Search

This paper describes (im)politeness strategies that occur in oral trials, because there are related to the credibility of the speakers –a matter of vital importance for the outcome of the trial–. The participants are divided into groups according to their goals, so there is an accuser block against a defender block, and between them stands the judge, who is responsible for sentencing. It will be shown that in these contexts, when there is an implicit conflict, individuals give priority to their image of credibility rather than maintaining a good self-image. Thus, they do not hesitate to show a negative image of themselves if they consider it may be beneficial for the verdict. On the other hand, they often project a bad image of the opponent group, preferably addressing information that questions the truth of the facts related by their opponents. In short, judicial contexts constitute a complex framework of communication where interests take precedence over the desire to convey a good image (of either themselves or another actor).