Place formulations and the incongruity procedure: On police officers’ practices for assembling appearances of wrongdoing

Abstract

‘Place’ is central to police work. Not only does the law prescribe proper uses of public spaces, but officers learn how to infer suspicion from people’s conduct and appearances at particular places. This article uses conversation analysis to examine how officers formulate place to render suspicious behavior accountably visible in their interactions with the public. Data come from recordings of police encounters in two American West Coast cities – the first dataset constitutes dashcam videos, and the second, videos recorded during ride-alongs. Findings suggest that officers use place formulations to (1) indicate violations in legally prescribed uses of space, (2) highlight incongruent elements in civilians’ conduct (e.g. proximity to incriminating objects), serving as a basis for inferring concealed wrongdoing, and (3) cast civilians’ presence in particular geographical areas as ‘out-of-place’. As place formulations do things in the interaction (i.e. accusing, questioning, accounting), the meaning officers ascribe to place is contingent upon ongoing courses of action.