The details surrounding Trayvon Martin's fatal confrontation with George Zimmerman on a hot, humid Florida night in 2012 are well known, as is the verdict of the jurors who found Zimmerman not guilty based on Florida's stand-your-ground defense. Like many legal cases that capture the nation's attention, the courtroom battle was intense. Caught in the center of the drama was Rachel Jeantel, Martin's 19-year-old friend and a key witness for the prosecution. Consider a brief excerpt of her testimony:
"And he say he—he by—ahm—the area that his daddy house is, his daddy fiance house is, and I told him 'Keep running.' He—and he said, 'Naw,' he'll just walk faster. I'm like, 'Oh-oh.' And I—I ain't complain 'cause he was breathing hard, so I understand why. Soo—."
Although linguists are divided on its specific definition, the lingual patterns, cadence and pronunciations associated with Ebonics—a blend of the words ebony (black) and phonics (sounds)—are thought to originate with the nonstandard English dialects spoken by indentured servants, slaves and West Africans. As such, Ebonics is often construed as the language of the lower class. Ebonics speakers often truncate words or phrases, drop th sounds or consonant clusters or substitute alternative words for "proper" English terms.
Because the structure of Ebonics differs from the typical English vernacular that Americans use and understand, those who speak Ebonics may be unfairly judged as less intelligent. Indeed, John Rickford, a linguistics professor at Stanford and an expert on African-American Vernacular English (AAVE), believes jurors in the Zimmerman case misunderstood and discredited Jeantel because of the way she talked. Lacking fluency in AAVE, he posits that court transcribers, attorneys and jurors missed or misconstrued crucial elements in her testimony. In fact, when CNN's Anderson Cooper asked a juror whether she understood Jeantel's testimony, the juror admitted she found the testimony difficult because Jeantel "was using phrases I have never heard before." When Cooper asked her if she found Jeantel's testimony credible, the juror gave a devastatingly simple answer: "No."
During her testimony, several parties often asked Jeantel to repeat herself, including the judge, the attorneys and—tellingly—even a juror. In response to Jeantel's testimony that Martin "told me now that a man is starting following him, is following him," the juror asked: "Again, or is still?" The judge informed the juror that he could not ask questions, and that, "If you don't understand, just raise your hand."
Misunderstandings of Ebonics in the courtroom might render otherwise reliable testimony less credible. Post-trial interviews with Jeantel showed that she was fully capable of conveying her thoughts in "structured English" when given time, but the stress associated with the courtroom can impede such clarity. According to Rickford, those well versed in AAVE fully understood Jeantel's testimony. He argues that translators—like those used for witnesses from foreign-language backgrounds—might similarly aid jurors in understanding Ebonics testimony.
But beyond translational concerns, recent research shows that non-native or vernacular speakers are less believed even when uttering innocuous statements. "It's likely this stems from social prejudice rather than mere lack of comprehension on the part of the listener," Rickford says.
Overall, it is important for psychologists to better understand how Ebonics affects witness credibility so they can educate jurors, judges and attorneys on such influences.
"Judicial Notebook" is a project of APA's Div. 9 (Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues).
