In the field - The development of reasons in criminal proceedings

  • Hannken-Illjes K
  • 7

    Readers

    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • 4

    Citations

    Citations of this article.

Abstract

Abstract  This paper is concerned with argumentation in legal proceedings, namely in criminal cases. My interest is to explore how in the legal realm different argumentation fields interact, the juridical field being just one of them. The paper lays out an approach of studying argumentation in the legal realm in the framework of an ethnographic methodology by identifying the “topical rules” the participants in criminal trials adhere to. Suggesting the notion of field-dependence as a good starting point for the analysis of legal argumentation, I will give several examples of different fields of argumentation interacting in criminal proceedings. The examination of what counts as a good reason and how arguments are employed, negotiated, and evaluated within a criminal proceeding might shed light on the practice of constructing facts and arriving at decisions in court. It can furthermore point at the constitution of legal rationality and how it is produced in criminal trials. I argue that rationality in criminal proceedings is interactively accomplished by negotiating different standards of validity.

Author-supplied keywords

  • Argumentation fields
  • Ethnography
  • Legal argumentation
  • Rationality

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document

Authors

  • Kati Hannken-Illjes

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free