Use of voices in legal opening statements

Abstract

A powerful determinant of the outcome of a trial, the opening statement is the first opportunity for lawyers from each side to construct a factual narrative of events that makes sense and sounds plausible to the jury. Although it is created entirely by a lawyer and delivered in monologic speech, the genre shows traces of other voices. Regarding voice as a semiotic resource that allows reanimators to incorporate multiple perspectives, the study explores lawyers' strategic orchestration of various voices in this initial phase of a trial, focusing on the source, function, and frequency of such voices. Based on a high-profile case, the findings suggest that the opening statement is a highly heteroglossic genre, and the two sides differ in terms of whose voices they choose to reanimate and what purposes those voices may be used to serve, including verbal-action representation, (re)contextualization, legitimation, and deconstruction. These voices not only serve to create and negotiate different realities but also contribute to making the opening statement essentially argumentative, rather than merely factual.