This study examines the construction of credibility in a rape conviction from 2013 in Swedishcourts of law by the district court and the higher regional court. The study use discourseanalysis with a focus on identity, and gender and honour as analytical concepts to analyse theconcept of credibility. The results show that the concept of credibility is not constantthroughout the courts and neither are the identities. In this case it may be due to the districtcourt´s judgement in a general credibility and weighed in only the plaintiffs Romanianethnicity and not the defendant’s Iranian ethnicity, while the higher regional court on theother hand judged a more specific credibility, looked at the facts and ruled out ethnicity. Inthe latter court the defendant was found guilty. The study also shows that when the courtsinterpret the parties from a modern context they miss alternative explanations for theirbehaviour regarding values of clannism in a pre-modern context. They missed alternativeways to interpret the parties as a trustworthy victim and a possible offender respectively. Aresult from this study is the suggestion that the most reliable credibility assessment is tointerpret the parties from their own context.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:su-123730 |
| Date | January 2015 |
| Creators | Bjurshammar, Denise |
| Publisher | Stockholms universitet, Institutionen för socialt arbete - Socialhögskolan |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0527 seconds