This is a study of police interviewing using an integrated approach, drawing on conversation analysis (CA), critical discourse analysis (CDA) and pragmatics. The study focuses on the balance of power and control, finding that in particular the institutional status of the participants, the discursive roles assigned to them by the context, and their relative knowledge, are significant factors affecting the dynamics of the discourse. Four discursive features are identified as particularly significant, and a detailed analysis of the complex interplay of these features shows that power and control are constantly under negotiation, and are always open to challenge and resistance. Further it is shown that discursive dominance is not necessarily advantageous to participants, due to the specific goals and purposes of the police interview context. A wider consideration of the context illustrates the contribution that linguistics can make to the use of police interview data as evidence in the UK criminal justice system.

Police-suspect interviews in England and Wales are a multi-audience, multi-purpose, transcontextual mode of discourse. They are conducted as part of the initial investigation into a crime, but are subsequently recontextualized through the judicial process, ultimately being presented in court as evidence against the interviewee. The communicative challenges posed by multiple future audiences are investigated by applying Bell's (1984) audience design model to the police interview, and the resulting “poor fit” demonstrates why this context is discursively counterintuitive to participants. Further, data analysis indicates that interviewer and interviewee, although ostensibly addressing each other, may orientate to different audiences, with potentially serious consequences. As well as providing new insight into police-suspect interview interaction, this article seeks to extend understanding of the influence of audience on interaction at the discourse level, and to contribute to the development of theoretical models for contexts with multiple or asynchronous audiences. (Audience design, audience orientation, police interviews, forensic linguistics)*

No abstract

This article addresses a serious, but currently unacknowledged, problem of evidential consistency regarding police-suspect interview evidence. It sheds light on flaws in current criminal procedure through the lens of linguistics, focusing on key stages of currently accepted practice which fly in the face of what linguists have long known about language. It demonstrates that, in stark contrast to the strict principles of preservation applied to physical evidence, interview data go through significant transformation between their creation in the interview room and their presentation in the courtroom, especially through changes in format between written and spoken text. It argues that, despite the safeguards provided by PACE 1984, there is nonetheless a level of routine distortion and contamination unintentionally built into the current system of presenting police interviews as evidence in England and Wales.

This article presents an analysis of the discursive construction of evidence in an English police interview with a rape suspect. The analytic findings differ from previous research on police-suspect interview discourse, in that here the interviewers actively lead an interviewee to produce defence evidence. The article seeks to make the following contributions: (i) it demonstrates the interactional mechanisms through which the interviewers co-construct the interviewee's own version of events, and highlights the potential legal ramifications by focusing on the construction of one key evidential aspect, namely, consent; (ii) it lends weight to the hypothesis that interviewer agendas are strongly determinative of interview outcomes in terms of the evidential account produced, while making the important new contribution of showing that this is not simply a case of police interviewers being inevitably prosecution-focused; and (iii) it aims to provoke further investigation into the significance of interviewer discursive influence in cases where consent is at issue, against a backdrop of increasing numbers of rape cases being discontinued by the police at this early stage of the criminal justice process.