Referential practice and contested identities in legal narratives

Abstract

Adopting a social constructionist perspective on identity, the study explores the form, functions, and frequency of person reference terms lawyers employ to construct and contest the identities of the defendants and victims in their narratives. Based upon six opening statements from three high-profile trials, the quantitative and qualitative analysis reveals that the prosecution and the defense differ starkly in their referential practice, and that referential terms constitute a prime mechanism that aids in the construction and ascription of polarized identities. These reference terms function to mediate jurors' perceptions, negotiate reality and (de)legitimize guilt and responsibility claims in this institutional setting.