Purpose and developments

The study has focused on courtroom interaction and documents in connection with trials related to street crime. The aim has been to examine how notions of culture, ethnicity, gender and age are negotiated in conversation practices and legal documents.

The purpose has remained unchanged, but some research questions have turned out to be less relevant, while new have called for attention. The question of differences between district courts in the big city and smaller towns has proved less important as we noted similar patterns are appearing in both environments. Examples of such patterns are detectable notions of cultural difference that may have consequences for the rule of law and commonly encountered shortcomings in interpreted hearings.

Implementation

We have observed interaction and analysed documents from 40 trials with approximately the same amount of trials in a big city as in smaller cities. To prevent identification of trials/district courts/individual legal representatives, we have increased the number of observed “small city” district courts. We have also extended the empirical material with a number of interviews with plaintiffs and interpreters. For the rest, the design has followed the structure specified in the application.

Most important results

1. Differences in "atmosphere" have been noted between “migration background trials” and trials where the parties have a Swedish background. We have also seen differences between how (young) men and women are treated, but the pattern changes when adding other social identities (such as ethnicity, age and class). Differences in the atmosphere appear as the presence or lack of laughter, playfulness, and informal conversations during the trial and breaks, but also as distinctions between laughing “with” or laughing “at”, or through patronising and sarcastic comments about participants with a migration background. Thus, differences rarely appear as pronounced references to culture and ethnicity, but as embodied and assumed ways of interacting that follow social/cultural manuscripts for action. However, pronounced "culturalizing" interaction has been noted in some trials, for example, when legal professionals refer to the foreign background of the parties or a “swedishness” that the parties are said not to master. These findings are discussed in an international article for the Sage journal Ethnicities and are the main focus of an article under review in a Nordic socio-legal journal.

2. The relationship between authority, performance and emotions is of great importance to credibility during interaction. Language constraints and unfamiliarity with court proceedings and social expectations place several of the observed participants in an unfavourable position. It becomes important for individuals to act in manners that seem "authentic" in relation to the identity of the actor and Swedish norms and values. Besides ascribed ethnicity, age, and gender, social position is an important component with significance for the ability to express credibility during the interaction. Ultimately, this may have an impact on the actors' trust in the legal system and on its legitimacy. Meanwhile, individual legal representatives make a difference. Noted deviations from the described patterns appear to depend on the characteristics of specific legal representatives. A certain prosecutor, or judge, can contribute to respectful interaction while others contribute to problematic trials. This result is discussed in a couple of published international publications, as well as in one in review process, and in international conference presentations. The interest for intersectionality perspectives on trial interaction appears to be growing internationally, while it has not yet attracted as much interest in Sweden.

3. Interpreted hearings have emerged as deeply problematic. Incorrect interpretations and grammar, uninterpreted corrections and various insertions/omissions have led to misunderstandings and emotional reactions such as anger, irritation or silence, which may affect legal certainty. Even in cases where parties speak with an accent abruptions often occur. Furthermore, legal representatives sometimes make use of language deficiencies to question the credibility of the counterparty. This result is discussed in several international articles, two of which are already published, one under review and one under construction. It has also been presented at international conference presentations. The importance of interpretation in a legal context is of great international interest, and invitations to international conferences have followed the publications.

New research questions

The findings of shortcomings during interpreted hearings raises research questions about the potential distribution of the problem and the consequences it has for the outcome in different legal contexts. It also calls for studies about the consequences it has for the interpreted parties’ experiences of participation the judicial system. Furthermore, questions about the interpreters' experiences in the legal context are raised.
The findings call for more research regarding the defendants’ experiences of the legal process. Interviews with defendants have raised questions concerning what consequences the interaction, patterns and forms of address in court are having for the participants’ trust in the legal system and the legitimacy of Swedish authoritative practice.

To the above question of trust in the legal system can be linked another research issue that follows upon the combination of racist social media forums and Sweden's relatively generous principle of public access, where citizens can order all material relating to individual criminal cases. Public access to sensitive material is significantly more limited in many other countries. The project has drawn attention to how trial interaction and documents have been used in several trials to build up a racist rhetoric on the Internet where the accused, but also plaintiffs, witnesses and relatives, are exposed and persecuted in various social forums. It has serious consequences for the participants, and for the credibility of democracy as an institution that guarantees fundamental protection for all. In connection with this issue, the ethical advice is blunt and sometimes incorrect. For example, open observations may lead to the use of research results with malicious intent on the Internet and identification of individual anonymized cases.

International dimensions

The project has continuously participated in the international research environment at the Linnaeus University Center for Concurrences in Colonial and Postcolonial Studies. This participation has enabled workshops in Warwick, UK and Sweden with participants from around the world. We also participated at the Law & Society world conference in 2016.

Distribution of results

Hitherto, publishing has been directed towards international peer-reviewed, high-quality journals with open access. Given the international interest, we will continue to publish in international academic journals while intending to publish results also in a Nordic context. One additional article is accepted by the Nordic journal Retfaerd, and another is being reviewed in the Journal of Law and Society. Three articles are being processed for international publications with emphasis on ethnography and socio-legal research. One researcher seeks funds to explore and publish the findings in an English-language monograph.

Conferences, workshops and presentations for other researchers are placed in the publication list. Here we address collaboration and popular science presentations. For instance, the project has participated in the "integration network" at Linnaeus University. This network consists of representatives from university research and administration, as well as representatives from different local and regional authorities who work with integration in the asylum context. Albeit indirectly, the issue of integration has been touched upon as some of the observed trials and interviews have related to newly arrived asylum seekers. Thus, we have been able to contribute to and profit from the meetings that have taken place within this network. Also, we have presented findings in popular science contexts such as:

‘Production of differences in a trial context. Language and notions about culture in court conversation and documents.’ Presentation at the "Day of research/Forskningens dag” (for the social work profession), Växjö, April 27, 2017.

‘“Not the sharpest knives in the drawer” '- Language and culture in court interaction’. Presentation at Fojo (Institute for journalism education) 7 December 2016.

‘“Did they want to live like their Swedish comrades?”- Production of differences in courtroom interaction’, at the “Research Day on Integration/Migration” (for professionals, authority representatives and researchers), Linnaeus University, 7 October 2016.

'"I do not want your money!" – Social construction and emotions in court action ". Presentation at Changing Social Work at Malmö University, March 12, 2014.

The project has also been featured in the media, for example:

Interviews in Radio Sweden, P1, 160521 and 160520 http://sverigesradio.se/sida/default.aspx?programid=1650

News item, Smålandsposten, 160520 http://www.smp.se/sverige-varlden/mindre-rattvisa-domar-vid-tolkning-2/

News coverage SVT, 160520, several channels, c.f. https://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/smaland/mindre-rattvisa-domar-vid-tolkning-1

Article Linnaeus News: https://lnu.se/mot-linneuniversitetet/aktuellt/nyheter/2016/stressade-tolkar-kan-skapa-trovardighetsproblem-vid-rattegangar/