Difference between revisions of "Licoppe-Dumoulin2015"
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) m |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|BibType=INCOLLECTION | |BibType=INCOLLECTION | ||
|Author(s)=Christian Licoppe; Laurence Dumoulin | |Author(s)=Christian Licoppe; Laurence Dumoulin | ||
| − | |Title= | + | |Title=“Is there someone in my videoconference room?”: managing remote witnesses in distributed courtrooms |
|Editor(s)=Baudouin Dupret; Michael Lynch; Tim Berard | |Editor(s)=Baudouin Dupret; Michael Lynch; Tim Berard | ||
|Tag(s)=Law; Ethnomethodology; Workplace; Mediated interaction; | |Tag(s)=Law; Ethnomethodology; Workplace; Mediated interaction; | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
|Publisher=Oxford University Press | |Publisher=Oxford University Press | ||
|Year=2015 | |Year=2015 | ||
| + | |Language=English | ||
|Address=New York | |Address=New York | ||
|Booktitle=Law at Work: Studies in Legal Ethnomethods | |Booktitle=Law at Work: Studies in Legal Ethnomethods | ||
|Pages=191–219 | |Pages=191–219 | ||
| + | |URL=https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190210243.001.0001/acprof-9780190210243-chapter-9 | ||
| + | |DOI=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190210243.003.0009 | ||
| + | |Abstract=This chapter is a case study of an innovative attempt to introduce video communication with remote witnesses in French criminal trials. It focuses on the practical problem of getting witnesses to testify one after the other, and discusses how the remote testimony transforms the organization of hearings. The analysis shows that the joint availability of videoconference technology and remote witnesses enables distinctive formats of requests and displays of affiliation, such as eliciting the collaboration of remote personnel, rather than instructing them on how to testify. The chapter then analyzes a problematic case, which makes perceptible in the courtroom settings the ‘interaction asymmetries’ which are characteristic of video communication. In such problematic situations, parties to the case orient toward practical issues, such as getting the hearing to proceed in an intelligible manner, and legal requirements, such as producing a record that is reviewable by lawyers for possible grounds of an appeal. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 07:11, 15 December 2019
| Licoppe-Dumoulin2015 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | INCOLLECTION |
| Key | Licoppe-Dumoulin2015 |
| Author(s) | Christian Licoppe, Laurence Dumoulin |
| Title | “Is there someone in my videoconference room?”: managing remote witnesses in distributed courtrooms |
| Editor(s) | Baudouin Dupret, Michael Lynch, Tim Berard |
| Tag(s) | Law, Ethnomethodology, Workplace, Mediated interaction |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press |
| Year | 2015 |
| Language | English |
| City | New York |
| Month | |
| Journal | |
| Volume | |
| Number | |
| Pages | 191–219 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190210243.003.0009 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | Law at Work: Studies in Legal Ethnomethods |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This chapter is a case study of an innovative attempt to introduce video communication with remote witnesses in French criminal trials. It focuses on the practical problem of getting witnesses to testify one after the other, and discusses how the remote testimony transforms the organization of hearings. The analysis shows that the joint availability of videoconference technology and remote witnesses enables distinctive formats of requests and displays of affiliation, such as eliciting the collaboration of remote personnel, rather than instructing them on how to testify. The chapter then analyzes a problematic case, which makes perceptible in the courtroom settings the ‘interaction asymmetries’ which are characteristic of video communication. In such problematic situations, parties to the case orient toward practical issues, such as getting the hearing to proceed in an intelligible manner, and legal requirements, such as producing a record that is reviewable by lawyers for possible grounds of an appeal.
Notes
