In Stories at Trial, author Audun Kjus focuses on the Norwegian criminal court system through analysis of defendant and plaintiff narratives from several trials and their respective judgments. Kjus cites an increasing interest in evidence presentation and judges’ ways of knowing and deciding the fates of defendants, coupled with a lack of ethnographic study in this area, as the catalyst for this work.

Kjus’ first three chapters, “Introduction,” “On Narrative,” and “How I Handled the Cases,” lay the groundwork for the heart of the book, analysis of the narratives and judgments. In chapter 1 a standard literature review is presented in which the author identifies earlier research that informs his current work. Although throughout later chapters William Labov and Joshua Waletzky emerge as significant influences on the author’s approach, no engagement with their theories is present in the opening chapters. In chapter 2, Kjus offers an informative overview of narrative construction with brief but connecting points on narrative memory and scripts in narrative context, as well as narrative impact, including reification, causality, and legitimization. This is followed, in chapter 3, with the author’s exploration of one of the more engaging points on methodology, the impact on the defendants of collecting the data (specifically recording the proceedings) within the courtroom. Kjus acknowledges the difficult position of some defendants in being included in this work, though consent was given to record when asked for by either Kjus or the presiding judge. The problematic part, according to Kjus, rests significantly on the counterbalance between the concepts of doing no harm and serving the “greater good” (36). Kjus determines that the resulting good achieved is ultimately surpassed by “any counterbalancing possible discomfort some experience from being the object of research” (36).

Chapter 4, on “Negotiations with Narratives,” analyzes cases and includes extracted transcription information from defendants, plaintiffs, prosecutors, and final judicial decisions. These extracted pieces are interspersed with narrative analysis in which Kjus examines the narrative moves in each extract, referencing Labov’s and Waletzky’s distinction between externalized and internalized evaluations as an analytical guide. Kjus demonstrates shifting between internal and external evaluation in the case studies and explores their implication for and impact on court judgments. Kjus devotes considerable space examining judgments that illustrate “pared-down” narratives utilized by judges in the resolution or dissolution of cases. Kjus suggests pared-down narratives in court judgments reveal the court’s desire to focus on the relevant aspects of the various narratives presented during trial and avoid extraneous narrative information presented. Issues of relevancy and extraneousness are based on what the court agrees upon and remain removed from such considerations by either defendants or plaintiffs. Kjus’ close analysis of various cases within this chapter presents a consistent presence of framing narrative choice made by the courts in their respective judgments. In these instances, Kjus argues, macro-narratives (familiar or example narratives which access cultural expectations of how an event should be understood and assessed) are used to inform any subsequent assessment.

Kjus extends his analysis of court judgments in chapter 5, “Comprehensive Assessment.” Here, Kjus applies the basic foundation of analysis shown in the previous chapter to judicial judgments of court cases, and closely examines the narrative methods used by judges to present their decisions. Such methods are not unique to these judges, but they illustrate the narrative landscape accessible by all. In chapter 6, “Shifting Credibility,” Kjus expands analysis of court judgments with focus on reality and credibility in court decisions and their distribution across the landscape of those judgments, as the credibility desired by defendants and their witnesses is reoriented within the scope of court decisions. Chapter 6 includes sections on “Authorisation and Reification,” “Confessions,” and “Distribution of Credibility in Judgments,” giving specific attention to analyzing defendant testimony and subsequent case judgments to determine “how shifts of credibility were carried out in the judgments” (163). Kjus concludes the book with findings and additional research possibilities, in chapter 7. He includes summations of the power and impact of macro-narratives of ethnicity, culture, and violent tendencies in court arguments and judgments, chronology and its maneuverability, and the rationale embedded in court judgments.

With a focus on narrative analysis specific to defendants and plaintiffs in the Norwegian criminal court system, Kjus’ Stories at Trial likewise, it offers an additional resource to studies in courtroom dynamics, narrative, and performance. Likewise, it offers additional avenues of consideration in how we approach narratives given in contested spaces or under mitigated situations.

--------

[Review length: 744 words • Review posted on October 3, 2012]