“Live” Cases* September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 29

Handwriting & Document Analysis NOT Forensic Linguistics September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 30

Some Areas of Forensic Linguistics • Communication between law enforcement officers and witnesses, suspects, etc. • Comprehensibility of the police caution issued to suspects • Use of linguistic evidence in court • Courtroom discourse • Court & law enforcement interpreting & translating September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 31

Aboriginal Justice & Asylum Issues • Analyzes Australian Aboriginal English in legal settings, especially the courtroom & educates law enforcement • With team of linguists worldwide, developed Guidelines for the Use of Language Analysis in Relation to Questions of National Origin in Refugee Cases September 21, 2005 Diana Eades • • Australia and USA Ph. D. The University of Queensland Linguistic Anthropology Currently Dept of Second Language Studies University of Hawai'i at Manoa © van Naerssen 2005 32

Forensic Linguistics also includes • Phonological variation in identity • Readability/comprehensibility of legal documents • Trademark disputes • Authorship attribution, for both written & spoken language, incl. threatening communications • Interviews with children in the legal system September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 33

Phonological Variation: Individual and Geographic http: //alt-usage-english. org/plosive_question. html September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 34

Help Identify Type of “person of interest” September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 35

Phonology: Individual and Geographic Variation • Bomb threats to Pan Am counter, LA airport • Disgruntled employee (New Yorker) sounded like recordings of threats William Labov, Dept of Linguistics http: //www. ling. upenn. edu/~wlabov/Papers/How Igot. html September 21, 2005 Ph. D. University of Pennsylvania © van Naerssen 2005 36

Comprehensibility • Comprehensibility of the police caution issued to suspects • Readability/comprehensibility of legal documents – Jury Instructions – Contracts September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 37

Jury Instructions • CALIFORNIA Supreme Court Rulings & Penal code, Jury instructions made simple, August 26, 2005 Previous: "Innocent misrecollection is not uncommon. '‘ Peter Tiersma, JD, Ph. D. Linguist and Law Prof. Loyola University, Los Angeles, CA New: "People sometimes honestly forget things or make mistakes about what they remember. '' Bethany Dumas, JD, Ph. D. Dept. of English University of Tennessee September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 38

Plain English? • Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth herein, in the event Buyer orders in writing changes which are approved by Seller or selects extras as provided in this Paragraph, any required payments by Buyer made with respect thereto are not refundable to Buyer under any circumstances (including but not limited to the provisions of Paragraph 7 hereof regarding Buyer's inability to obtain a mortgage commitment), unless settlement does not occur because of Seller's default hereunder or unless this Agreement is terminated pursuant to Paragraph 25 hereof. (86 words) (housing contract case) September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 39

Pennsylvania Statutes Trade and Commerce (Title 73) Plain Language Consumer Contract Act § 2505. Test of readability. • All consumer contracts shall be written, organized and designed so that they are easy to read & understand. • Guidelines were established covering 8 language categories & visual/ graphic features September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 40

Violations of Plain Language Guidelines September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 41

Trademarks When does a trademark become generic? -Kleenex, Xerox- Imagine the “Golden Arches” here • Mc. Donalds v. Quality Inns • Mc. Sleep Inns Mc=low cost, standardized, fast, convenient? Due to trademark regulations, I can’t show the Mc. Donalds trademark! (Shuy) September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 42

Authorship Attribution/ Identity • Bomb threats • Ransom notes • Other threats of violence • Verification of suicide notes • Hoax emergency calls, other hoaxes • Scandalous or libelous communications • Claims or denials of authorship of texts in evidence [wills, reports, etc. ] September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 43

Where to start? Questioned Document ? ? ? ? Who created it? September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 44

Did X write the Q-Document? Questioned Document ? September 21, 2005 Known Document(s) © van Naerssen 2005 45

What kind of person might have written the Q-Document? Questioned Document(s) ? September 21, 2005 No Known Documents ? © van Naerssen 2005 46

Not all analyses of language evidence is forensic linguistics September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 47

--A Task-NOT a Single Technique • Linguistics • Content Analysis • Risk Analysis • Style • Statistics September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 48

“Bugged” Communications • • • Multiple speakers Confidential informant Overlapping discussions Poor transcripts Visual context missing September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 49

US v John Z. De. Lorean (narcotics) Conversation analysis • • • Ambiguous references “interim deal” “we” “that” Wrong assumptions Evidence of distancing self (Shuy) September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 50

005 1, 2 er 2 mb epte Love Triangle 05 n 20 sse aer an N ©v Case Summary

005 1, 2 er 2 b tem Sep Love Triangle-1 Arturo Juan 05 n 20 sse aer an N ©v Luisa

005 1, 2 er 2 b tem Sep Love Triangle-2 Luisa 05 n 20 sse aer an N ©v Juan

05 , 20 r 21 mbe te Sep Love Triangle-3 sse aer an N ©v 05 n 20 Luisa

Police Interview -No English skills -3: 1 -Police interpreter -No attorney -No audio recording -Misleading Qs September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 55

Missing Voices • Interviewer asks in English • Reporter records in Eng. September 21, 2005 -Interpreter asks Suspect in Sp. -Suspect replies in Sp. -Interpreter transl. to Eng. © van Naerssen 2005 56

Conversation Analysis It’s ALL there in the text! September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 57

Questioning Patterns Police interviewing similar to trial? Direct questioning Attorney questions own witness Cross-examination Opposing attorney questions witness, trying to limit what witness can say • Asks many open-ended questions • Lets witness tell own story September 21, 2005 • Asks leading questions, • Controls response—yes/no • Builds in assumptions © van Naerssen 2005 58

Shifting Responsibility • Closed questions yes/no • Leading questions & statements suggesting she was jointly involved in planning the murder • Fronting Luisa, putting her in the beginnings of comments about planning the murder September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 59

Luisa’s Responses Q: While you and Juan were talking about killing Arturo, did he tell you what he was going to do with the body? A: No. 1. Luisa appears to answer information part of questions but doesn’t react to shift in responsibility – except 1 x A yes/no response makes it look like she agrees with the whole Q, incl. the shift in responsibility, 2. Content in some assumptions NOT consistent with content of her earlier responses. Where did content come from? If not from Luisa? September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 60

Creating a Confession Leading & complex questions + Luisa’s interpreted short responses=>confession that Luisa planned (with Juan) to murder Arturo But we don’t know how much Luisa actually understood in the questions & what was translated • no audio of interpreter asking in Spanish • no audio of Luisa’s actual responses in Spanish September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 61

Death Penalty? 05 n 20 sse aer an N ©v Luisa

Forensic Linguistics Can Help Serve Justice Email: mvannaerssen@immaculata. edu or margaret. vannaerssen@gmail. com September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005

• Smithsonian Associates support staff • Amanda Albright, Instructional Design Specialist, Immaculata University • Hans van Naerssen • Mac. Kenzie Gray, junior, Immaculata University • Sociology, criminology, and sciences classes of Judge John Anthony, Frank Hartleroad, & Sister Rose Mulligan, IHM, & AV staff, Immaculata University • Roger Shuy, Malcolm Coulthard, John Olsson, & other forensic linguists who brainstormed with me Summer 2005 September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 64

The International Association of Forensic Linguists IAFL http: //www. iafl. org/ September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 65

Full References in Presentation http: //alt-usage-english. org/plosive_question. html http: //www. english. bham. ac. uk/who/coulthard. htm http: //folk. uio. no/mostarke/forens_ent/forensic_entomology. html http: //www. hawaii. edu/sls/eades http: //www. iafl. org http: //www. ling. upenn. edu/wlabov/Papers/How. Igot. html http: //www. rogershuy. com http: //www. un. org Butters, Ron. 9/30/05. Personal communications: posting on Forensic Linguists List – discussion list, referencing collected volume of Raven Mc. David. Pennsylvania Statutes Trade and Commerce (Title 73) Plain Language Consumer Contract Act § 2505. Test of readability Shuy, Roger. nd. Using a Linguist in Tape Cases. Unpublished paper, pp. 11 -12, and personal communication, 9/8/05. Case is also discussed in Shuy’s 1993 book, Language Crimes. Shuy, Roger. 2002. Linguistic Battles in Trademark Disputes. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Mac. Millan. Zallinger, Rudolph. 1965. Ascent of Man from “Early Man”. Listed on http: //www. learner. org/channel/courses/biology/archive/images/1678. html Courtesy of Time. Life books Extensive references forensic linguistics can be found on the website of International Association of Forensic Linguists, www. iafl. org as well as on websites of several members, including Blackwell, Dumas, and Tiersma. September 21, 2005 © van Naerssen 2005 66