Competing Creole Transcripts on Trial

A criminal prosecution of Jamaican Creole (JC) speaking ‘posse’ (=gang) members in New York included evidence of recorded speech in JC. Clandestine recordings (discussions of criminal events, including narration of a homicide) were introduced at trial. Taped data were translated for prosecution by a non-linguist native speaker of JC. Defense disputed these texts and commissioned alternative transcriptions from a creolist linguist, who was a non-speaker of JC. Prosecution in turn hired another creolist, a near-native speaker of and specialist in JC, to testify on the relative accuracy of both sets of earlier texts. Differing representations of key conversations were submitted to a non-creole speaking judge/jury, both linguists testified, and defendants were convicted. The role of linguistic testimony and practice (especially transcription) in the trial is analysed. A typology of linguistic expertise is given, and effects of the language’s Creole status and lack of instrumentalization on the trial are discussed.