Question

what is forensic linguistics and how has it been used in casework such as the investigation of the Unabomber?

Answer 1

Forensic linguistics, legal linguistics, or language and the law, is the application of linguistic knowledge, methods and insights to the forensic context of law, language, crime investigation, trial, and judicial procedure. It is a branch of applied linguistics.

There are principally three areas of application for linguists working in forensic contexts:

• understanding language of the written law,
• understanding language use in forensic and judicial processes, and
• the provision of linguistic evidence.

The discipline of forensic linguistics is not homogenous; it involves a range of experts and researchers in different areas of the field.

Forensic linguistics, which is sometimes referred to as forensic stylistics, is a branch of linguistics that focuses on taking the analytical techniques of that field and applying them to legal and criminal issues as far-ranging as trial, investigation, rehabilitation and punishment. As a discipline, forensic linguistics reviews spoken and written materials and, using the scientific techniques of linguistics, analyzes them. This branch of linguistics is concerned with such things as determining who authored a written document and identifying speakers of oral material, such as taped conversations. Forensic linguistics also measures as well as determines both the content and meaning of both spoken and written material.

In deciding authorship, the technique used in the field of forensic linguistics is to study a written communication and compare its spelling, grammar, vocabulary, tone and sentence structure to known writings from the suspect to determine whether he or she wrote it. An example might be a suicide note whose legitimacy is in question. This type of analysis is particularly useful in threat assessment, where a ransom note or a menacing email, letter or text message has been received. For example, in the case of threatened workplace or school violence, specific word usage can give law enforcement officials insight into how likely it is that action will follow.

CASE : INVESTIGATION OF THE UNBOMBER (Theodore J. Kaczynski) USING FORENSIC LINGUISTICS

The man that the world would eventually know as Theodore Kaczynski came to our attention in 1978 with the explosion of his first, primitive homemade bomb at a Chicago university. Over the next 17 years, he mailed or hand delivered a series of increasingly sophisticated bombs that killed three Americans and injured 24 more. Along the way, he sowed fear and panic, even threatening to blow up airliners in flight.

In 1979, an FBI-led task force that included the ATF and U.S. Postal Inspection Service was formed to investigate the “UNABOM” case, code-named for the UNiversity and Airline BOMbing targets involved. The task force would grow to more than 150 full-time investigators, analysts, and others. In search of clues, the team made every possible forensic examination of recovered bomb components and studied the lives of victims in minute detail. These efforts proved of little use in identifying the bomber, who took pains to leave no forensic evidence, building his bombs essentially from “scrap” materials available almost anywhere. And the victims, investigators later learned, were chosen randomly from library research.

We felt confident that the Unabomber had been raised in Chicago and later lived in the Salt Lake City and San Francisco areas. This turned out to be true. His occupation proved more elusive, with theories ranging from aircraft mechanic to scientist. Even the gender was not certain: although investigators believed the bomber was most likely male, they also investigated several female suspects.

The big break in the case came in 1995. The Unabomber sent us a 35,000 word essay claiming to explain his motives and views of the ills of modern society. After much debate about the wisdom of “giving in to terrorists,” FBI Director Louis Freeh and Attorney General Janet Reno approved the task force’s recommendation to publish the essay in hopes that a reader could identify the author.

After the manifesto appeared in The Washington Post and The New York Times, thousands of people suggested possible suspects. One stood out: David Kaczynski described his troubled brother Ted, who had grown up in Chicago, taught at the University of California at Berkeley (where two of the bombs had been placed), then lived for a time in Salt Lake City before settling permanently into the primitive 10’ x 14’ cabin that the brothers had constructed near Lincoln, Montana.

Most importantly, David provided letters and documents written by his brother. Our linguistic analysis determined that the author of those papers and the manifesto were almost certainly the same. When combined with facts gleaned from the bombings and Kaczynski’s life, that analysis provided the basis for a search warrant.

On April 3, 1996, investigators arrested Kaczynski and combed his cabin. There, they found a wealth of bomb components; 40,000 handwritten journal pages that included bomb-making experiments and descriptions of Unabomber crimes; and one live bomb, ready for mailing.

Kaczynski’s reign of terror was over.