Advertisement

Mother, Monster, Mrs, I: A Critical Evaluation of Gendered Naming Strategies in English Sentencing Remarks of Women Who Kill

Article

Abstract

In this article, we take a novel approach to analysing English sentencing remarks in cases of women who kill. We apply computational, quantitative, and qualitative methods from corpus linguistics to analyse recurrent patterns in a collection of English Crown Court sentencing remarks from 2012 to 2015, where a female defendant was convicted of a homicide offence. We detail the ways in which women who kill are referred to by judges in the sentencing remarks, providing frequency information on pronominal, nominative, and categorising naming strategies. In discussion of the various patterns of preference both across and within these categories (e.g. pronoun vs. nomination, title + surname vs. forename + surname), we remark upon the identities constructed through the references provided. In so doing, we: (1) quantify the extent to which members of the judiciary invoke patriarchal values and gender stereotypes within their sentencing remarks to construct female defendants, and (2) identify particular identities and narratives that emerge within sentencing remarks for women who kill. We find that judges refer to women who kill in a number of ways that systematically create dichotomous narratives of degraded victims or dehumanised monsters. We also identify marked absences in naming strategies, notably: physical identification normally associated with narrativization of women’s experiences; and the first person pronoun, reflecting omissions of women’s own voices and narratives of their lived experiences in the courtroom.

Keywords

Corpus linguistics Forensic linguistics Language and law Feminist legal methodology Critical discourse analysis Women offenders Women who kill Interdisiplinary approaches Discourse analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank our colleagues at Cardiff University School of English, Communication and Philosophy, and Lancaster University Law School for their comments on earlier drafts of this article.

References

  1. 1.
    Allen, Hilary. 1987. Justice Unbalanced: Gender, Psychiatry and Judicial Decisions. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Almog, Shulamit. 2001. As I Read, I Weep: in Praise of Judicial Narrative. Oklahoma City Law Review 26: 471.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ashe, Marie. 1991. The ‘Bad Mother’ in Law and Literature: A Problem of Representation. Hastings Law Journal 43: 1017–1038.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ballinger, Anette. 2012. A Muted Voice from the Past: The ‘Silent Silencing of Ruth Ellis. Social and Legal Studies 21(4): 445–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barlow, Charlotte. 2015. Silencing the Other: Gendered Representations of Co-Accused Women Offenders. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice 54(5): 469–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Beauvoir, Simone de. 2010. The Second Sex (trans: Constance Borde and Sheila Malovany-Chevallier). London: Random House.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Becker, Sarah, and Jill McCorkel. 2011. The Gender of Criminal Opportunity: The Impact of Male Co-Offenders on Women’s Crime. Feminist Criminology 6(2): 79–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boshoff, Anel. 2007. Women as the Subject of (Family) Law. In Choice and Consent: Feminist Engagements with Law and Subjectivity, ed. Rosemary Hunter and Sharon Cowan, 41–57. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carline, Anna. 2005. Zoorah Shah: An ‘Unusual Woman’. Social and Legal Studies 14(2): 215–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Conley, John, and William M. O’Barr. 1998. Just Words: Law, Language, and Power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Coulthard, Malcolm. 1994. On the Use of Corpora in the Analysis of Forensic Texts. The International Journal of Speech Language and the Law 1(1): 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Coulthard, Malcolm, and Janet Cotterill. 2006. Introducing Forensic Linguistics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Courts and Tribunals Judiciary. Judgments. https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/judgments/. Accessed 30 Dec 2016.
  15. 15.
    Cunningham, Clark. 1992. The Lawyer as Translator, Representation as Text: Towards an Ethnography of Legal Discourse. Cornell Law Review 77: 1298–1387.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Easteal, Patricia, Lorana Bartels, Noni Nelson, and Kate Holland. 2015. How are Women Who Kill Portrayed in Newspaper Media? Connections with Social Values and the Legal System. Women’s Studies International Forum 51: 31–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Edwards, Susan. 1984. Women on Trial: A Study of the Female Suspect, Defendant and Offender in the Criminal Law and Criminal Justice System. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Edwards, Susan. 1996. Sex and Gender in the Legal Process. London: Blackstone Press Limited.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Habermas, Jürgen. 1977. Erkenntis und Interesse. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Halliday, Michael. 1970. Language Structure and Language Function. In New Horizons in Linguistics, ed. John Lyons, 140–165. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hardie, Andrew. 2014. Modest XML for Corpora: Not a Standard, But a Suggestion. ICAME Journal 38(1): 73–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Heffer, Chris. 2005. The Language of Jury Trial: A Corpus-Aided Analysis of Legal-Lay Discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Henderson, Claire, and Graham Thornicroft. 2009. Stigma and Discrimination in Mental Illness: Time to Change. The Lancet 373(9679): 1928–1930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hirsch, Susan. 1998. Pronouncing and Persevering: Gender and the Discourses of Disputing in an African Islamic Court. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hook, Donald. 1984. First Names and Titles as Solidarity and Power Semantics in English. IRAL 22(3): 183–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hunter, Rosemary, Clare McGlynn, and Ericka Rackley. 2010. Feminist Judgments: An Introduction. In Feminist Judgments: From Theory to Practice, ed. Rosemary Hunter, Clare McGlynn, and Erika Rackley, 3–29. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jackson, Bernard. 1988. Law, Fact and Narrative Coherence. Merseyside: Deborah Charles Publications.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lacey, Nicola. 1998. Unspeakable Subjects: Feminist Essays in Legal and Social Theory. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Leech, Geoffrey. 1999. The Distribution and Function of Vocatives in American and British English Conversation. In Out of Corpora: Studies in Honour of Stig Johansson, ed. Hilde Hasselgård and Signe Oksefjell, 107–118. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lips, Hilary. 2007. Sex and Gender: An Introduction. 6th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Matoesian, Gregory. 2001. Law and the Language of Identity: Discourse in the William Kennedy Smith Rape Trial. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    McCarthy, Michael, and Anne O’Keefe. 2003. ‘What’s in a Name?’: Vocatives in Casual Conversations and Radio Phone-in Calls. In Corpus Analysis: Language Structure and Language Use, ed. Pepi Leistyna and Charles F. Meyer, 153–185. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    McEnery, Tony, and Andrew Hardie. 2011. Corpus Linguistics: Method, theory, Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
  35. 35.
    Morris, Allison, and Ania Wilczynski. 1994. Rocking the Cradle: Mothers Who Kill Their Children. In Moving Targets: Women, Murder and Representation, ed. Helen Birch, 198–217. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Morrissey, Belinda. 2003. When Women Kill: Questions of Agency and Subjectivity. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Nicolson, Donald. 1995. Telling Tales: Gender Discrimination, Gender Construction and Battered Women Who Kill. Feminist Legal Studies 3(2): 185–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Nicolson, Donald. 2000. Criminal Law and Feminism. In Feminist Perspectives on Criminal Law, ed. Donald Nicolson and Lois Bibbings, 1–28. London: Cavendish Publishing.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Office for National Statistics (ONS). 2016. Appendix tables: focus on violent crime and sexual offences. Appendix table 2.17a. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/compendium/focusonviolentcrimeandsexualoffences/yearendingmarch2015/bulletintablesfocusonviolentcrimeandsexualoffencesyearendingmarch2015 Accessed 23 June 2017.
  40. 40.
    Philips, Susan. 1998. Ideology in the Language of Judges: How Judges Practice Law, Politics, and Courtroom Control. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Potts, Amanda, and Anne Lise Kjær. 2015. Constructing Achievement in the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY): A Corpus-Based Critical Discourse Analysis. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 29(3): 525–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    R v Dennehy, Stretch, Layton and Moore. 2014. Crown Court at Cambridge sitting at the Central Criminal Court. https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Documents/Judgments/the-queen-v-dennehy-sentencing-remarks-28022014.pdf. Accessed 18 Aug 2017.
  44. 44.
  45. 45.
  46. 46.
    R v Matthews and Hoare. 2015. Bristol Crown Court.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Rackley, Ericka. 2010. The Art and Craft Writing Judgments: Notes on the Feminist Judgments Project. In Feminist Judgments: From Theory to Practice, ed. Rosemary Hunter, Clare McGlynn, and Erika Rackley, 44–58. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Roberts, Dorothy. 1993. Motherhood and Crime. Iowa Law Review 79: 99–123.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Rock, Frances. 2007. Communicating Rights: The Language of Arrest and Detention. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Seal, Lizzie. 2010. Women, Murder and Femininity—Gender Representations of Women Who Kill. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sentencing Guidelines Council. 2004. Overarching Principles: Seriousness. Guidelines. https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/web_seriousness_guideline.pdf. Accessed 23 June 2017.
  52. 52.
    Van Leeuwen, Theo. 2008. Discourse and Practice: New Tools for Critical Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Weare, Siobhan. 2013. ’The Mad’, ‘The Bad’, ‘The Victim’: Gendered Constructions of Women Who Kill Within the Criminal Justice System. Laws 2(3): 337–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Weare, Siobhan. 2017. Bad, Mad or Sad? Legal Language, Narratives, and Identity Constructions of Women Who Kill Their Children in England and Wales. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 30: 201–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Worrall, Anne. 1990. Offending Women: Female Lawbreakers and the Criminal Justice System. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of English, Communication and Philosophy (ENCAP)Cardiff UniversityCardiffUK
  2. 2.Law SchoolLancaster UniversityLancasterUK

Personalised recommendations