Turner, Ellie2024-07-022024-07-022022https://hdl.handle.net/2440/141526This item is only available electronically.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 transcriptsHonours; PsychologyThesis