Discourse Analysis In Criminal Justice
conducted on behavior between patrol officers and motorists. When motorist were asked to pull over for traffic violations, their reactions vary, such as the usage of sympathy, justification, mitigations, ignorance, and remorse. In addition, it was noted that police officers tend to depersonalize their personal discretion to the responsibility of the police hierarchical bureaucracy, in order to avoid negative social sanctions from the public.
In past studies, the Criminal Justice system has analyzed the social functions between accounts in offensive behaviors. These institutions such as police and correctional services have researched the descriptions about speech acts (4). When exploring the social functions, the studies were based on scenario-based vignettes (5). Accounts on violations focused on “socially approved” aspects on what is considered a socially accepted justification for such offensive acts (5). Furthermore, Mills explored the ‘vocabularies of motive’ of differing deviant acts to display how excuses and justifications interrelated to interpersonal crimes (6). For instance, in rape trials, the convicted rapist justifies their actions and frames the victim, while shifting him or herself away from the blame. Hence, these social functions of justifications were examined by the criminal justice on law violations.
When analyzing the utterance, will it be considered an interruption of sequence due to Korryn requesting identification prior to being told of her…