L T A M C V
「いとこのビニー」の法律用語
芦峰 隆章 T ASHIMINE
Introduction
The movie My Cousin Vinny, which provides the primary source of information for this paper, is now more than twenty years old. About ten years after the fi lm was released for theater viewing, it was reformatted for Fox Home Entertainment on DVD. The DVD has the advantage of enabling the viewer to choose the audio language (English or dubbed Japanese) and also the captions (English or Japanese translation). Although I had previously seen the VHS version issued in Japan, I more recently encountered the DVD version in a rental shop in Okinawa which I occasionally visit because I teach English at the university level and I am constantly looking to fi nd interesting materials, both for inspiring my students and for helping me maintain my own competence in English. Upon viewing this fi lm again, I found it to be particularly interesting, not only for its award-winning quality, but for the fact that the underlying confl ict is a problem of misunderstandings.
The entertaining aspect of the film comes from the fact that repeatedly neither of the parties who are communicating with each other recognizes that the other has misunderstood what was said. Instead, for the most part, it is only the viewer who is able to comprehend the difference in each side’s understanding of the verbal exchange. Often the misunderstandings result from different expectations stemming from different experiential and cultural backgrounds (urban New Yorkers and rural Alabamans). This fi lm therefore provides many excellent and entertaining examples of intercultural miscommunication. For the purposes of this paper, however, the focus is on communication and verbal exchange related to legal matters.
The primary purpose of this particular paper is not to analyze the structures of miscommunication as presented in the fi lm. Instead, I am concerned about another kind of misunderstanding: the comprehension diffi culties faced by Japanese viewers who are likely unfamiliar with the many English legal expressions used in the fi lm, and also unfamiliar with the legal structures generally well-understood by persons living in the United States. Therefore, I have attempted to list here those legal expressions appearing in the fi lm. After having consulted several sources, I selected brief defi nitions for each of over fi fty legal terms, and for most of those expressions, I have included
segments of the film’s dialog to serve as contextual examples Furthermore, I comment on Japanese people’s probable confusion and misinterpretation of some of the fundamental legal expressions of English, a confusion that comes not only from unfamiliarity with the Western adversarial form of judicial processes but also from the manner in which some English terms are pronounced by, or have been adopted by, Japanese speakers.
This paper is presented in three parts: Background Fundamentals, The Collection of Legal Terms with Defi nitions, Script Scenes Illustrating Usage of the Legal Terms.
1. Background Fundamentals
The organization of this part is as follows. First I provide (1) a synopsis of the movie, without revealing the climax or the end of the movie, yet with indication of the primary points of misunderstandings and miscommunication.
Next, I present (2) an explanation of methodology, and (3) some background information about courtroom drama in American movies and television. Finally, (4) some explanation about the compilation and organization of over fi fty legal terms used in the fi lm.
1.1 Synopsis of the fi lm
An inexperienced rookie lawyer (Vinny Gambini) from Brooklyn, New York arrives by car with his fi ancée (Mona Lisa Vito) in Beechum County, Alabama, having driven there for the purpose of representing and defending his cousin Bill, one of two young men who have been mistakenly accused of the murder of a convenience store clerk in the area of Wazoo, the county seat. The two young men, Bill and Stan, had been driving from New York to California when they stopped at the convenience store to buy groceries, had immediately driven off, and were unaware that a few moments later the clerk was shot and killed. Not long later, and shortly before the boys are stopped by a patrol car, Bill discovers that he had inadvertently left the store without having paid for a can of tuna which he had forgotten to remove from his pocket when paying for their groceries. The two fellows are taken to the police station where they are separately interrogated by the Sheriff. Those interrogation scenes are comical because the Sheriff never mentions “murder” and the two young men both assume that they have been stopped and picked up for shoplifting. The responses of the two New Yorkers are taken by the Alabaman Sheriff as admissions of guilt, and Bill is booked for murder and his friend Stan is booked for accessory to murder.
1.2 Approach/Methodology
After viewing the film numerous times, and compiling a list of legal expressions used in the film, I checked various sources for defi nitions of the terms, some of which were actually defi ned in the fi lm itself. In general, by my observation, an understanding of the legal terms is more easily obtained in the context of the movie than from the dry defi nitions. (In particular, see fi lm script E.)
After compiling the list of legal terms, and their defi nitions, I arranged the terms by category (general terms and titles of persons) or by adjacency (used in the same section of the fi lm). In addition to providing defi nitions of courtroom terms, as obtained from a textbook and from legal and standard dictionaries (in places personally modifi ed and adapted), I have presented examples of the contextual usage of the terminology by presenting brief film script dialogs taken from the on-screen, English-language captions in the form of terminology usage in dialogs occurring in the fi lm. I also comment about Japanese understanding of some of the terminology.
1.3 Courtroom drama in American fi lms
In American fi lms, courtroom drama has long had strong appeal for viewers. More than twenty years ago, when the American Bar Association presented a list of twelve of the best-ever trial fi lms, ten of those fi lms listed were American.1 Some courtroom films have been so popular that they have been remade a number of times, with different directors and different actors. For instance, Inherit the Wind, based on the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, was originally a 1955 theater drama written by Jerome Lawrence. The play was adapted to film at least four times, in 1960, 1965 (for television), 1988, and 1999. The 1991 fi lm My Cousin Vinny, discussed here, is unusual among trial fi lms in that it is essentially a comedy. Nonetheless, the fi lm has been praised for the accuracy of its presentation of courtroom procedure and trial strategy.2
It is noteworthy that courtroom films, including My Cousin Vinny, use a great many legal terms. Quite likely, Americans’ familiarity with legal expression, their interest in legal matters, and the high status of lawyers, are all related to the existence of many fi lms and television programs that deal with legal issues. Well-known and popular television dramas that deal with courtroom battles include “Perry Mason” (1957-1966), “The Defenders”
(1961-1965), “L.A. Law” (1986-1994), “Judging Amy” (1999-2005), “Boston Legal” (2004-2008), and the longest-run courtroom TV series, “Law & Order” (1990-present).
1.4 About the compilation of legal expressions in the fi lm My Cousin Vinny
In this paper, I present a listing of distinctly legal expressions that appear in the fi lm My Cousin Vinny. I provide definitions for each expression, indicating source by abbreviatory initials (all English-language sources). The source of each defi nition is indicated by a three-letter abbreviation noted in the references. Wherever I modifi ed a defi nition, I indicate it as “adapted from,” and in some cases I preferred my own, more simple defi nition (indicated by the initials TA). However, defi nitions are not adequate for an understanding of usage. For this reason, in Part Three, I include sections of dialog taken from the fi lm in order to present examples of usage, noting that in some instances legal terms are actually defi ned within the dialog. Eighty percent of the listed legal expressions occur in one or more of the dialog scripts given here. The Table of Legal Expressions, presented in Part Two, can be used as an index to the script dialogs.
Fifty legal terms are defi ned, along with ten variants.. The collection of terms is divided into four smaller groups, according to function or context: (1) general terms, (2) persons, (3) legal expressions used before the courtroom scenes begin (before the arrival of Vinny), and (4) legal expressions used after the arrival of Vinny (not all of those are courtroom scenes). The dialog segments presented in Part Three include examples of general terms and terms for persons. That is, all four groups are represented. For ease of access, the list of terms is in alphabetical order within each group. Within the dialogs, each listed legal term is underlined and followed by a reference number given in brackets, indicating its position in the Table of Legal Expressions (which is also a table of contents of the defi nitions). Where the listed legal terms occur in my discussion, they are simply indicated in bold without reference number. There is no annotation or modifi cation to legal expressions occurring in the brief situational explanations preceding each script scene.
2. My Cousin Vinny—The Collection of Legal Terms
Sixty legal terms are listed here, including variant forms. The defi nitions of terms come from several sources appropriate for university-level study, the sources indicated by abbreviated form as indicated in the references.
The legal terms are arranged here in four groups of terms, within each group the terms being listed in alphabetical order. Fifty terms are numbered in sequence, with accompanying variant forms unnumbered. The collection is given without defi nitions in the Table of Legal Expressions.
Forty percent of the legal terms listed here can be considered either general terms or terms for indicating persons who regularly appear in courtroom scenes. (Note that I am not including here other persons of the law such as
Sheriff, Deputy, etc.) All of these terms listed here are likely to be familiar to most adult Americans yet may be misused or misunderstood by Japanese-speaking viewers living in Japan. Discussion related to this matter follows the list of defi nitions given in the two groups, General terms and Terms for persons.
Group One—General terms:
1. Arrest vb. To seize (a person) by legal authority; take into custody: The police arrested the burglar. [RHD]
2. Bar n. the rail dividing off the judge’s seat at which prisoners stand to be charged or sentenced; the lawyers who plead in court [CPD]; an authority or tribunal that hands down judgment: the profession of barrister or lawyer [WNC]
3. Court n. (law) the place where legal cases are heard [courtroom]; the judges and offi cials who preside there [CPD]: n. an offi cial assembly for the transaction of judicial business; a session of such a court; a place for the administration of justice; a judge or judges in session [WNC]
4. Defend vb. To serve as attorney for (a defendant): He has defended some of the most notorious criminals. [RHD]
5. Evidence n. (Law) data presented to a court or jury in proof of the facts in issue and which may include the testimony of witnesses, records, documents, or objects [RHD]
6. Execute vb. To kill someone as a punishment for a serious crime [IFT]
7. Guilty adj. having committed an offense, crime, violation, or wrong [RHD];
justly chargeable with or responsible for a usu. grave breach of conduct [WNC]
8. Hearing n. a preliminary examination in criminal procedure [WNC]
9. Judicial adj. Relating to judgment in a court of law [IFT]
10. Oath n. A pronouncement of swearing the truth of a statement…, usually by an appeal to God to witness its truth. An oath is required by law for various purposes …[including] giving evidence in court. The usual witness’s oath [includes the phrase ] “…the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.” Those who object to swearing an oath…may instead affi rm. [abridged and adapted from CDL]
11. Prosecute vb. To institute legal proceedings against (a person) [RHD]
12. Testimony n. A statement of a witness in court, usually on oath, offered as evidence of the truth of what is stated. (Also: testify, vb. To give testimony, or testimonial evidence) [adapted from CDL]
13. Trial n. a formal legal process to decide whether someone is guilty of a crime [CDL]
Group Two—Terms for persons:
14. Accessory n. One who is a party to a crime that is actually committed by someone else (the perpetrator). An accessory is one who either successfully incites someone to commit a crime (counsels or procures) or helps him to do so (aids and abets). [CDL]
15. Bailiff n. An offi cer of a court (usually a county court) concerned with the service of the court’s processes and the enforcement of its orders, especially warrants of execution authorizing the seizure of the goods of a debtor. The term is often loosely applied to a sheriff’s offi cer. [CDL]
16. Client n. a person or group that uses the professional advice or services of a lawyer, accountant, advertising agency, architect, etc. [RHD]
17. Counselor n. a lawyer, esp. a trial lawyer [RHD]
18. Defendant n. A person against whom court proceedings are brought. [CDL]: defense n.(Law) a defendant and his or her counsel [RHD]; public defender n. a lawyer appointed or elected by a city or county as a full-time, offi cial defender to represent indigents in criminal cases as public expense [RHD]
19. District attorney n. an offi cer who acts as attorney for the people or government within a specifi ed district [1780-90 Amer.], abbrev. D.A.
20. Judge n. A state offi cial with power to adjudicate/(make legal decisions [TA]) on disputes and other matters brought before the courts for decision. [CDL]; Addressed formally as “your honor”
[TA].
21. Jury n. A group of people in a court of law who have been chosen to listen to the facts about a crime and decide whether the person accused is guilty or not. Also juror: n. A member of a jury) [IFT]
22. Lawyer n. one whose profession is to conduct lawsuits for clients or to advise as to legal rights and obligations in other matters; lawyerly adj [WNC]
23. Prosecutor n. The public offi cer in a county, district, or other jurisdiction charged with carrying on the prosecution in criminal proceedings; prosecuting attorney [RHD]
24. Witness n. A person who appears in a court of law to tell what he/she knows about a crime [IFT]
COMMENT: A number of the terms in the preceding two groups are often loosely used among the Japanese.
For example, Japanese speakers often think of execute as “to do something,” such as an executive would do, or to execute (begin and complete) a maneuver. They do not think of execute as referring to the legal, court- ordered killing of a human. For the Japanese, the word trial almost always means “an attempt” and, for them, a legal connotation is nearly non-existent. Similarly, witness does not include a courtroom sense for most Japanese
persons. That is, they tend to think of a witness as someone who sees or watches something, not as someone called to testify in court. Jury and juror are short, simple words, but few Japanese actually know their meaning because of lack of familiarity with the jury system. Eventually legal usage and vocabulary will become familiar as the terms are adapted to the Japanese legal system. This discussion on the Japanese perception of English legal terms is continued later, beginning with discussion of the Japanese understanding of counselor, following the series of fi lm scripts illustrating usage of legal terms.
Group Three—Legal terms used before the appearance of Vinny
25. Aid and abet vb. To assist in the performance of a crime either before or during (but not after) its commission. Aiding usually refers to material assistance (e.g. providing the tools or necessary information for the crime), and abetting to lesser assistance (e.g. acting as a look-out or driving a car to the scene of a crime). Aiders and abetters are liable to be tried as accessories. [CDL]
26. Book vb. To make a formal written declaration of accusation;
booking: n. The act of naming a person and announcing the charges against him as formally entered at the police station. [adapted from IFT]
27. Confession n. An admission by an accused person of his guilt made to a person in authority over the prosecution (e.g. a police offi cer) [CDL]
28. Convict vb. To prove or declare guilty of an offense, esp. after a legal trial: to convict a prisoner of a felony [RHD]
29. Murder n. (Law) the killing of another human being under specifi c conditions. In the U.S., that includes murder committed during the commission of another serious crime, such as robbery or arson (fi rst-degree murder) [adapted from RHD]
30. Waive vb. (Law) to willingly give up or let go of a known right, interest, etc. [adapted from RHD]
Group Four—Legal terms used after the appearance of Vinny
31. Arraign vb. To begin a criminal trial on indictment by calling the defendant to the bar of the court by name, reading the indictment to him, and asking him whether he is guilty or not. The defendant then pleas to the indictment, and this completes the arraignment (n.). [CDL]
32. Bail (see also Bailiff) n. An amount of money which the accused person pays to the court to assure that he will return to the court on the trial date. If the person comes back, the money is returned to him. If not,
the court keeps the bail money. [IFT]
33. Bench n. The seat of a judge in court. [CDL]
34. Charge vb. To accuse formally or explicitly (usu. Followed by with) They charged him with theft. [RHD]
35. Contempt of court n. Conduct that obstructs or tends to obstruct the proper administration of justice.
[CDL]
36. Cross-examination n. The questioning of a witness by a party other than the one who called him to testify. [CDL] Also cross-examine vb. [TA]
37. Custody n. Imprisonment or confi nement. [CDL]
38. Disclose vb. To make known, reveal, uncover [RHD];
disclosure n. making documents available for inspection by the opposing party [abridged from CDL]
39. Discovery n. (Law) Compulsory disclosure, as of facts or documents [RHD]
40. Dismissal of action n. The termination of a [court] action if favor of the defendant [abridged from CDL]
41. Mistrial n. (Law) a trial terminated without conclusion on the merits of the case because of some error in the proceedings. [RHD]
42. Objection n. a reason or argument presented in opposition [WNC]; a formal request that specifi c evidence not be admitted because of improper procedure [TA]
43. Overrule vb. To rule or decide against (a plea, argument, etc.); reject: to overrule an objection [RHD]
44. Plea n. A formal statement in court…[in] response to a charge.
Plead vb. To make a plea.) [CDL]
45. Precedent n. (Law) a legal decision or form of proceeding serving as an authoritative rule or pattern in future similar or analogous cases [RHD]
46. Procedure n. a series of steps followed in a regular defi nite order <legal procedure> [WNC]
47. Proceedings n. (Law) the instituting or carrying on of an action at law; a legal step or measure; to institute proceedings against a person [RHD]
48. Recall(of witness) n. The further examination of a witness after his evidence has been completed. [CDL]
(Also, vb. to recall a witness)
49. Sustain vb. To uphold as valid, just, or correct, as a claim or the person making it, The judge sustained the lawyer’s objection. [RHD]
50. Verdict n. (Law) The finding or answer of a jury given to the court concerning a matter submitted to their judgment [RHD]
3. My Cousin Vinny—Script scenes containing Legal Terms
The dialogs (script scenes) taken from the fi lm are given to show usage. Script of the dialog is taken from the English-language captions of the DVD version of the fi lm.
Legal expressions appearing in dialogue from the fi lm are underlined with the listing-number given in square brackets. In my commentary, legal expressions are given in bold, without a referential number.
Film scripts before the arrival of Vinny (Script scenes A, B, C, and D)
The film begins with two college-age men driving a green convertible through rural Alabama. They stop at a small convenience store to buy groceries. While there, Bill accidentally forgets to pay for a can of tuna that he put in his pocket while balancing other items in his hands. Later, after they drive off, he discovers his mistake.
Unfortunately, before they can decide whether to return to the store, a police car pulls them off the road. Stan, the passenger, is terribly upset because he believes the South is very severe on criminals and outsiders. They both are keenly aware that they are actually transporting stolen merchandise (the can of tuna), and they mistakenly believe the stolen can of tuna is the reason for their being stopped by the patrol car. They are both surprised when the police offi cer pulls out his gun and tells them to get out of their car with their hands on their head. However, prior to the next scene, showing the line-up and interrogation at the police station in Wazoo, in Beechum County, Alabama, the film shows the convenience store where the clerk is shown shot and lying dead on the floor. A middle aged woman appears visibly upset as she asks the sheriff, “What kind of person would do such a thing?”
The next scene is at the police station. There Sheriff Farley questions the two boys separately. He begins by asking Bill, “Do you know why you are here?”
[Film script scene: A, in the police station where Bill and Stan are being questioned]
Sheriff Farley enters the room, addresses Bill, identifi es himself, shakes hands with Bill, and then asks Bill if he knows why he is there at the police station. The Sheriff appears a bit surprised at Bill’s calm admission of guilt.
Bill: Yeah, I do. I’m sorry. It was a stupid thing to do.
Sheriff: Have you been made aware of your rights?
Bill. (Looking down) Yeah.
Sheriff: You’re willing to waive [30] that right?
Bill: Yes, yes. I’ll cooperate fully. I’ll sign a statement or whatever makes the whole thing easier.
Sheriff: (Laughing softly in surprise or relief) Good, good. That makes things easier.
Bill: But I want you to know…. Stan, he had nothing to do with it.
Sheriff: Did he help you plan it?
Bill: No. I mean it wasn’t planned out. You know. It just happened.
Sheriff: Did Stan try to stop you at any time?
Bill: No. I mean he was…. Why? Is that a big deal?
Sheriff: Aiding and abetting. [25]
Bill: Aiding and abetting? [25] What is that? A major thing?
Sheriff: Oh, yeah! Yeah!
During this scene, the audience understands that the Sheriff and Bill have a different concept of what “it” means:
murder and shoplifting, respectively. Next, the Sheriff is seen talking with Stan. The two boys have apparently been separated since before questioning.
[Film script scene: B] The Sheriff interrogates Stan
Stan: Accessory? [14] Are you guys kidding? Accessory? [14] I didn’t help. I didn’t plan it.
Sheriff: You didn’t try to stop him.
Stan: I didn’t know it was happening. I found out later in the car.
Sheriff: Why didn’t you get out? Call the police in?
Stan: God! He’s my friend!
Sheriff: Your friend has put you into a lot of trouble.
Stan: (after a pause) What’s gonna happen to Bill?
Sheriff: (Standing at the door, about to leave the room.) Nothing. Unless he is convicted [28]. Of course, if he is, we’re gonna run enough electricity through him to light up Birmingham.
Stan rolls his eyes and almost smiles in amusement as the Sheriff leaves. Stan believes the police are simply having fun with the two young men all because of a stolen can of tuna. It is easy to understand his view because at the beginning of the fi lm it did appear that nothing exciting was likely to happen in that rural area.
The Sheriff returns to talk with Bill. Bill appears tired but relaxed as he explains that he and Stan were friends at
NYU and had both applied for and received a scholarship to UCLA. They had decided to drive through the South on their way to California in order to enjoy the weather and the scenery. The Sheriff then interrupts, “What about the tuna fi sh?” he asks. (The audience can guess that Bill has already mentioned the pocketed can of tuna fi sh.)
[Film script scene: C] The Sheriff seeks a confession from Bill
Bill: Then I forgot about the can of tuna fi sh and then we…we left.
Sheriff: Did he catch you with the tuna fi sh? Is that how it started?
Bill: No, he didn’t say anything.
Sheriff: But he knew about it.
Bill: I don’t know.
Sheriff: Let’s talk about that for a moment. You paid for the groceries. And then what?
Bill: We went out to the car. And that’s it.
Sheriff: When did you shoot him?
Bill: (looking startled) What?
Sheriff: At what point did you shoot the clerk?
Bill: (repeating with an expression of puzzlement) I shot the clerk?
Sheriff: Yes! When did you shoot him?
Bill: (repeating again with an expression of puzzlement) I shot the clerk?
At that point, we hear a door open behind Bill, and hear the voice “Hey, Dave! We need you out here.” The Sheriff crosses in front of Bill, and doesn’t see Bill’s face as he, the Sheriff, complains “I’m in the middle of a damn confession [27] here.” Bill hits his forehead with his hand as the expression on his face shows that he understands that there has been some confusion about the meaning of words. “Wow! Wait a minute!” he says.
In the next scene, the two boys are shown together, side-by-side, sitting on a bench, both wearing handcuffs. They are talking to each other, exchanging their points of view.
[Film script scene: D] Stan and Bill, handcuffed, talking to each other
Stan: … they don’t execute [6] for shoplifting.
Bill: You think we’ve been booked [26] for shoplifting, huh?
Stan: No! YOU’ve been booked [26] for shoplifting. I’ve been booked [26] for accessory [14] to shoplifting.
Bill: No, Stan! I’ve been booked [26] for murder [29] and you’ve been booked [26] for accessory [14] to murder [29].
Film scripts after the arrival of Vinny (Script scenes E through J)
The following scenes appear after Vinny arrives in Wazoo. Script scene E is in the county courthouse, showing Vinny’s fi rst day in court, the day of arraignment.
[Film script scene: E] Courtroom scene: The arraignment
Bailiff: All rise. The Court [3] of Beecham County is now in session.
Court Reporter: Be seated. First case, the people of Alabama versus William Robert Gambini and Stanley Marcus Rothenstein.
Stan: (speaking in a whisper to Bill) “Stein!” She called me “Stine.” (Apparently Stan is objecting to the mispronunciation of his name, and still thinks this situation is a joke.)
Judge: Counselor [17]. Your clients [16]. Charged [34] with fi rst degree murder [29]. How do they plead [44]?
Vinny: Your honor [20]. My clients [16]…
Judge: Don’t talk to me sitting in that chair.
Vinny: He told me to sit here.
Judge: When you’re addressing the court [3], you will rise. Speak to me in a clear, intelligible voice.
Vinny: Sorry. My clients [16] are…
Judge: What are you wearing?
Vinny: Huh?
Judge: What are you wearing?
Vinny: I’m wearing clothes. I don’t get the question.
Judge: When you come into my court [3] looking like you do, you not only insult me, but you insult the integrity of this court [3].
Vinny: I apologize, sir. But this is how I dress.
Judge: Next time you come into my courtroom [3], you will dress lawyerly [22]. And I mean you comb your hair and wear a suit and tie. And that suit got to be made out of some kind of cloth. You understand me?
Vinny: Uh, yes! Fine, judge [20], fi ne.
Judge: Good. You may continue. How did your clients [16] plead [44]?
Vinny: Ah. My clients [16] are caught completely by surprise. They thought they were getting arrested [1] for shoplifting a can of tuna.
Judge: What are you telling me? Are they pleading [44] “not guilty [7]”?
Vinny: No. I’m just trying to explain.
Judge: I don’t wanna hear explanations. The State of Alabama has its procedure [46]. And that procedure [46]
at this point in time is to have an arraignment [31]. Are we clear on this?
Vinny: Yes. But there seems to be a great deal of confusion here.
Judge: Mr. Gambini! (The judge motions for Vinny to come towards him.) Vinny: My clients [16]…
Judge: Mr. Gambini… (The judge repeats the motion of his hand.)
Vinny: All the way? (After Vinny’s question, the judge nods, and Vinny steps up to him.)
Judge: (Speaking in a low voice) All I ask from you is a very simple answer to a very simple question. There are only two ways to answer it: “guilty [7]” or “not guilty [7]”.
Vinny: Your honor [20], my clients [16] didn’t do anything.
Judge: Once again. The communication process’s broken down. It appears to me that you wanna skip the arraignment [31] process, go directly to the trial [13], skip that, and get the dismissal [40].
Vinny: Huh, huh, huh…
Judge: Well, I’m not about to revamp the entire judicial [9] process just because you found yourself in the unique position of defending [4] clients [16] who said they didn’t do it. Now the next words out of your mouth ought to be “guilty [7]” or “not guilty [7]”. I don’t wanna hear commentary, argument or opinion. If I hear anything other than “guilty [7]” or “not guilty [7]”, you’ll be in contempt [35]. I don’t even wanna hear you clear your throat. I hope I’ve been clear. Now, how do your clients [16] plead [44]?
Vinny: I think I get the point.
Judge: No, I don’t think you do. You are now in contempt of court [35]. Would you like to go for two counts of contempt [35]?
Vinny: Not guilty [7].
Judge: Thank you. Bail [32] will be 200,000 dollars. Preliminary hearing [8] will be set for 9:30 tomorrow morning. Bailiff [15], please take Mr. Gambini into custody [37]. His bail [3] will be set at 200 dollars.
Bailiff: Come in here, please.
Court Reporter: All rise as the Judge [20] leaves.
Vinny: (talking to Lisa) You got to bail [32] me out. You know that, right?
[Film script scene: F] Outside, near the prison, after Vinny is released on bail
Lisa and Vinny are talking after Vinny has been released on bail. Lisa expresses concern about the progress of the case, and asks Vinny if he is worried, and Vinny replies that it was a good experience, that he is learning and that he expects to do better.
Lisa: Learn it as you go? Didn’t they teach that in law school?
Vinny: No. That’s not what they teach. They teach you contracts, precedents [45], interpretations. And then the fi rm that hires you, they teach you procedures [46]. Or you can go to court [3] and watch.
(Vinny explains that he had no chance to go to court to watch because he was too busy in Lisa’s father’s garage and working nights to earn money.)
[Film script scene: G] In their hotel room, Vinny learns the meaning of disclosure
This dialog takes place in the hotel room of Vinny and Lisa. Vinny had left earlier to go hunting with Trotter, the district attorney (but he was actually intending to fi sh for information). Lisa thought he should instead have been preparing for the trial. Vinny returns carrying a heavy box full of papers.
Lisa: What’s all that?
Vinny: Trotter’s fi les. All of them.
Lisa: You stole his fi les?
Vinny: I didn’t steal his fi les. Listen to this. I’m just ready to fi nesse. I’m starting to fi nesse. While I get going, he offered to have his secretary copy everything for me.
Lisa: That’s very impressive fi nessing.
Vinny: That’s not all. He’s letting us use his hunting cabin as soon as he gets back. It’s in the woods. It’s quiet. HE sleeps like a baby when he’s there.”
Lisa: Terrifi c. You’re a helluva bonder.
Vinny: (Pointing to the Alabama Legal Procedures book which the Judge had given to Vinny; the book is in front of Lisa, who apparently has been reading it)
What’s this? You’re reading this book?
Lisa: Yeah.
Vinny: Do me a favor, OK? Don’t read this book! OK? Thank you very much.
Lisa: All right. I just wonder why Trotter gave you his fi les.
Vinny: I told you why already.
Lisa: He has to. By law, you’re entitled. It’s called disclosure [38], you dickhead. He has to show you everything. Otherwise it could be a mistrial [41]. He has to give you a list of all his witnesses [24]. You can talk to all his witnesses [24]. He’s not allowed any surprises. Didn’t they teach that in law school, either?
COMMENT:
At this point I want to make a very important comment about the change in Vinny’s attitude after he learns about disclosure. Vinny is empowered by gaining knowledge of the term and its meaning and by learning what information he is entitled to receive. Clearly he is also gaining confi dence from his knowledge of legal terms and their meanings. After obtaining that knowledge, and confi dence, Vinny is shown talking to the witnesses in their homes, prior to the court proceedings, and then in court he aggressively cross-examines the witnesses. Later that evening, and again in Lisa and Vinny’s hotel room, Vinny is seen talking on the phone to Trotter, the District Attorney. Apparently Trotter has called Vinny in an attempt to intimidate Vinny with knowledge that Trotter will bring a surprise witness to court. Their dialog is shown here in script scene H. The remaining two script scene dialogs are from court, on the last day of the trial.[Film script scene: H] In the hotel room: The counselor and prosecutor talk over the phone.
In the evening before the last day of the trial, Vinny is in his room, talking to Trotter over the phone.]
Vinny: What’s that? You know you have to disclose [38] all your evidence [5] to me.
Trotter: Well, I just got it myself tonight. I’ll disclose [38] it fi rst thing in the morning. Judge [20] gonna have to admit it.
[Film script scene: I] Courtroom scene: The trial
Vinny attempts to object to Trotter’s calling in a surprise witness.
Vinny: Your Honor [20]. May we approach the bench [33], please?
Judge: If you wish.
Vinny: I object to this witness [24] being called at this time. We’ve been given no prior notice he’d testify [12], no discovery [39] of any tests he’s conducted, or reports he prepared and the court [3] is aware that the
defense [18] is entitled to advance notice of any witness [24] who will testify [12], particularly those giving scientifi c evidence [5], so we can prepare for cross-examination [36], as well as to give the defense [18] an opportunity to have reports reviewed by a defense [18] expert who might then be in a position to contradict the veracity of his conclusions.
Judge: Mr. Gambini.
Vinny: Yes, sir.
Judge: That is a lucid, intelligent, well thought-out objection [42].
Vinny: Thank you, Your Honor [20].
Judge: Overruled [43].
COMMENT:
As can be seen here, by the many legal terms underlined in the transcription of his speech, Vinny has developed a respectable style of courtroom argumentation and is even praised by the judge, though the judge perversely decides to overrule Vinny’s well-expressed objection.[Film script scene: J] Courtroom scene: Vinny calls a witness.
Vinny: In that case, Your Honor [20], I’d like to recall [48] George Wilbur.
Judge: (to Wilbur as he takes the witness stand) You realize you’re still under oath [10].
Wilbur: Yes, Your Honor [20].
COMMENT:
To return here to the discussion of the Japanese perception of the meaning of English legal terms, I would like to mention common Japanese understandings of counselor, judge, (not) guilty, and your honor.To begin, the word counselor is a borrowed word and almost all Japanese have an idea of its meaning except for the usage of the word in a legal context. For most Japanese, a counselor is someone you can go to for advice;
however, few Japanese would call a lawyer a counselor. As for the word judge, it is often used in the context of sports competition, both as a noun and a verb. In karaoke contests, a “judge” (noun) must “judge” (verb) who wins fi rst place. Nonetheless, the term is not as well recognized in the legal context as it is in the other contexts just mentioned. It is also interesting to consider the expressions guilty and not guilty in terms of the Japanese translation. The Japanese equivalents are yuuzai ka nuzai ka. However, when translated back to English, those Japanese expressions would be given as “guilty or innocent.” That is, the Japanese expression is an assertion of a positive quality while the English expression is a flat denial of a negative quality. To conclude this brief commentary with consideration of the formal address form your honor, the expression “honor” in Japanese katakana is homophonous with the Japanese pronunciation of the word “owner.” Golfers recognize that word
as referring to the player who, by reason of having the lowest score, “owns” the next tee ground and is entitled to tee off first. In Golf, the homophony causes no problem because it is an honor to be owner of the tee. For other Japanese who know a little English, the word “honor” is likely to be associated with “fame” or “something honorable” or deserving of “respect,” but is not likely to be recognized as used to address a judge in a court of law.
CONCLUSION
This paper has considered a number of English-language expressions used as familiar legal terms in the United States. The collection of terms, and their analysis, has been based solely on the English forms appearing in the fi lm My Cousin Vinny and has not been based on the Japanese translations or equivalents for those expressions as used in that fi lm. It is hoped that a future paper will address issues of the Japanese translation of the dialogue in that fi lm, both spoken and in captions.
Most of the courtroom terms described in this paper are fundamental terms that often appear in American courtroom films, and so the American audience is familiar with those expressions. Therefore, it is clear that an understanding of these terms will help Japanese viewers enjoy not only My Cousin Vinny but also other, more intense or complicated legal drama. The courtroom is a part of American culture and part of the daily life experience of Americans. Having knowledge of legal terms is keenly felt as necessary for those who live in the United States. For Japanese who may have reason to study or work in English-speaking countries, familiarity with legal terminology is most desirable. Regardless, and whether we like it or not, one cannot completely do away with having some legal knowledge even in Japan because the Japanese court is now adopting a jury system, as practiced in the United States.
Although, in this fi lm, there are quite a few “unlawyerly,” offensive words (in addition to some ungrammatical usages of the English language), these shortcomings do not detract from the fact that My Cousin Vinny is a very educational movie for college students, for law majors, and for other students who do not major in law. Young people watching the film will surely learn a great deal. They will see the results of overcoming failure. They will understand the value of determination. They will recognize the power available through understanding and properly using words. And they will see the value of expressing appreciation for the help of others. Of course, they will also gain some knowledge about the American judicial system, and will defi nitely come to understand the term “litigator,” and perhaps might even want to become one.
General Terms
1. Arrest E
2. Bar
3. Court(room) E.F.I
4. Defend E
5. Evidence H.I
6. Execute D
7. Guilty E
8. Hearing E
9. Judicial E
10. Oath J
11. Prosecute
12. Testimony, testify I
13. Trial E
Terms for Persons
14. Accessory B,D
15. Bailiff E
16. Client E
17. Counselor E
18. Defendant,
defense, defender I 19. District Attorney
20. Judge, your honor E,H,I,J 21. Jury, juror
22. Lawyer(ly) E
23. Prosecutor
24. Witness G,I
(*before/** after Vinny’s arrival)
Other Contexts
Terms for Interrogation & Arrest*
25. Aid and abet A
26. Book(ing) D
27. Confession C
28. Convict B
29. Murder D,E
30. Waive A
Terms for Defense**
31. Arraign(ment) E
32. Bail E
33. Bench I
34. Charge E
35. Contempt (of court) E 36. Cross-examination I
37. Custody E
38. Disclose, disclosure G,H
39. Discovery I
40. Dismissal of action E
41. Mistrial G
42. Objection I
43. Overrule I
44. Plea, plead E
45. Precedent F
46. Procedure E,F
47. Proceedings
48. Recall of witness J 49. Sustain
50. Verdict
TABLE OF LEGAL EXPRESSIONS
(Appearance in Film Scripts A through J is indicated)NOTES
1 A list of some well-known trial fi lms includes: 12 Angry Men (1957), Paths of Glory (1958), Anatomy of a Murder (1959), Inherit the Wind (1960), Judgment at Nuremberg (1961), To Kill a Mockingbird (1962), The Trial (1962), A Man for All Seasons (1966), The Verdict (1982).
2 Richard Brust, The 25 Greatest Legal Movies. ABA Journal, August 2008 Issue Cover Story. (www.
abajournal.com)
REFERENCES
Davidson, G. W. and Seaton, M. A. (edit) Chambers Pocket 20th Century Dictionary. Edinburgh: W & R Chambers. 1984.
Flexner, Stuart Berg (edit) The Random House Dictionary of the English Language, Second Edition, Unabridged.
New York. 1983.
Mish, Frederick C. (edit) Websters Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary. Springfi eld, Mass.; Merriam-Webster. 1986.
Lynn, Jonathan. (Dir) My Cousin Vinny. 1991. [Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment DVD edition (2002),
「いとこのビニー」Itoko no Binii (FXBA-1876)].
Martin, Elizabeth A. (ed) A Concise Dictionary of Law. Oxford University Press. 1983.
Smith, Lorraine C. and Mare, Nancy Nici. Issues for Today, Japan Edition. Newbury House/Shohakusha. 1996.
(Unit 3, Justice and Crime, pp.49-75)
ON-LINE REFERENCES
Nora Tooher (July 16, 2007) “ ‘Boxing in’ witnesses for knockout depositions.http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2007/07/16/boxing-in-witnesses-for-knockout-depositions/ (Retrieved 13 July 2012)
SOURCES FOR DEFINITIONS OF LEGAL TERMS
Abbreviation Source
CDL A Concise Dictionary of Law 1983
CPD Chambers Pocket 20th Century Dictionary, 1984
IFT Issues for Today (Smith and Mare), 1996
RHD Random House Dictionary of the English Language (2nd edit.), 1983.
WNC Websters Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, 1986
