The Narrative Construction Of Courtroom Statements And Its Impacts On The Jury Verdict

Courtroom trial is a form of legal implement, which is one of the most significantlegal activities. The opening statement and closing statement are the essential links andthe most complete display in the courtroom speech, serving as critical occasions forattorneys to highlight continuously and freely their views in the most detailed waysbefore the judges and the jury. The statements will ultimately exert influence on theirjudgment or verdict which consequently has significant impacts on the destiny of theaccused, and the properties and reputation of the plaintiff and the defendant. Therefore,research on courtroom speech, especially on the opening statement and the closingstatement, has theoretical and practical importance.This study intends to explore the statements in the courtroom from the aspect ofthe narrative construction. It is natural for all the participants to tend to use suchmultifarious speech and linguistic strategies as phonological, lexical, and syntacticalstrategies in the opening statement and the closing statement to gain the bestpersuasive effects in the trial, and the speech strategies may contain rhetoric, topic,questioning and contextual strategies to deconstruct the opponent’s story. Thesestrategies, especially the narrative constructions can be combined together and utilizedby the prosecution or the defense to construct their own story and deconstruct theopponent’s story, as is shown from the Timothy McVeigh case and the0. J. Simpsonmurder case, where narrative construction of the stories of the prosecution and of thedefense differs, and weighs differently as the jury renders its verdict.Based on the analysis of the organizational strategies employed by the prosecutorin the opening statement in the Timothy McVeigh case, and by addressing the narrativestrategies used and articulated by both the prosecution and the defense in their closingarguments in the0. J. Simpson murder case, the present study concludes theprosecution or the defense may employ such narrative strategies as quotation fromeminent persons, rhetoric devices, etc.，to refute the opposite side’s statement or castdoubt on their narrative coherence, legal relevance, discourse frame, for the purpose oftaking advantage of the emotion of the judge and the jury, deconstructing theopponent’s story, and composing a more convincing narrative style, thus prove to be more effective to give prominence to events or states, and consequently succeed incasting doubt on the character of the opponent and rebutting his statement andmotivation, and ultimately win the case. The present research holds that courtroomnarrative research will broaden the view of the jury or the judge, which will ultimatelyfacilitate the finding of the facts and contribute to precise verdict or judgment．...