"Even if acting in extremis..." The Construction of Guilty Behaviour in Wrongful Convictions: A Thematic Discourse Analysis of Court Transcripts
Date
2022
Authors
Turner, Ellie
Editors
Advisors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Type:
Thesis
Citation
Statement of Responsibility
Conference Name
Abstract
Wrongful convictions have devastating consequences on the lives of those convicted, their friends, families and the wider community. In the United States alone it has been estimated that 41,000 additional crimes could occur annually when the wrong person is jailed. Research demonstrates that law enforcement professionals such as police officers, lawyers, judges, and juries can develop tunnel vision when approaching criminal cases, leading to instances of interpreting evidence with a preconceived notion of guilt. How such interpretations of suspect behaviour are discursively constructed within court proceedings is yet to be explored. This study aims to fill said gap in the literature by conducting a thematic discourse analysis of wrongful conviction court transcripts. Four cases of wrongful convictions that discussed suspect behaviour, located in Australia and the United States, were analysed through a social constructionist lens to understand how the social world of the courtroom allows for the construction of behaviour as guilty. The thematic analysis generated two overarching themes: Behaviour Described Within the Framework of Guilt When it Could Easily be Described as Innocent and The Same Argument Made by Drawing From Contradictory Ideas. The discourse analysis explored the techniques utilised to construct behaviour as guilty. Results from this study contribute to a deeper understanding of how construction of behaviour as guilty can lead to unfair and incorrect assessments which contribute to wrongful convictions. Keywords: wrongful convictions, tunnel vision, thematic discourse analysis, fact construction, court room transcripts
School/Discipline
School of Psychology
Dissertation Note
Thesis (B.PsychSc(Hons)) -- University of Adelaide, School of Psychology, 2022
Provenance
This electronic version is made publicly available by the University of Adelaide in accordance with its open access policy for student theses.
Copyright in this thesis remains with the author. This thesis may incorporate third party material which has been used by the author pursuant to Fair Dealing exceptions. If you are the author of this thesis and do not wish it to be made publicly available, or you are the owner of any included third party copyright material you wish to be removed from this electronic version, please complete the take down form located at: http://www.adelaide.edu.au/legals
Description
This item is only available electronically.