Louise Woodward: Jury Analysis
In this essay i will be writing and explaining how spoken language is used and adapted to influence the jury in the closing argument that convicted Louise Woodward. The prosecutor uses a variety of features in this argument to convince the jury persecute Louse Woodward. I will be going through these techniques and explaining why he uses them to influence the jury.
Gerard T Leone Jr was the prosecutor in the case of the death of Mathew Eappen. He uses repetition in the first section of the argument by repeating the victim name, “Mathew Eappen.”The repetitions show that he wants the jury to focus his attention on the victim. He wants the jury to feel emotionally connected to Mathew Eappen so it would affect the decision the jury makes. The repetition of “Mathew Eappen” encourages the acceptance of the idea that he was young and already dead because of Louise Woodward. It gives Mathew and the court people a mutual bond. He talk about Mathew Eappen by saying the things he hasn’t done to make the court feel pity toward him by saying that “Mathew Eappen will never take his first step.Mathew Eappen will never say his first word because Mathew Eappen is dead.”
An additional example of repetition is when the repeats the …show more content…
Gerard talk about the testimony Louise gave about the death of Mathew Eappen. She saying the testimony that she popped Mathew on the floor but he replies by saying “that the word popped sounds like the word dropped, that the words popped sounds a little lie tossed.”This is sarcastic because he wants the people to know for sure that Louise dropped Mathew Eappen which cause his head to “explode.”His using sarcasm to tell the jury that Louise Woodward is guilty without tell the jury and court directly that she is guilty. This is effective because not is he accusing her indirectly but he is confirming that the injuries were caused by Louise
Gerard T Leone Jr was the prosecutor in the case of the death of Mathew Eappen. He uses repetition in the first section of the argument by repeating the victim name, “Mathew Eappen.”The repetitions show that he wants the jury to focus his attention on the victim. He wants the jury to feel emotionally connected to Mathew Eappen so it would affect the decision the jury makes. The repetition of “Mathew Eappen” encourages the acceptance of the idea that he was young and already dead because of Louise Woodward. It gives Mathew and the court people a mutual bond. He talk about Mathew Eappen by saying the things he hasn’t done to make the court feel pity toward him by saying that “Mathew Eappen will never take his first step.Mathew Eappen will never say his first word because Mathew Eappen is dead.”
An additional example of repetition is when the repeats the …show more content…
Gerard talk about the testimony Louise gave about the death of Mathew Eappen. She saying the testimony that she popped Mathew on the floor but he replies by saying “that the word popped sounds like the word dropped, that the words popped sounds a little lie tossed.”This is sarcastic because he wants the people to know for sure that Louise dropped Mathew Eappen which cause his head to “explode.”His using sarcasm to tell the jury that Louise Woodward is guilty without tell the jury and court directly that she is guilty. This is effective because not is he accusing her indirectly but he is confirming that the injuries were caused by Louise