IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No.

3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

MOOD IN COURTROOM DISCOURSE: AN EXAMPLE OF OLU

OLAGOKE’S ‘THE INCORRUPTIBLE JUDGE’

Farinde, Raifu Olanrewaju, Ph.D

Department Of English And Literary Studies
Federal University Oye-Ekiti, Nigeria
mikh_fad75@yahoo.com
&
Ogunrinde, Ebenezer Deji, Ph.D
Department Of English And Literary Studies
Federal University Oye-Ekiti, Nigeria
ebenezer.ogunrinde@fuoye.edu.ng
DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18277.47848

Abstract
When a writer writes, it is with the intention of conveying some moods to the readers and
audience. Embedded in literary texts are various types of mood which conveys diverse
messages to the readers and audience. This study attempts an appraisal of the mood
types in the courtroom scene of Olu Olagoke’s The Incorruptible Judge. The analytical
tool proposed by Gibbons’ (2008), forensic questioning model was adopted as analytical
tool for the play. The study reveals such mood types as fear, anger, sorrow, gloom,
rejection, etc. The study concludes by recommending further analyses with texts
containing courtroom discourse as they are modeled after real life situations.
Keywords: Incorruptible, mood, courtroom, discourse, sorrow, judge

Introduction
Language and mood are interwoven. One is embedded in the other. This is
because language is the outlet for the expression of mood. According to Farinde
(2006), there are many discourse situations such as buying things in a shop or
market, interview for a job, interrogation between the accused and the police,
talking formally in cases or meetings, interactions within the family and loved
ones etc. These situations will have their own formulae and convention which
we will follow. Mood is the decisive factor that will help us know the right
words to choose under the various discourse situations. In support of this, Ojo
(2006) observes that it is through language that mood must be observed and
gauged and that a speaker/writer employs language in his day-day interactions
and what he says/writes at a particular time is an indicator of his mood. In
essence, the mood of speaker/writer determines the language he uses.

61
 IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No. 3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

According to Olaniyi (2016), mood has been studied from different perspectives
by linguistics, Pragmatics, Semantics and Phonology and so forth. Articles with
literary texts as data include those of Osisanwo (2006), Akorede (2006) and Jimoh
(2006) among others. Despite this, there is dearth of literatures on mood which
dwells on courtroom discourse using literary text as data. This is the focus of
this present study. This research investigates mood in courtroom discourse
using the courtroom scene in Olu Olagoke’s play ‘The incorruptible Judge’ as data.
A brief Synopsis of Olagoke’s The Incorruptible Judge

Olagoke has published two plays in the Evans Africa plays series which are ‘The
Incorruptible Judge’ and ‘The Iroko man and the wood-carver’. ‘The Incorruptible
Judge’ is a moralistic play which deals with the evil embedded in the act of
bribery and corruption. The play contains some fundamental truth that no
sinner will go unpunished as this is shown in the final scene with the arrest and
trial of the unscrupulous employer James Ade Agbalowomeri.

The play opens with Ajala, a very brilliant young school-leaver who applies for
vacancy at the Establishment office in the Government Development
Department. The Establishment Officer, Mr Ade Agbalowomeri told the
applicant that he must first bring five pounds before he could employ him.
Ajala, the applicant then reported the matter to the police, Detective Sergeant
Clement Agbonifo Okoro who gave him five pounds notes and followed him to
the office of Mr James Ade Agbalowomeri and eventually arrested him. Despite
several attempts made to influence the trial Judge, Mr Justice Faderin by Mr
Eniola Durojaye, his father- in-law and his friend Chief Bobameto, an important
chief, the judge remains adamant and proves incorruptible. Mr James Ade
Agbalowomeri; the corrupt officer is eventually convicted and sentenced to three
years’ imprisonment with hard labour. All his relatives and friends were wailing
and dashing themselves to the ground as the prisoner is led away from the dock
by the police.

Courtroom Procedure
Before going on to questions in court, it is necessary to discuss about courtroom
procedures. This will guide us in later stages when some aspects of the
procedures in the courtroom are referred to. In the courtroom, examination-in-
chief usually comes first. The aim is to obtain narrative facts from the witnesses
that will support the examiner in-chief client. In England and Wales, the party
who calls a witness (to the court) conducts the examination-in-chief. In Nigeria,

62
 IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No. 3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

the prosecution counsel who is the lawyer representing the state asks question or
examine the witness. In the magistrate court in Nigeria, the prosecutor who is a
police officer usually examines the witness. Either in the high court or the
magistrate court, the prosecuting counsel who is a lawyer or the prosecutor who
is a police officer must be well armed with the facts of the case. The
examination-in-chief is also known as ‘direct examination’ or ‘examination’. The
object of examination-in-chief is to obtain vivid narrative facts of the case from
the witness.

In this regard, questions that will generate maximum narrative facts are more
frequent as they “allow the witness to break into narratives that give an authentic
ring to testimony” (Woodbury, (1984-211). At this stage, leading questions are
frown upon, because the aim is to elicit maximum facts from the witness.
Leading questions are questions embedded with propositions of the questioner
which can convince the witness. Cross-examination on the other hand, comes
after examination-in-chief. Here, the objective is quite different from
examination. The aim of cross-examining lawyers is to discredit the witnesses’
testimony. Thus, it is usually a tense confrontation between an aggressive
lawyer and the witness. The cross-examining lawyer will always be aiming to
derive testimony that will be favourable to him from the witness, “lawyer’s role
in direct examination is to showcase the witness testimony, on cross-
examination, you should be centre of attention” (Manet 1980:247-249). That is
why examination has always been described in the literature as cooperative
while cross-examination is described as hostile and uncooperative
(Luchjenbroers 1997).

Review of Nigerian Language and the Law Literature

Little work has been done in the area of Language and the Law in Nigeria. The
little research efforts that is in existence have dwelt much on the features of the
language of the law, including lexical, syntactic, discoursal and graphological
features. For example, Okolo’s (2000) study looks at the features of language of
the law in general at the discoursal level, syntactic level and lexical levels.

At the discoursal level, the study frowns on the absence of pronouns and lack of
cohesive devices in the legalese which makes legal documents very difficult to
comprehend for a lay man. At the syntactic level, legal documents also have
large numbers of passive constructions, truncated passives, nominalisations,
multiple negatives, misplaced or intrusive phrases, doublets such as any and all,
cease and desist, false and untrue and unusual prepositional phrases such as ‘as to’,

63
 IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No. 3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

‘in the event of’, and ‘until such a time as’. Okolo admits here that subjecting
legal documents to syntactic analysis will be a herculean task because syntactic
rules cannot generate most legal sentence structures. Furthermore, at the lexical
level, there is a preponderant presence of French, Latin and Old English words,
whose original meanings have not been replaced with their current equivalents
as should be expected, making legal language a myth to a layman. All the above
features are given in Okolo’s study and this mystification of legal language is
observable at those levels of linguistic analysis. However, central to Okolo’s
study is the application of existing linguistic theories with which this problem
can be overcome.

Still speaking on the peculiar language features of the language of law, Alabi’s
(1997) work also categorised these features into lexical and syntactic peculiarities,
and graphological peculiarities. Under lexical and syntactic pecularities, the
study identifies the following as being the features of language and the law: (i)
technical words such as malicious, act, decree, plaintiff etc; (ii) foreign words
such as French and Latin borrowings e.g. de jure, in loco parentis, tort and
posteriori; (iii) nominalizations such as assignor, transferor, inspectee, appointee;
(iv) stringing together of adverbials and prepositions e.g. therewith, thereafter,
hereby, whereof etc; (v) many abbreviations such as L.J. for justice; (vi)
preponderant use of nominal and dearth of pronouns; and (vii) inversion of
word order.

Very few studies of language and law in Nigeria attempt the analysis of the
structure of courtroom discourse. Among these is Opeibi (2001). In Opeibi
(2001), there is the categorisation of the discourse strategies used in court which
are: the structure of the message, the addresser-addressee structure and the
cohesive structure. The author is of the opinion that by the nature of the
courtroom discourse, apart from very few declarative and imperative sentences,
the information gathering process and gathering of facts are done through the
means of interrogations. Opeibi (2001:9) asserts that the preponderance of
interrogative sentences is a reflection of the nature of legal process in general.

Olubakin and Kalejaiye (2018) study examines the mood system displayed in the
communicative event presented in the clause structure of courtroom utterances
of a selected manslaughter trial in a Nigerian court. They are of the opinion that
language in courtroom interrogations express mood associations in addition to
the syntactic implication meaning making. This work is a detailed syntactic
analysis of courtroom discourse in mood situations. However, it does not cover

64
 IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No. 3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

the fictional aspect as it is based on real life courtroom situations. This present
study is based on fictional aspect as given in Olu Olagoke’s the Incorruptible
Judge.

As maintained earlier, only very few of the studies of language and the law in
Nigeria attempt the language analysis of the structure of courtroom discourse.
Farinde (2016) paper attempts this. Farinde (2016) studies pragmatic markers in
courtroom discourse. He is of the opinion that cross-examination is a hostile
phrase and it always favours the lawyers because of their power and asymmetry
over the witnesses and the accused persons. These discourse markers are always
used by the lawyers during the cross-examination which also emphasize their
powers over the witnesses and the accused persons. Although, Farinde’s work is
a detailed work on courtroom discourse, the focus is pragmatic markers to the
detriment of the structure of courtroom discourse. That is the major and highly
significant gap that this paper is trying to fill. This paper attempts to provide a
very detailed and rigorous analysis of Nigerian courtroom discourse as given in
Olu Olagoke’s The Incorruptible Judge.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework for this study is supported with Gibbons’ (2008)
forensic questioning model. This model is especially good for the analysis of
institutional dyadic discourse of unequal participants. It is essentially good for
courtroom discourse because observation of the data used for this work has
revealed that the greatest linguistic tool or weapon the lawyers employed in
establishing their institutional authority over suspects is question. In support of
this, Stygall (1994) asserts that questions are a powerful tool the lawyers and
police interrogators use to control the flow of discourse, requesting particular
information in a certain fashion, presenting the story in the order they impose,
which does not necessarily follow the temporal succession of the actual events.

Questions in court are different from questions in other contexts. This is so

because in the courtroom, question can only be asked by the judges, lawyers and
prosecutors. The witnesses’ and defendants’ role is just to answer these
questions. This is unlike in other contexts such as conversation between two
colleagues whereby any of the two can ask questions and is not reserved for one
person alone. Questioning procedure, therefore, in court is reserved primary for
those who form a part of the court system e.g. judges, magistrates, lawyers,
clerks (Harris 1994).

65
 IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No. 3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

Gibbons (2008) postulates some questioning forms which are identified, analysed
and discussed for this present study. They are (i) Declarative questions, (ii)
Choice questions (iii)Wh-questions, (iv) Projected questions, and (v) Special
formulas. According to Gibbons (2008), in courtroom discourse, only one party is
normally expected to ask questions and the other party is only allowed to
respond and normally must respond.

Declarative Questions: These are questions loaded or embedded with the

questioners’ views, positions, ideas and propositions, aimed at indicting or
convincing the respondent. According to Gibbons (2008), they are very
powerful questions because they contain the proposition of the questioner. As
can be inferred from above discussions, declarative questions have
presuppositions and all questions posed in natural language will contain words
or phrases that have emotive connotations, both positive and negative.
According to Watson (2003: 1791), the suggestiveness of a declarative question
can have subtle effects on the respondent who is a witness. What may occur is
that the suggestive terms in the question can result in the interrogator's views
being incorporated into the memory of that witness.

Choice Questions: These are otherwise known as polar or Yes/No questions.

They are questions that require the respondent to oscillate between two options
of yes or no. The lawyers make use of this type of question in police-suspect
discourse to limit the choice of response of suspects. Such questions are also
used by the police to prevent suspects from deviating from the subject of
discourse. According to Gibbons (2008), these choice questions license in the
response only information provided by the lawyers and police interrogator.

WH-questions: These questions whether restricted or non-restricted are

questions usually posed by the police for specific facts and information. They are
introduced by WH-words such as where, who, when, why, how and what. This
type of question is the one that is mostly employed by lawyers in the course of
their interaction with accused persons.

Projected Questions: According to Gibbons (2008), questions in police

interrogation usually contain verbal projection (reported speech). In these kinds
of questions, the propositions of the police interrogator are usually embedded in
them thereby placing high levels of pressure for agreement on the suspect. In a
verbal projection, like ‘You say that he killed the woman', there is an assumption
that the speaker is committed to the truth of the core proposition (He killed the
woman) rendering it very difficult to deny without branding oneself a liar.

66
 IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No. 3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

Therefore, if the person answers ‘No’ this denial is primarily a denial of saying
this, but does not deny that he killed the woman (although the denial may affect
this core proposition if there is no other evidence for the fact). The core
information (He killed the woman) is to some degree presupposed or embedded.

Special Formulas: One characteristics of police interrogation is that there are

occasions when police interrogators specifically mark the fact that the
information is their version of events, not that of suspect, them challenge the
suspect to agree. This is done by the use of legal formulas, the most common of
which is “I put it to you that".'' This phrase is not exclusively part of police
domain and may be more frequently and more effectively used in courtroom
discourse (e. g. cross examination). It is nonetheless a phrase which is unlikely to
turn up in general conversation but which does appear with some frequency in
police interrogation (Gibbons 2008).

Data
The data for this study were selected from Olu Olagoke’s The Incorruptible Judge.
Precisely, this research investigates mood in courtroom discourse using the
courtroom scene in Olu Olagoke’s play ‘The incorruptible Judge’ as data. The
courtroom proceedings in the text were studied painstakingly with focus on
question and answer adjacency pairs presented by the prosecuting lawyer, the
defence lawyer, accused and the witnesses and rigorously analyzed. We have
selected this text because it contains detailed and almost real life proceedings of
courtroom discourse. It also contains elements of mood and being a drama piece
it portrays direct characters in action.

Analysis
Extract 1
Lawanson : What is your name?
Okoro : Clement Agbonifo Okoro.
Lawanson: Did anybody make a report to you on the 18th day of March, 1962?
Okoro : Yes.
Lawanson : Who was that?
Okoro : Ajala Oni.

67
 IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No. 3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

Lawanson : What did he say?

Okoro : He said when he took his application to the Establishment office in the
Government Development, he demanded a bribe of five pounds from him
before he could appoint him.
Lawanson : What did you do when he told you this?
Okoro : I marked five pounds notes, carefully recorded their numbers, and gave
them to the complainant to give to the accused in his office. I followed him
and stood outside the applicant coughed and came out.
Lawanson : Do you know why he coughed?
Okoro : Yes, I asked him to cough after the accused got the money from him.
Lawanson : What did you do after that?
Okoro : I went to him immediately. When the accused denied receiving any money
from the applicant. I searched him and found thirty pounds in his pocket.
When I checked them, I saw four of my marked notes in them. I was
looking for the fifth note when the accused suddenly grabbed the notes and
put them in his mouth. I held his throat until he spat out and then I
charged him to court.

In extract 1 above, the prosecuting lawyer, Lawanson is asking questions from

the Detective-Sergeant Clement Okoro who is the police officer in charge of the
case. Since the prosecuting lawyer is the counsel for the prosecution, and
Sergeant Okoro is the officer in charge of the case, this is under direct
examination. It is direct examination because the prosecuting lawyer is on the
side of officer in –charge of the case. The glaring fact to be noted about extract 1
is the preponderance of both restricted and non-restricted WH-questions. This
finding conforms to existing literatures in legal discourse about the contrast
between direct examination and cross-examination. The direct examination
stage is very supportive and cooperative as opposed to the cross-examination
stage which is hostile and unfriendly. The prosecuting lawyer uses WH-
questions to elicit maximal response and more facts from the officer in charge of
the case in this extract. Since he is acting on behalf of this witness he is
sympathetic towards him. Many of the WH-questions that he uses are non-
restricted ones that enabled him to get the real information about the witness’
version of reality from the witness. The objective of this is to put this witness in a

68
 IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No. 3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

relaxed mood so that he will be in a frame of mind to tell what actually

happened. Such non-restricted WH-questions are:
1. What did he say?
2. What did you do when he told you this?
3. What did you do after that?

Even when the prosecuting lawyers uses restricted WH-questions such as ‘Who
was that?’, it is to ask for specific name. We can observe in this extract that
Sergeant Okoro here is in a relaxed mood and he freely gives narrative answers
about what really happened.
Extract 2
Arogunmatidi : Who saw you marked those notes?
Okoro : Nobody.
Arogunmatidi : So there was nobody to see and confirm that the notes were actually
marked?
Okoro : Yes.
Arogunmatidi : I put it to you that you did not actually marked the notes, that
after searching such an eminent gentleman without finding anything
incriminating on him you realized that you might be taken to court for
wrongful and malicious accusation or even defamation of character with the
possibility of having to pay a heavy fine. Then you suddenly invented that you
saw your marked notes in the money he brought from home. After all nobody saw
you mark those notes.

In extract 2 above, the defence lawyer, Arogunmatidi is asking questions from

sergeant Okoro who is the officer-in-charge of the case. This is the cross-
examination stage. Here, the defence lawyer uses WH-questions sparingly.
Even, the one he uses is the restricted WH-question which is to ask for specific
name such as ‘Who saw you mark those notes?’ and Sergeant Okoro replied
‘Nobody’. He makes sure that he uses this restricted question that requires only
naming a specific person. This reveals the power that lawyers have over the
witnesses. Furthermore, the defence lawyer also makes use of choice question
thereby restricting the witness to either affirming or denying such as ‘so there
was nobody to see and confirm that the notes were actually marked’ and
sergeant Okoro replied in the affirmative ‘Yes’. This is hardly surprising

69
 IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No. 3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

however, since the aim of the defence lawyer is to limit the choice of Okoro’s
reply to either ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ thereby conforming to his own side of the story.

Another thing that is peculiar to this extract is the use of special legal formula
which is attached to declarative question that is used with the intention of
forcing the defence lawyer’s prepositions on the officer-in-charge of the case. The
aim of the defence lawyer, Arogunmatidi is to impose his proposition and his
own version of reality on sergeant Okoro. His objective is to put the witness,
Okoro in a mood of fear thereby limiting his response to barely
acknowledgement of the defence lawyer’s, propositions. ‘I put it to you that
you... The defence lawyer even uses a negative choice question to make the
officer-in-charge agree with his own side of the story ‘Is that not so?’ After all
nobody saw you mark those notes. That negative question is used during this
cross-examination stage reveals the powerful nature of negative questions and
the oppressive nature of cross-examination stage. But sergeant Okoro is too
experienced to fall for this and he replied in the negative also. ‘No sir. Not only
did…

Extract 3
Arogunmatidi : At what time did you consult the accused?
Ajala : At about 12.30pm.
Arogunmatidi : He promised to help?
Ajala : Yes.
Arogunmatidi : He insisted on taking money?
Ajala : Yes
Arogunmatidi : Do I understand you to mean that he took the money not as a
gift but
as a tip?
Ajala : Yes
Arogunmatidi : But anyone could show gratitude by a present!
Ajala : Yes… but… eh…

70
 IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No. 3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

In extract 3 above, the defence lawyer is asking questions from the young
applicant Ajala. Because of the fact that Arogunmatidi is the defence lawyer who
is on the side of the accused Agbalowomeri and Ajala is the second prosecuting
witness, this extract is under cross-examination. In this regard, the WH-question
used is just to ask for a specific time ‘At what time did you consult the accused?’
And Ajala replied precisely ‘at about 12.30pm’. He also makes use of choice
questions to restrict the witness to either affirming or denying his propositions.
It is very difficult for the witness to deny such propositions and that is why Ajala
confirm these propositions despite the fact that this is not helping his own case:
Arogunmatidi : He promised to help?
Ajala : Yes
Arogunmatidi : He insisted on taking money?
Ajala : Yes.

We can see here that during cross-examination, the lawyers are all powerful. It is
they that control the discourse between them and the witnesses’ contributions.
That is why at the end of this cross-examination, the defence lawyer puts a
declarative question to Ajala which caught him off-guard and makes him start
stuttering:
Arogunmatidi : But anyone could show gratitude by a present?
Ajala : Yes: but…eh…

Declarative questions are usually favoured by lawyers during cross-examination

because they are very powerful, leading and coercive. The declarative questions
asked during cross-examination are not asking for answers that lawyers do not
know already. Rather, they are asking for witness corroboration and agreement
of the propositions embedded in them.

Extract 4
Arogunmatidi : What is your name?
Agbalowomeri : James Ade Agbalowomeri
Arogunmatidi : Age?
Agbalowomeri : Forty-four
Arogunmatidi : What is your occupation?

71
 IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No. 3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

Agbalowomeri : Establishment officer in the Government Development

Department.
Arogunmatidi : How long have you been working in the civil service?
Agbalowomeri : Twenty years.
Arogunmatidi : Have you ever been involved in any case of bribery or
corruption,
misappropriation or maladministration?
Agbalowomeri No
Arogunmatidi : When will you retire from the civil service?
Agbalowomeri : Next year
Arogunmatidi : Will you be entitled to a substantial gratuity and pension
for life?
Agbalowomeri : Yes
Arogunmatidi : Are you married with wife?
Agbalowomeri : Yes, five children
Arogunmatidi : What is your own version of the story?
Agbalowomeri : When the prosecution witness brought his application
to me, I told him that he was quite qualified and gave
him a note to report for duty
the following day. He said he was grateful and that he
would pay me
back for my help. I didn’t know what he meant. The next
thing I know was the police, searching me. I did not
destroy any notes.
Arogunmatidi : In the light of that statement, you deny any knowledge of
receiving anything?
Agbalowomeri : Yes, he only … the fact is that… I thought he…

In extract 4 above, the defence lawyer Arogunmatidi is asking questions from the
accused person James Agbalowomeri. The accused is already in a pensive mood
but since the defence lawyer is defending the accused, and is on his side, during
this examination, he is asking questions that will put him in a relaxed mood.
That is why most of the questions asked are WH-questions that will showcase his
good qualities and his good past records and reputation. Even, when the
defence lawyer makes use of choice questions, it is also to showcase his good
qualities and his past meritorious service. For example:
Arogunmatidi : Have you even been involved in any case of bribery or corruption,

72
 IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No. 3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

misappropriate or maladministration?
Agbalowomeri : No.
Arogunmatidi : Will you be entitled to a substantial gratuity and pension for life?
Agbalowomeri : Yes.
Arogunmatidi : Are you married with wife?
Agbalowomeri : Yes.

The last choice question about his wife and children are also asked by the
defence lawyer so that the judge can have pity on him and consider his marital
status and responsibilities. But the judge is not impressed by this and he cuts
him sharply:

The Judge : Speak the truth and precisely

Agbalowomeri : My lord, I did not receive anything. God is my witness.

Here, the mood of anger and indignation is portrayed by Justice Faderin who
always stands by the side of truth and cannot tolerate deceit and lies.

Extract 5
Agbalowomeri : God is my witness that I never got a penny from anybody. Please
take pity
on my condition, your lordship, and be lenient with me. Consider
my age, my length of service, my family and my children. Don’t
send me to prison.
The Judge… There is also the necessity of deterring others from following you
bad
example. This is a very serious offence and the one that has been
rampant. This country must be protected against unscrupulous
officers of your type who abuse their position of trust and
responsibility, betray the confidence
reposed in them by their employers and make things difficult for the
honest…

73
 IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No. 3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

Agbalowomeri : I have a family of six, your lordship. Have mercy

on me. The quality of mercy is not strained. It droppeth…
The Judge: Enough of that hackneyed quotation from Shakespeare. I cannot be too
drastic in an offence of this nature and I should be failing in my duty to
the public if I gave you the option of fine. So I find you guilty of
extortion and you are therefore sentenced to three years’ imprisonment
with hard labour.

In extract 5 above, the judge is giving his judgement on the case. He is an

incorruptible judge and all the antics of both the prosecuting lawyer and the
defence lawyers do not make him derail from his line of duty. He makes use of
performative verb in the delivering of his judgement. Performative verbs are
uttered by the dominant speaker to his/her inferior. This means that their use
reveals the power of the dominant speaker over his/her inferior, ‘So, I find you
quilty of extortion and you are hereby sentenced to three years’ imprisonment
with hard labour. All the appeals for his mercy and sympathy by the defence
lawyer and the accused do not move him in the least. He therefore sentenced the
accused to three years’ imprisonment. The mood of sorrow, anguish, and gloom
are shown by the accused as tears started rolling down his cheeks and his
relatives and friends started wailing and dashing themselves to the ground.

Conclusion

From the analysis above, we have seen how the analysis of courtroom discourse
has help in the projection of various mood types such as sorrow, gloom dejection
relaxation, annoyance and indignation etc. We have used the tool of analysis in
Forensic Linguistics as it covers the domain of courtroom discourse. Courtroom
discourse analysis of Olu Olagoke’s The Incorruptible Judge has thus demonstrated
that in situations with uncertainty, human judgments often exploits rule of
thumb which fundamentally contradicts human propositions but Justice Faderin
remains incorruptible and was able to convict the unscrupulous employer at the
end. It has thus been shown that using texts containing courtroom discourse for
Forensic Linguistic analysis has been a rewarding and fruitful exercise and we
therefore recommend further analyses with texts containing courtroom discourse
as they are modeled after real life situations.

74
 IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No. 3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

References
Akorede, O. Y. (2006). ‘Mood and Reader’s feedback. A reading Experience
of Aissatou Opebiyi‘Fear forBaby’. In A Gift of Lace’. In Ajiboye, T. &
Osissanwo W. (eds) Mood in Language and Literature. Lagos: Femolous-
Fetop Publication. Pp 183-201.

Alabi, V.A. (1997). Stylistic Features of the Legal Discourse. In: A. Lawal
(ed.). Stylistics in Theory and Practice. Ilorin: paragon Books.

Farinde, R.O. (2006). ‘An Interpretative Analysis of Mood in Discourse

Situations. In Ajiboye, T. & Osissanwo W. (eds) Mood in Language and
Literature. Lagos: Femolous- Fetop Publication. Pp 148-163.

Farinde, R.O.(2016). ‘Pragmatic Markers in Nigerian Courtroom Discourse’.

In Akin Odebunmi, Ayo Osisanwo, Helen Bodunde and Stella Ekpe
(eds) Grammar, Applied Linguistics and Society: A Festschrift for Wale
Osisanwo. Ile-Ife: Obafemi Awolowo Universiy Press. pp 546-557.

Gibbons, J. P. (2008). Questioning in Common Law Criminal Courts' In

Gibbons, J. and Turell, M. T [eds] Dimensions of Forensic Linguistics.
Boston: John Benjamin's Publishing company Pp 115-130.
Harris, S. (1989). ‘Defendant resistance to power and control in court’. In
Hywel C. (Ed.). Working with language, (pp 131-164). Berlin: Mouton de
Gruyter.

Jimoh, R. (2006). ‘Mood and Syntactic Choice in Drama: The Example of

Shakespeare’s Julius Ceasar’. In Ajiboye, T. & Osissanwo W. (eds) Mood
in Language and Literature. Lagos: Femolous- Fetop Publication. Pp 210-
226.
Luchjenbroers, J. (1997). In your own words…: questions and answers in a
supreme court trial. Journal of Pragmatics. 27. 477-503.

Manet, T. (1996). Trial Techniques. Boston: Little Brown and Company.

Olubakin V.O. and Kalejaiye A. S. (2018). ‘The English Mood System in the
Language of Courtroom Interrogations’. In Ayo Osisanwo, Ibrahim
Olaosun and Idowu Odebode (eds) Discourse Stylistics, Sociolinguistics
and Society: A Festschrift for Ayo Ogunsiji. Ibadan: Stirling-Horden
Publishers Ltd, Pp 245-258.

75
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 8. No. 3, (2022)
ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online)
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University, Umunya

Ojo, J.O. (2006) ‘Mood in Language: A Lexico-Syntactic Analysis of Mood in

Gani Fawehinmi’s ‘Obasanjo has Betrayed Democracy’. In In Ajiboye, T.
& Osissanwo W. (eds) Mood in Language and Literature. Lagos: Femolous-
Fetop Publication. Pp 92-110.

Okolo, B.A. (2000). ‘A Linguistic Study of Legal Language’. In Research in

African Language and Lingustics Vol 5. 12-31.

Olagoke, O. (1972). The Incorruptible Judge. Ibadan: Evans Publishers.

Olaniyi, O. (2016). ‘ Syntactic Analysis of Grammatical Mood Types in

Chimammanda Adiche Ngozi’s The Thing around Your Neck’. In Akin
Odebunmi, Ayo Osisanwo, Helen Bodunde and Stella Ekpe (eds)
Grammar, Applied Linguistics and Society: A Festschrift for Wale Osisanwo.
Ile-Ife: Obafemi Awolowo Universiy Press. Pp 142-161.

Opeibi O.B.(2001). Aspects of Language Use in Courtroom: An Analysis of a

Selected Text fromCourt Proceedings. A Paper Presented at Nigerian
Millenium Sociolinguistic Conference, Department of English,
University of Lagos, Nigeria.

Osisanwo, W. (2006). ‘A Pragmatic Analysis of Mood Types in Selected

Literary Texts’. In Ajiboye, T. & Osissanwo W. (eds) Mood in Language
and Literature. Lagos: Femolous-Fetop Publication. Pp 126-147.

Stygall , G. (1997). Trial Languages Differential discourse Processing and

Discursive formation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamin’s
Publishing Company.
Woodbury, H. (1984). ‘The Strategic Use of Questions in Court’. Semiotica
48,197-228.

76