A Forensic Linguistic Point of View of Implicational Conversations in a Police Interrogation: a Review

3370 Talent Development & Excellence Vol.12, No. 1, 2020, 3370 - 3384

A Forensic Linguistic Point of View of Implicational Conversations in a Police Interrogation: A Review

Munirah1*, Sigit Apriyanto2 1*UniversitasMuhammadiyah Makassar, Indonesia. 2 Faculty of Applied Science and Technology, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM) 1*e mail [email protected] 2e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract: Forensic linguistic experts pick out troubles through a speech from speakers in the structure of language style, forensic phonetics, and dialectology while writing in the form of fingerprints and analysts to categorical the contents of their writing. This study covers the concern on the criteria are used to decide a persons' can be known as linguist witnesses,the ethics of a linguist witness, the criteria that can be used to measure the level of scientific evidence presented by linguistic witnesses,the way of linguist witnesses in finding linguistic evidence, and the way of linguist in describing the implicature of conversation in a police interrogation. The data collected from research articles, books, and journals were analyzed by using descriptive analysis method. In this study, the things related to the role of linguistic forensics will be presented in the process of interrogation, legal language, and forensic linguistic position itself. Finally, it can be concluded that the conversational implicature is used by the police in the interrogation process in dealing with the suspect on common ground, make the suspect consistent without feeling depressed, and help the suspect in describing the case. Keywords: Forensic Linguistics; Interrogation; Implicational Conversations Introduction Forensic linguistics is one part of linguistics that is still relatively young. This discipline is a branch of applied linguistics that examines the interaction between language, crime, and law (Saletović & Kišiček, 2012). Olsson (2004) says that in forensic linguistics knowledge and linguistic techniques are applied to study linguistic phenomena related to legal cases or case investigations; or personal disputes between several parties which in the next stage have an impact on taking legal action. If further elaborated, the main concerns of forensic linguistics are: (1) the language of legal documents, (2) the language of the police and law enforcement, (3) interviews with children and witnesses who are vulnerable in the legal system, (4 ) interactions in the courtroom, (5) linguistic evidence and expert testimony in the trial, (6) authorship and plagiarism, and (7) forensic phonetics and speaker identification(Coulthard & Johnson, 2007;Coulthard, 2010). Apart from the seven aspects, forensic linguistics also examines the language used in prisons, the development of language translation used in the context of legal events, the provision of forensic linguistic evidence based on expertise, and the provision of linguistic expertise in the preparation of legal

ISSN 1869-0459 (print)/ISSN 1869-2885 (online) © 2020 International Research Association for Talent Development and Excellence http://www.iratde.com 3371 Talent Development & Excellence Vol.12, No. 1, 2020, 3370 - 3384 documents and efforts to simplify legal language (Gibbons, 2003). From the explanation of the scope of forensic linguistics, it can be seen that the dimensions of the study are quite broad and involve all levels of linguistics, ranging from phonetic, morphological, and syntactic to pragmatic. One aspect that is quite important to review is the use of expertise in the field of linguistics in the context of legal incidents, such as expert witnesses in trials(e.g. Apriyanto et al., 2020; Santoso & Apriyanto, 2020b, 2020a). Linguistic evidence presented by linguists can be an important consideration for both the complainants and the judges in making fair decisions. This can be seen in the trial of the Ahok Case related to blasphemy cases or cases involving former PKS presidents in bribery cases of beef imports. The two cases were quite awful at the time. The involvement of linguists (forensics) in such legal cases certainly becomes important in the context of law enforcement. However, several questions arise regarding the existence of linguist witnesses, including: (1) what criteria are used to determine someone's expertise so that they can be called linguist witnesses? (2) Are there ethics that must be held by a linguist witness? (3) what are the criteria that can be used to measure the level of scientific evidence presented by linguistic witnesses? (4) How do linguist witnesses deliver evidence, especially linguistic evidence? (5) How is a linguist witness involved in police questioning? and (6) How do linguist witnesses view the implicature conversation? In connection with the efforts to answer these questions, this paper will discuss the matter of linguists as expert witnesses. The main references used to discuss the issue come from Coulthard (2005, 2010), Gibbons (2003), and Olsson (2004). The subject presented by Coulthard (2005)and Coulthard & Johnson (2007)in their book is a linguist as an expert witness. The main issues discussed include the form of the submission of expert witness opinions, expert witness criteria, acceptable evidence, and experts as consultants whose opinions can be used for the investigation. Gibbons (2003) describes more things related to language as evidence that is classified into two things, namely communication evidence and authorship evidence. While Olsson (2004) presents views on expert witnesses in various countries.

Method This study is a review paper, descriptive analysis, and dependent on non-experimental structure. To accumulate data about the extent of the investigation, the analysis was led in auxiliary wellsprings of books, articles, journals, electronic sources, and theories.

Discussion Forensic Linguistics A subject of forensic linguistics has been creating in the present occasions. As referred to over that scientific semantics alludes to the connection among language and law in the entirety of its assortments(Zarirruddin & Nordin, 2016; Anesa, 2013). The noteworthiness of the utilization of legal phonetics is when numerous language specialists are taken for an investment in the court. By the use of their ability and demonstrable skill, a linguist can give opinions that can be seen as the evidence. Legal etymologists are entranced in thankfulness etymological law, its multifaceted nature and its source, and also the utilization of language ISSN 1869-0459 (print)/ISSN 1869-2885 (online) © 2020 International Research Association for Talent Development and Excellence http://www.iratde.com 3372 Talent Development & Excellence Vol.12, No. 1, 2020, 3370 - 3384 in criminological strategies. They also find out about the legal procedure from the factor of capture, and utilizing the meeting, charge, preliminary, and condemning levels(Ariani et al., 2014). The subjects in forensic linguistics are various. One of the fields of measurable etymology is the language of criminal content, which comprises of the exploration of kinds of writings and types of investigation (Luh et al., 2016). Olsson (2004)copes that in reality, any literary substance or communicated in language can be measurable content. This sort of printed substance can be a proposition, a telephone message, a payoff know, or any extraordinary hazard message or even a self-destruction note. This forensic linguistics evidence can be utilized in a criminal investigation or submitted as an evidence in a court. A study by Correa (2013)indicates that instant messages have been utilized as linguistics evidence much of the time under the watchful eye of the courts. For instance, on account of Daniel Jones, who vanished in 2001. To distinguish the young lady's ruffian and killer, language specialists utilized two messages that she had sent to her uncle before the occurrence. For this situation, language specialists looked at some content records before the young lady's last content to explain the case. Dissecting the forensic investigation dependent on the accessible evidence, he presumed that the investigator had not composed it himself, implying that others additionally guarantee to be in a specific request (alluding to his uncle). In view of the description above, it is seen that the consequences of the logical forensic investigation in a surpassing book demonstrate that the standards of language investigation bolstered the logical instruments approach is applied to uncover that implies behind the legitimate language. Moreover, a forensic linguist as a proficient has the obligation of helping a pick in giving a court approach a lawful case, inside which a forensic linguist ought to talk with the morals of an educated and also the standards and states of a learned so concerning conclusion and everything to be reportable from the aftereffects of his investigation is reliable and mindful.

Ethics Expert Witness An expert witness is matchless from a fact witness. A fact witness gives the words for what that individual saw, heard, or experienced. 'I saw the green vehicle turn left and hit the man on the bike', is the sort of statement such an observer may give. On the other hand, an expert witness is permitted to offer input testimony to a court(Kadane, 2005). A specialist's capabilities are analyzed and acknowledged by the adjudicator before the person in question may offer such thoughts(Sanders, 2007). Be that as it may, the assessments an expert is allowed to communicate in court are restricted to those in the territory of one's skill, on account of the majority of you, to insights(Ferreres, 2014). Specifically, it is rash and unwanted to communicate feelings about the law, as the court won't have acknowledged you as a specialist in the law and views it as something for the legal advisors and the adjudicator to talk about. As an expert witness, especially a linguist witness is bound to certain ethics. Ainsworth (2009) identifies several ethics that must be considered by a forensic linguist witness as follows. First, expert witnesses can give the testament to one of the warring

ISSN 1869-0459 (print)/ISSN 1869-2885 (online) © 2020 International Research Association for Talent Development and Excellence http://www.iratde.com 3373 Talent Development & Excellence Vol.12, No. 1, 2020, 3370 - 3384 parties, as well as to the other party. The reference that must be held is that experts only serve loyally for their knowledge. This is different from lawyers who are loyal to their clients. Second, related to compensation, expert witnesses are not allowed to calculate their salaries as witnesses using the contingency fee model. One reasonable thing is imposed on lawyers. Third, expert witnesses should conduct an objective analysis. Ainsworth (2009) called it the phrase 'tell it like it is'. Therefore expert witnesses must swear to tell the truth, there is nothing but the right thing. Fourth, all drafts and notes made by experts when completing the final report should be kept, so that they can be used if cross-testing is needed. Fifth, expert witnesses should not make contacts outside the court with participants involved in the court.

Format Submission of Linguistics A linguist can be a witness in court through two stages. First, he will usually be asked to make a written report that contains his opinion. Next, there is a possibility that he will be asked to come to court and explain and defend his opinion. Coulthard & Johnson (2007) mentions there are two ways for linguists to describe their opinions. First, opinions are presented semantically, and secondly, they are explained statistically. The first choice is often done by some forensic and phonetic linguists. Traditionally linguists feel unable to present their findings statistically in the form of mathematical probabilities, so opinions are more coded semantically (Coulthard & Johnson, 2007b). If seen from the paradigm of scientific research, studies in the field of linguistics indeed intersect more with the qualitative research paradigm, although in certain conditions it can also be approached with a quantitative approach.

Evidence of Linguistics and acceptability As explained before, the linguistic phenomenon can be used as evidence in court. The extent to which the linguistic evidence submitted can be accepted will depend on three things namely expertise (see Santana, 2016), validity (see Lau et al., 2017; Santana, 2016), and relativity (see Santana, 2016). The aspect of expertise concerns the knowledge possessed by a linguist. The next two aspects relate to scientific criteria, namely whether the evidence presented is relevant to the issue in question and whether the evidence is based on scientific methods so that it can be trusted. Regarding linguistic evidence, Gibbons (2003) distinguishes them in two groups. The first group is evidence related to communication events, and second, evidence related to authorship.

Evidence Communication In a communication event, 3 important elements are interrelated namely linguistic forms, the situation in which the communication takes place, and the background knowledge possessed by the communication participant. These three elements become the basis for good communication. Effective communication involves choosing the most appropriate set ISSN 1869-0459 (print)/ISSN 1869-2885 (online) © 2020 International Research Association for Talent Development and Excellence http://www.iratde.com 3374 Talent Development & Excellence Vol.12, No. 1, 2020, 3370 - 3384 of words to communicate the intended meaning to certain participants in a particular context while taking into account the effect of distance from the context. Based on that, the methodology in forensic linguistics will involve four aspects (Gibbons, 2003). First, an analysis of the series of words used in communication. This analysis involves sound, words, grammar, and discourse and their interactions in certain social contexts. Second, an analysis of the possible meanings in these linguistic forms. The third aspect is the measurement of the language skills of the participants. The fourth is the aspect of the context in which the communication event took place. Some aspects that are closely related to the presentation of linguistic evidence include graph phonology, transcription, lexical, morphology, syntax, discourse, and sociolinguistics.

Authorship Evidence The basic issue related to the authorship evidence is whether someone produced a text that can take the form of spoken speech or written text(Nirkhi et al., 2016). A frequently encountered case is to determine who between the two authors produced a text. The basic principle used to identify authorship is the similarity and difference variables of the texts being compared(Johnson & Wright, 2014). The realm of linguistic development is quite rapid in the identification of sounds. Sound or voice is one important linguistic evidence because each individual has unique sound characteristics that are different from other individuals(Waskita, 2014) - like fingerprints. Although accuracy is not as high as DNA identification, sound identification is widely used in judicial processes. Features used to identify sounds include a fundamental frequency of conversation - especially in voiced sounds, articulation, sound quality, prosody, pronunciation time, intonation patterns, obstruction in pronunciation, intensity, dialect/sociolect, pronunciation, and idiosyncratic language patterns, and improper use of emphasis(Adiga et al., 2017). Efforts to identify speakers can be done in two ways, namely using a machine or using the ear (ear witnessing)(see Newman et al., 2008). Besides sound, written language is also a field that is directly related to authorship identification. That includes handwriting analysis, typography, and other writing characteristics. Handwriting is a form of text that is very potential to be used as an authorship identification tool (see Alpers et al., 2005; Bantum & Owen, 2009; McDonnell, 2014). Like fingerprints or sounds, each individual's handwriting is also very distinctive. Three characteristics can be used to classify writers, namely class characteristics, individual characteristics, and idiosyncratic characteristics. Other identification tools that can be used are spelling and punctuation. Besides handwriting, another aspect that can be used to identify authorship is word choice. This choice of words is often related to specific vocabulary that is commonly used by certain circles. One study on the use of words carried out by Coulthard (see Gibbons, 2003), found a construction when the police compiled transcriptions of interviews with suspects. The police often 'slip up' by writing police jargon or doing excessive elaboration so that it looks odd. That is what gives evidence that the suspect's information in certain parts has been modified. Jeremiah (2009) in his study found that a judge - in this case, Greg

ISSN 1869-0459 (print)/ISSN 1869-2885 (online) © 2020 International Research Association for Talent Development and Excellence http://www.iratde.com 3375 Talent Development & Excellence Vol.12, No. 1, 2020, 3370 - 3384

Mathis - used a series of typical linguistic variations including vocabulary, as well as special grammatical and phonetic features. Studies from a sociolinguistic point of view also play a role in identifying authorship which includes dialects, sociolects, and registers. Gibbons (2003) was asked to identify whether someone involved in a refugee case in Australia spoke English in the Canadian dialect. By analyzing the distinctive features, especially the accent, Gibbon can determine that the person is from Western Canada or northwest America. Linguistics can also help the judiciary describe the profile of an author or speaker. Through assessment of the language used, a person's profile will be known such as age, gender, social class, education level and area of origin, even profession. This type of evidence is very helpful for the police to investigate because it can narrow the focus of the investigation.

Police Interrogation It is frequently respected that police investigation is the dominating look at procedure with the guide of the police to obtain admission to wrongdoing (Evans, 2010;Baldwin, 1993). The primary element of the investigation way is additionally worked in with different goals, for example, settling other related wrongdoings, finding taken things, and absolving honest people (Moston & Engelberg, 1993). An investigation directed by Pearse & Gudjonsson (1996) who attempted to feature the account of police presumes investigation in London found that the basic explanation behind the investigation is to imply what happened and see whether wrongdoing has enough evidence or not. In any case, much of the time, admission is the significant objective of the investigators, presently not realities. The interrogation process, like the arrangement of capture, is one of an instrument in which detainees face amazingly over the top dangers of self-assertive or maltreatment of power. In areas, the spot the commonness of police in researching criminal moves is powerless, the danger of cops for the subjective cure is higher. The coherence of strategies on the best way to correct grill is the most solid security measure. By and large, the interrogation way will be helped out if the measurements purchased through the investigator is basic to grill the suspect, and this is the appropriate strategy (Verhoeven, 2016). A police investigation will be directed to ensure the speculates association in wrongdoing. As alluded to Leahy & Bull (2017) as a rule, the suspect was not permitted to secure their allegations. At the end of the day, the suspected should do an affirmation of a case, although the suspected does now not generally do it.

The Roles of Forensic Linguist in Police Interrogation Studies of police interrogations consistently attempt to see how the police in the investigation are provoked by an admission (Leo, 2013). An investigation of the interrogator's coordination and verbal conduct of the speculate all through investigation has been led with the guide of (Richardson et al., 2014). This investigation about the features of the critical job of legal semantics to extricate realities because of the real parts of the realities emerging from such talk can be utilized in court. The exactness of the language utilized in an ISSN 1869-0459 (print)/ISSN 1869-2885 (online) © 2020 International Research Association for Talent Development and Excellence http://www.iratde.com 3376 Talent Development & Excellence Vol.12, No. 1, 2020, 3370 - 3384 investigation decides the blamelessness or blame of a suspect. Hirsch (2014)contended that estimating the suspect's language and reaction to verbal prompts should be possible through the investigation strategy to check of guiltlessness and blame of a suspect. An investigation by Goodman & Martschuk (2018)about the capacity and excursion of the language utilized through translators has a basic key to a beneficial investigation. The data has been collected with the guide of semi-organized meetings to portray the experience and energy about the meeting directed by the method of the mediator. The impacts show that the mediator changes the elements of the meeting and decides the benefits of the use of an interpreter. A point that can be raised is the capacity of the linguist expected to decipher the announcement and make it more prominent precisely. This method adds to the achievement of the interrogation system to get clear data. Studies on forensic linguistics in police interrogations worldwide have uncovered that scientific linguistic ability had a bigger situation in the segments of criminal cases (Elek, 2016). Ceaseless research has been led to handle the reasons for police officers in doing an interrogation. As alluded to through Franken (2008) the police need to avow the discoveries that occur in the court. Subsequently, desk work that has been acted in the investigation stage would be utilized for the check procedure. This is a significant basis for the police to choose whether the charge is coming clean and whether the suspect's story is reliable. The significance of police edifying capacities in convincing the suspects, to come clean, will become key trouble police (Bartels, 2011). In criminal law, a technique for questions proposed through the police to suspected interests to search for a response to a wrongdoing. If the police fall flat or disregard to give this procedure, the inquiries and answers are not adequate as evidence at the preliminary or knowing about the captured individual. This circumstance that makes the insights got for the term of the interrogation process has subtleties of vagueness. Forensic linguistics includes the subjects of the language of judges, legal advisors, witnesses, lawbreakers, and common cases (Fielding, 2013). Forensic linguistics comprises the assessment of composed and communicated in language for jail capacities. A few assortments of criminological phonetic confirmation are industriously utilized in criminal courts, for example, content, email, and chat have been done to introduce clear evidence in a court (Lisina, 2013). As comment with the guide of Määttä (2015), interviews come to be one of the means being taken through law authorization bunches in fathoming criminal cases that can reason a few issues. It's identified with express and certain which implies the nearness of composed writings. This gets some answers concerning featured on the supplier of a mediator and found that the variables of perspective on the translator, sociolinguistics, and interpreting studies can be a superb wellspring of information in perusing this case. Subsequently, in interpreting textual substance it must feature the improvement of the language completely. It is because each sort of archive has a remarkable shape and setting. Linguistic principles, for example, discourse or speech analysis, language rule, and discourse act thought will be utilized by the legal etymologists to give their suppositions in a court (Ramezani et al., 2016). The commitment of alinguist is exceptionally useful for the investigative specialists to get a handle on an affirmation or translating a revelation that may ISSN 1869-0459 (print)/ISSN 1869-2885 (online) © 2020 International Research Association for Talent Development and Excellence http://www.iratde.com 3377 Talent Development & Excellence Vol.12, No. 1, 2020, 3370 - 3384 have assumed lost unknowingly (Correa, 2013). Intending to the battling of crime and linguistic information, a get some answers concerning by method of Kredens (2016)found that the investigators indicated a view of the interpreter's analysis. In light of this investigation, the interpreter and the interrogators have equivalent objectives, for example, the achievement of correspondence. A large portion of the interpreters will be requested their assessment utilizing the police in settling the cases that contain a language in innumerable wrongdoings looked through suspects. Forensic linguistics had been utilized to get mindful of numerous linguistic issues in police investigations (Shuy, 2011). A focal issue in forensic linguistics is the job of linguists in helping the court to are looking for shrouded implications and afterward make the correct inferences (Rajamanickam & Rahim, 2013). The significant point in this part is the power to decide a case is the privilege of police, the obligation of linguists is just to offer thoughts on fundamental issues related to the language analysis. In Indonesia, language has an indispensable key in the criminal framework. The investigator will advise the suspect really and utilize a language that can be comprehended through the suspects about what suspected (Doringin, 2014). The portrayal of the investigation and remembering the utilization of language for the methodology of investigation is contained in the Criminal Code Procedure, in Section XIV (Investigation) Section Two of the "Investigation", which incorporate Articles 106 to 136, controls an assortment of investigator‟s obligations in analytical the suspect. The factor directly here is interrogation comprises of inquiry and answer structure to the suspect.

The Perspective of Implicature On the other hand, implicature is one part of pragmatics. According to Benotti & Blackburn (2001), the term of implicature is used to describe what might be interpreted, suggested, or supposed with the aid of a speaker that is distinct from what the speaker says. In line with that opinion, Grice (1975) suggests that an implicature is a proposition that is implied through the utterance of a sentence in a context, even though the proposition itself is no longer a part of what used to be referred to in the past (Potts, 2015). It is nearly the same as the opinion of Brown & Yule (1986), but Grice tries to relate a context that surrounds a speech that offers to mean. In short, Grice stated the implicature of the dialog is one element of pragmatic study whose fundamental subject used to be to learn about 'that means of a speech' by the context. The conversational implicature is used to explain the implicit meaning at the back of "what is said or written" as "something that is applied". The characteristics of a conversational implicature are the same. The above question can be concluded that a conversational implicature has characteristics, namely: (1) A dialog implicature can be canceled in certain instances (cancellability), (2) Usually there is no other way to say what is said and nonetheless continues the implicature worried (nondetachable), (3) The conversational implicature requires prior information of the conventional that means of the sentence used (nonconventional), and (4) The truth of the contents of a speech implicature is no longer structured on the reality being said (calculable). Grice's idea says that the implicature is divided into three types, specifically conventional implication, conversation, and presupposition (e.g. Bottyán, 2002). The six ISSN 1869-0459 (print)/ISSN 1869-2885 (online) © 2020 International Research Association for Talent Development and Excellence http://www.iratde.com 3378 Talent Development & Excellence Vol.12, No. 1, 2020, 3370 - 3384 questions above are a kind of conversational implicature (non-conventional implicature). The non-conventional or conversational implicature is a pragmatic implication implicit in a dialog and the data is in the context of the police interrogation of witnesses and suspects. The conversational implicature seems in a conversation act. In the police interrogation setting, the investigator has organized an interrogation machine in such a way as the cooperative precept that can guide people's actions in the dialog itself. The conversations above on the groundwork of cooperation adhere to the four maxim of conversation, namely: maxims of quantity, maxims of quality, maxims of relevance, and maxims of manner (Grice, 1975). The precept of cooperation which is elaborated in the four maxims is regulative(Kerry Linfoot, 2007; Levinson, 1983). Therefore, normatively every conversation needs to obey it. However, occasionally the precept is now not usually obeyed so that there have been discovered many "violations" of the rules/principles of cooperation in a conversation. Violation of that precept does not mean "damage" or "failure" in the dialog (communication). The violation may want to be deliberately done using the speaker to obtain the impact of the implicature in the speech he uttered (see Chowdhury, 2014; Wells, 2009).

The Perspective of Forensic Linguistics in Police Interrogation of the Symbolic Meaning in Legal Languages The conversational implicature, when analyzed with forensic linguistics, has symbolic meaning(Miles et al., 2014), specifically proving crime barring breaking the law, such as statements of pressure, intimidation, compelled will, and verbal and nonverbal acts of violence (Pratomo, 2012). The conversational implicature is a manifestation of the interrogator's smart mindset in interrogating. The utilization of the conversational implicature creates a relaxed and humane state of affairs. a) Building Public Trust Interrogators construct trust relationships based totally on humanitarian issues due to the fact they are interrogated in an uncomfortable situation(Leo, 1992). The way to construct trust depends on gender, age, social background, ethnicity, mom-tongue, and intellectual ability to be interrogated(Terpstra & Kort, 2016). Building trust is a vital issue because being interrogated may additionally worry about the effect of speak to an interrogator. Interrogating is an undertaking that requires cautious idea and handling. If accomplished wrong, the risk is getting incomplete records and intentionally misled by way of being interrogated. Interrogators can start with non-public conversations, for instance as friends to create a cozy and humanistic atmosphere. Personal talks are held to destroy the ice with subjects that suit the situation. b) Humanist Violence in the investigation process is a behavior that can give the impression to the suspect that he must be guilty. This is very contrary to the principle that is upheld by the rule of law and democracy, namely the presumption of innocence (see Hirsch, 2014; Judicial & Network, n.d.; Memon et al., 2003). This principle implies that every person suspected, ISSN 1869-0459 (print)/ISSN 1869-2885 (online) © 2020 International Research Association for Talent Development and Excellence http://www.iratde.com 3379 Talent Development & Excellence Vol.12, No. 1, 2020, 3370 - 3384 arrested, detained, prosecuted, and / or presented before a court, must be presumed innocent before there is a permanent legal ruling from the court. Investigators are required to have a friendly and wise person that is, being patient and empathetic, even if they are interrogated in convoluted ways. The humanist attitude is demonstrated by being aware of one's nature, namely observing oneself in words and actions from an interrogated point of view(Cosmin & Claudia, 2015). The bad behavior of the investigators in conducting the investigation process gave a bad image for the Police. Therefore, in addition to the policy to conduct surveillance of investigations, the National Police has also improved by carrying out bureaucratic reforms to further strengthen the Polri's firm and humanist image as a basis for building partnerships and local, national, regional and global arrangements while creating public trust. Listening activities are not passive activities, because they must consider body language carefully to apply the implicature of the conversation by the communication situation. A comfortable and humanistic atmosphere is one of the police services, which treats all people humanely and still respects interrogated self-esteem.

Analysis and Function of Implicational Conversations in Interrogation Examples of implicature forms found in police interrogations are the following: Example 1: 1. Pertanyaan, “Jelaskan oleh saudara kapan dan dimana saudara melakukan … terhadap korban! [Question, Explain to you when and where you did ... the victim!] 2. Pertanyaan, “Jelaskan oleh saudara dengan cara bagaimana saudara melakukan … tersebut![Question, Explain by you the way you do ... that!] Questions 1 and 2 are asked by the investigator to direct the suspect to answer in the specific direction of the goal. So that the investigator and the suspect have the same common ground so that the investigator understands and adapts to the context of the questions that will be asked in the investigation. This adjustment is useful for forming conversational implicature in the investigation process. Example 2: 3. Apakah saudara mengetahui masing-masing peran saudara dan teman saudara saat melakukan perbuatan tersebut? Jelaskan![Do you know each of your roles and your friends when you do this? Explain!] The question of whether it should be answered only elliptically using yes or no. But the word 'explain' [jelaskan] used by the investigator in this question leads the suspect to answer the question by adding information other than repeating the question raised by the investigator. The suspect directly detailed his role and his friend in the event of a crime. Investigators direct the suspect to inform who committed the crime. Example 3:

ISSN 1869-0459 (print)/ISSN 1869-2885 (online) © 2020 International Research Association for Talent Development and Excellence http://www.iratde.com 3380 Talent Development & Excellence Vol.12, No. 1, 2020, 3370 - 3384

4. Jelaskan oleh saudara dengan menggunakan alat apa saudara dan saudara X melakukan … tersebut? Jelaskan![Explain by you using what tools you and your friend X did ... that? Explain!] 5. Apabila demikian, dari mana saudara membawa “alat” tersebut? Jelaskan! [If so, where did you bring the "tool"? Explain!] The investigator for the second time sought information and compatibility with the evidence found. In this question, the investigator found the suspect mentioned evidence in the form of a tool. With this question, the investigator knows the picture of the incident at the time of the incident. Investigators only ask for information about what tools the suspect used in the crime, but the word 'explain' [jelaskan] leads the suspect to complete the questions raised by the investigator. This question helps the suspect reconstruct little by little what happened on the day of the incident. The implicature of the conversation is produced because of a particular conversation context. The speaker and the speech partner have the same knowledge about what is said following the rules of the cooperation principle. The function of using conversational implicature on interrogation is as follows: a. In example 1, the implicature is useful as forming the frame of view so that the investigator and the suspect have the same knowledge about what will be discussed and explained in the investigation. This type of direct questioning is needed by the investigator to build common ground with the suspect. b. In example 2, the implicature functions as self-appraisal, whether the suspect understands who he is and what he does. The suspect can judge himself and will assist the investigator in meeting the investigation needs and also the suspect's needs. c. In example 3, the implicature in the direct question is used to avoid pressure on the suspect so that the suspect can narrate the incident so that the investigator can uncover other things/evidence that has not been found. Thus, the use of conversational implicature in the interrogation conducted by the investigator aims as a bridge between the investigator and the suspect so that the investigator can uncover the actual occurrence without making the suspect cornered and hinder the investigation process.

Conclusion Forensic linguists can present their opinions in two forms. First, the expert opinion is explained qualitatively based on facts and data. One technique that can be taken is to use a semantic scale. Second, linguistic opinion is presented using statistical techniques in the form of mathematical probabilities. Broadly speaking, the linguistic evidence that can be presented by forensic linguists involves all linguistic levels ranging from phonetics, morphology, syntax, to discourse analysis. The use of conversational implicature used by investigators in conducting investigations is a form of general conversation implicature in which the investigator and the suspect have the same knowledge about the context being discussed. So that the essence of an

ISSN 1869-0459 (print)/ISSN 1869-2885 (online) © 2020 International Research Association for Talent Development and Excellence http://www.iratde.com 3381 Talent Development & Excellence Vol.12, No. 1, 2020, 3370 - 3384

investigation that is a goal-oriented event can run as expected by the investigator. In its function of use, the implicature is used by the investigator to show a positive face or build a friendly image before the suspect. It also becomes the media in softly conveying certain intentions.

Acknowledgment The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support from Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar, Indonesia, and we would like to thank the reviewers for their comments on this article.

References 1. Adiga, N., Khonglah, B. K., & Mahadeva Prasanna, S. R. (2017). Improved voicing decisions using glottal activity features for statistical parametric speech synthesis. Digital Signal Processing: A Review Journal, 71, 131–143. 2. Ainsworth, J. (2009). A lawyer‟s perspective: Ethical, technical and practical considerations in the use of linguistic expert witnesses. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 16(2), 279–291. 3. Alpers, G. W., Winzelberg, A. J., Classen, C., Roberts, H., Dev, P., Koopman, C., & Taylor, C. B. (2005). Evaluation of computerized text analysis in an Internet breast cancer support group. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(2), 361–376. 4. Anesa, P. (2013). Courtroom Discourses: An Analysis of the Westerfield Jury Trial. UNIVERSITA„ DEGLI STUDI DI VERONA. 5. Apriyanto, S., Dalman, & Anum, A. (2020). A retrospective study of cyberbullying on social networking. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(6), 137–144. 6. Ariani, M. G., Sajedi, F., & Sajedi, M. (2014). Forensic Linguistics: A Brief Overview of the Key Elements. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 158, 222–225. 7. Baldwin, J. (1993). POLICE INTERVIEW TECHNIQUES Establishing Truth or Proof? THE BRITISH JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY, 33(June), 66–72. 8. Bantum, E. O. C., & Owen, J. E. (2009). Evaluating the Validity of Computerized Content Analysis Programs for Identification of Emotional Expression in Cancer Narratives. Psychological Assessment, 21(1), 79–88. 9. Bartels, L. (2011). Research in Practice: Police interviews with vulnerable adult suspects. In Australian Institute of Criminology -Research in Practice (Issue 21). 10. Benotti, L., & Blackburn, P. (2001). Conversational implicatures. 1–10. 11. Bottyán, G. (2002). The operationality of Grice‟s tests for implicature. Quality, 2, 1–8. 12. Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1986). Discourse Analysis. Cambridge University Press. 13. Chowdhury, M. F. (2014). Interpretivism in Aiding Our Understanding of the Contemporary Social World. Open Journal of Philosophy, 4(4), 432–438. 14. Correa, M. (2013). Forensic linguistics: An overview of the intersection and interaction of language and law. Studies About Languages, 23, 5–13. 15. Cosmin-Constantin, B., & Claudia, C. E. (2015). Rhetorical Critic‟s Role and Mission in Communication. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197(February), 167–174. 16. Coulthard, M. (2005). Some forensic applications of descriptive linguistics. Applied ISSN 1869-0459 (print)/ISSN 1869-2885 (online) © 2020 International Research Association for Talent Development and Excellence http://www.iratde.com 3382 Talent Development & Excellence Vol.12, No. 1, 2020, 3370 - 3384

Linguistics, 9, 9–28. 17. Coulthard, M. (2010). Forensic Linguistics: the application of language description in legal contexts. Langage et Société, 132(2), 15. 18. Coulthard, M., & Johnson, A. (2007a). An Introduction to Forensic Linguistics: Language in Evidence. Routledge. 19. Coulthard, M., & Johnson, A. (2007b). An Introduction to Forensic Linguistics: Language in Evidence. Routledge. 20. Doringin, B. (2014). Kewajiban Penyidik dalam Menginterogasi Tersangka Menurut KUHAP. Lex Crimen, III(4), 84–92. 21. Elek, B. (2016). To the Recommendation of Using “Linguistic Fingerprints” in the Criminal Procedure“. Comparative Legilinguistics, 28, 134. 22. Evans, R. (2010). Policing and Society : An Police interrogations and the Royal commission on criminal Justice. International Journal of Research, 4:1(May), 73–81. 23. Ferreres, A. R. (2014). Ethical issues of expert witness testimony. World Journal of Surgery, 38(7), 1644–1649. 24. Fielding, N. G. (2013). Lay people in court: The experience of defendants, eyewitnesses and victims. British Journal of Sociology, 64(2), 287–307. 25. Franken, S. (2008). Finding the truth in Dutch courtrooms How does one deal with miscarriages of justice ? Utrecht Law Review, 4(3), 218–226. 26. Gibbons, J. (2003). Forensic Linguistics: An Introduction to Language in the Justice System. Wiley-Blackwell. 27. Goodman-delahunty, J., & Martschuk, N. (2018). Risks and Benefits of Interpreter-Mediated Police. Journal of Criminal Justice and Security, 4, 451–471. 28. Grice, H. . (1975). Logic and Conversation. In Studies in the Way of Words (pp. 305–315). Harvard University Press. 29. Hirsch, A. (2014). Going to the Source : The “ New ” Reid Method and False Confessions. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 11(2), 803–826. 30. Husein Ismail, Rahmad Syah, “Model of Increasing Experiences Mathematics Learning with Group Method Project”, International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, pp. 1133-1138, 2020.

31. Jeremiah, M. A. (2009). Linguistic Variation in Judge Greg Mathis‟ Courtroom. The Western Journal of Black Studies2, 33(1). 32. Johnson, A., & Wright, D. (2014). Identifying idiolect in forensic authorship attribution: An n-gram textbite approach. Language and Law/Linguagem e Direito, 1(1), 37–69. 33. Judicial, E., & Network, T. (n.d.). Language training on the vocabulary of judicial cooperation in criminal matters. 34. Kadane, J. B. (2005). Ethical issues in being an expert witness. Law, Probability and Risk, 4(1–2), 21–23. 35. Kerry Linfoot. (2007). FORENSIC LINGUISTICS, FIRST CONTACT POLICE INTERVIEWS, AND BASIC OFFICER TRAINING. UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA. 36. Kredens, K. (2016). Conflict or convergence?: Interpreters‟ and police officers‟ perceptions of the role of the public service interpreter. Language and Law= Linguagem e Direito, 3(2), ISSN 1869-0459 (print)/ISSN 1869-2885 (online) © 2020 International Research Association for Talent Development and Excellence http://www.iratde.com 3383 Talent Development & Excellence Vol.12, No. 1, 2020, 3370 - 3384

65–77. 37. Lau, J. H., Clark, A., & Lappin, S. (2017). Grammaticality, Acceptability, and Probability: A Probabilistic View of Linguistic Knowledge. Cognitive Science, 41(5), 1202–1241. 38. Leahy-Harland, S., & Bull, R. (2017). Police Strategies and Suspect Responses in Real-Life Serious Crime Interviews. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 32(2), 138–151. 39. Leo, R. A. (1992). From coercion to deception: the changing nature of police interrogation in America. Crime, Law and Social Change, 18(1–2), 35–59. 40. Leo, R. A. (2013). Why Interrogation Contamination Occurs Richard. University of San Francisco Law Research Paper, 11(1), 197. 41. Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press. 42. Lisina, N. (2013). Stylistic Features of Legal Discourse [University of Oslo]. http://www.duo.uio.no/ 43. Luh, N., Seri, N., & Tan, V. (2016). Forensic Linguistics Analysis of Virginia Woolf ’ S Suicide Notes. 9(1), 52–57. 44. Määttä, S. K. (2015). Interpreting the discourse of reporting: The case of screening interviews with asylum seekers and police interviews in Finland. Translation and Interpreting, 7(3), 21– 35. 45. McDonnell, M. (2014). Comparison of Text Analysis Programs for Identification of Emotional Expression. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, December, 57. 46. Memon, A., Vrij, A., & Bull, R. (2003). Psychology and law: truthfulness, accuracy and credibility. In Wiley series in psychology of crime, policing, and law (Vol. 2). 47. Miles, M., Huberman, M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis (H. Salmon (ed.); 3rd ed.). SAGE Publication. 48. Moston, S., & Engelberg, T. (1993). Police questioning techniques in tape recorded interviews with criminal suspects. Policing and Society, 3(July). 49. Newman, M. L., Groom, C. J., Handelman, L. D., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2008). Gender Differences in Language Use : An Analysis of 14 , 000 Text Samples. 211–236. 50. Nirkhi, S., Dharaskar, R. V., & Thakare, V. M. (2016). Authorship Verification of Online Messages for Forensic Investigation. Physics Procedia, 78, 640–645. 51. Olsson, J. (2004). What is Forensic Linguistics? 1–16. 52. Pearse, J., & Gudjonsson, G. (1996). Police interviewing techniques at two south london police stations. Psychology, Crime & Law, 3(1), 63–74. 53. Potts, C. (2015). Presupposition and Implicature. The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, June, 168–202. 54. Pratomo, B. I. (2012). Bahasa, kekuasaan, dan kekerasan (2nd ed.). Sanata Dharma University Press. 55. Rajamanickam, R., & Rahim, A. A. (2013). Forensic Linguistic Evidence and its Admissibility in Malaysia. International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS, 13(04), 51–56. 56. Ramezani, F., Sani, A. K., & Moghadam, K. (2016). Forensic linguistics in the light of crime investigation. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 24(1), 375–384. 57. Richardson, B. H., Taylor, P. J., Snook, B., Conchie, S. M., & Bennell, C. (2014). Language style matching and police interrogation outcomes. Law and Human Behavior, 38(4), 357– ISSN 1869-0459 (print)/ISSN 1869-2885 (online) © 2020 International Research Association for Talent Development and Excellence http://www.iratde.com 3384 Talent Development & Excellence Vol.12, No. 1, 2020, 3370 - 3384

366. 58. Saletović, L. M., & Kišiček, G. (2012). Contribution to the analysis of witness statements in the croatian language. Suvremena Lingvistika, 38(73), 73–88. 59. Sanders, J. (2007). Expert Witness Ethics. Fordham Law Review, 76(2), 517–519. 60. Santana, C. G. (2016). Evidence and formal models in the linguistic sciences. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 174. 61. Santoso, D., & Apriyanto, S. (2020a). Algorithms of language in speech by the president of republic indonesia. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(6), 125–136. 62. Santoso, D., & Apriyanto, S. (2020b). Pragmatics implicature analysis of police interrogation: Forensic linguistics analysis. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(6), 115–124. 63. Shuy, R. W. (2011). Applied Linguistics in the Legal Arena (Issue Handbook of Applied Linguistics). Mouton de Gruyter. 64. Terpstra, J., & Kort, J. (2016). Police officers‟ trust in criminal justice. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 47, 12–20. 65. Verhoeven, W. J. (2016). The complex relationship between interrogation techniques, suspects changing their statement and legal assistance. Evidence from a Dutch sample of police interviews. Policing and Society, 28(3), 308–327. 66. Waskita, D. (2014). Transitivity in Telephone Conversation in A Bribery Case In Indonesia: A Forensic Linguistics Study. Jurnal Sosioteknologi, 13(2), 91–100. 67. Wells, D. (2009). Law 101 : Legal Guide for the Forensic Expert. 24–25. 68. Zarirruddin, M., & Nordin, F. (2016). Forensic Linguistics and the Detecting of Deviant Teaching in.