Collocation: review of the Bentley case – “I then” vs. “then I”
This is a linguistic variable (paper).
The variants don’t have equal frequency
www.corpus.byu.edu - database with spoken language to find frequencies.
- Two offers made is relevant since it is not always clear which one Delorean
was focused on
o Leads to ambiguity
§ It, thing, interim deal
- Coloration of guilt
- Topic analysis
- Lack of conversational slot
The Hugo Forrester Case
Why does Shuy say Forrester is in a “vulnerable” business?
Because people come in and try to sell you things of unknown origin.
It is illegal to purchase stolen property (small and expensive, so easy to steal). At the
same time, the jeweler is always looking for a good business deal (i.e., buy cheap, sell
high). For reasons that are not entirely clear, the authorities were interested in convicting
Forrester. They had David Rubin and Alice Winston wear wires to get evidence showing
Forrester agreeing to buy stolen property.
What is a test of entrapment? Some states have used this to determine id an
individual is predisposed to commit a crime. At the time of the case, it was fine to
entrap someone in California, which is what the police set out to do to Huge
Forrester. Still, the authorities are not supposed to put undue pressure on an
individual to commit a crime.
The case involves analyzing tape recordings in Forrester’s store to determine whether or
not he agreed to purchase stolen property. According to Shuy, the evidence suggests he
did not. But how was Forrester’s hearing? This is relevant since he may not have heard
the offers of illegality (especially not in the hustle and bustle of everyday business).
The incident begins with Rubin claiming he has some “stuff” to sell. Question:
what does the word “stuff” mean? Does it refer to something illegal? (It could, but not
necessarily). After a long statement from Rubin about this “stuff”, including the
statement at the beginning that “it’s stolen”, Forrester says, “UPS is not the greatest way
to ship”. This is considered strong, incriminating evidence.
We don’t even know whether Forrester was within earshot when Rubin said it was
stolen. Furthermore, as mentioned, the words are uttered at the beginning of
Rubin’s statement, and then followed by a discussion of mailing (which is not
illegal!). What’s more, examination of the phrase “it’s stolen” suggests that Rubin