Why do lawyers and cops talk so obliquely?

Who knows, maybe insecurity, small sex organs, it’s hard to tell.

To make it sound as though their job is a lot more complicated than it actually is.

Because words like “impacted” have specific, legal definition and a degree of exactness that a word like “hit” does not.

Specific terms are used because they have strict definitions in a court of law.

OK. Can you be more specific?

And the police all add an unnecessary “at” to the end of location questions.
“Where’s the gun at?” “Where’s Jamal at?”

Every profession has its own jargon or lingo.

People in Kansas do that, adding “at” at the end of a sentence. I do it from habit, even though I know it’s wrong.

@janbb I can’t think of another profession that substitutes for every day, ordinary words.

@Dutchess_III – I’m not a lawyer or a policeman. I’ll ask my son-in-law tongiht

@elbanditoroso is correct.

It’s also important to maintain a certain level of professionalism and very precise language on legal documentation. “One car hit another car” is what I might say to a friend, but I certainly wouldn’t put that on anything a judge might see. There’s something similar in the medical field – “Gave patient 2 Norco” just isn’t going to cut it. First of all, “gave” isn’t acceptable, it’s “administered.” Second of all, even if Norco is typically given orally, the nurse would still record that as, “Administered 2 tabs Norco PO,” meaning she gave the patient two tablets of the drug by mouth. If someone were to go back for some reason and check these records, they need to be as specific as possible, for liability purposes. Cops and lawyers have to cover their own asses, too. Why not use a more precise term than a general one?

@LuckyGuy That’s not a cop thing. A lot of people do that. I’ve actually never heard an officer say something like that. Sounds like something the person they’re arresting might say, though.

It’s the constant stream of abbreviations that tickle me…
“OK, put out an APB on a DUI, he’ll be up before the DA unless the FBI show up then he’s gonna be KIA & the CSI will be all over this LOL ROFLMAO YOLO BFF”

@livelaughlove21 Do you get the TV show “Cops” where you live. No matter what the region the police officers add the “at” when they are talking to an alleged perp.
“We can make this a lot easier if you are straight up with me. Where are the drugs at?”
“Dey’s unner the fron’ seat.”
“Ok I’m arresting you for felony possession, conspiracy to….”
Did the cop lie? Nope. It did go a lot easier – for him.

It’s like @elbanditoroso says. “Hit” is less precise of a word and implies fault, whereas “impacted” means something specific and leaves it open where the fault lies. To “see” something, it only has to be within your visual field. “Observing” something means you noticed and paid attention to it. Seeing is not sufficient for probable cause. Observing is.

When I teach my informal logic course, I often use legal examples to show why we need to be careful with language in certain contexts. Prosecutors and defense lawyers alike lose cases over poorly worded discovery motions, and people have lost millions of dollars over ambiguous clauses in contracts.

@ucme – the Brits take it to an extreme.

@LuckyGuy Of course I get Cops. Doesn’t everyone? I haven’t noticed that phenomenon, though.

“Dey’s unner the fron’ seat.”

That seems vaguely racist to me. Who’s that supposed to be? John Coffey?

@elbanditoroso Not so’s you’d notice.

@livelaughlove21 I’m just going with what I’ve seen on that show. Check it out and keep score.
1)Look for the word “at”.
2)Notice the way the “perps” speak, and
3)Watch how the officers lie to the get info.

Ok, I can see how “saw” and “observed” could come about. Observe means you also saw, and took note, of everything around it (I assume.)
However, what possible difference could there be between “hit” and “impact?”
“He impacted my jaw with his fist.” How is that different than “He hit me in the jaw with his fist”?

I can see how some “jargon” could be necessary, but so much if it seems pretentious to me. When I was asking Rarebear about my granddaughter pooping white he said, “Is she feeling OK physically or is she just shitting white poop?” Made me laugh! I told him Doctors don’t use the word “shit.” They use more doctorly terms! But it’s all the same thing. “Bowl movement, ” “shit,” all the exact same thing. The only difference is, one is a bit crude and unprofessional-sounding so I know he doesn’t use it when talking to his patients. But “impact” does NOT sound more professional than “hit.”

@Dutchess_III I’ve actually never heard this before: “Car A impacted car B.” Is that even the correct use of that word – impact as a verb? I’ve heard “collided with” used instead of “hit,” and I’ve heard “impact” used in other ways when describing a car accident, but not that one.

As I said, I like Judge Judy. I know it’s not a REAL court room but I hear it when the defendants / plaintiffs are trying to sound lawyerly. Yes, they say “impacted” rather than “hit.” It’s so dumb, IMO.

They also tend to say “I had went….”

It’s SO prevalent on there I wonder if they’re being coached to sound like idiots.

@Dutchess_III Of course they are. They’re actors – all of them. Not a single person on there is a real defendant or plaintiff. I actually know an actress that got a part on one of those court shows a few years back. They told her what to say, how to act, etc., just like with any other role.

Because the law hinges on wording. Many a case has been lost and many a law has been dismantled because of poor wording.

@livelaughlove21 I’m not sure how true that is. Yes, much is staged, the audience for example, but I’m not sure about the litigants. What was your actress friend’s name who appeared on the show?

@Darth_Algar I understand that, but how could a case hinge on “impact” vs “hit,”?

Because “hit” is a pretty vague term. For example I was in the parking lot of a grocery store one day when a person pulled in to the space next to me and hit my car. This hit resulted in a minor, barely noticeable scuff. “Hit” could be anything from that minor scuff to a a wreck that smashes the entire front of the car in and causes fatalities. I don’t thing anyone however would, in my case, say that the other car “impacted” mine. On the other hand my wife was in her car one day, had the right-of-way and a 4-way stop and as she was crossing the intersection another driver blew threw the intersection and impacted my wife’s car causing it to do a complete spin in the road and creating several thousands of dollars in damage. Now you can say that driver “hit” my wife’s car, but that doesn’t give much of a clue as to damages. “Impacted” gives a better idea that there are extensive damages.

Yes, to me “impact” implies a greater force, like when a meteor “impacts” the earth. I still don’t see it applying to a sock on the jaw or a fender bender, but I hear it applied that way. It is a whole different sentence though, when they say, “The impact threw the vehicle 35 feet through the air.” That’s what I view as an impact.

However, technically, any time one thing touches another it’s been impacted.

At any rate, whether you say the car was “hit” or “impacted” you still have to describe the extent of the damage.

Yes, but you’re asking why lawyers and police officers speaking like this. It’s because their profession often requires them to be as precise as possible.

OK.

@Dutchess_III Brittany Joyal. She landed a role in an episode of America’s Court as a girl suing her roommate. She even made a YouTube video about it (that’s actually how I know her). Every bit of it was fake.

Judge Judy may not be 100% staged like some of the others, but it’s certainly not 100% real.

@Dutchess_III Like I said before: “hit” implies fault, whereas “impact” (which can be used as a verb) does not. If A hit B, then the incident was initiated by A. If A impacts or collides with B, it is open whether A, B, or something else entirely caused the contact.

@livelaughlove21 I already conceded that it wasn’t 100% real. I’ll Google your friend.

That’s a good point @SavoirFaire. But I think people should avoid using that kind of language in every day life. When I worked at the jail I noticed that many of my students kind of talked in that lingo. I don’t know if they heard it so much that that they just picked it up naturally, or if they consciously did it, thinking it made them sound “educated.”

@livelaughlove21, found your girl. About ½ through this she mentions that she was on The People’s Court with Judge Ross,. At the end of each episode of The People’s Court a standard disclaimer is shown that states that ”...all characters displayed are fictional and any resemblance to actual persons is coincidental.”

At the beginning of each episode of JJ they claim the cases are real. I would think they would have been in a whole lot of trouble by now if that wasn’t so.

Having said that, I know that much of JJ is staged, I just don’t think the plaintiffs / defendants are.

@Dutchess_III I’m just not so quick to believe what a TV show tells me. “Reality” shows, for example, are about the furthest thing from reality you can get. Most of it is staged. Why not court shows, too? I’m not picking on JJ, I watch it as well, but I’m not convinced those people aren’t told how to behave.

I think that if it was pure fiction they’d have to say so. As far as “told how to behave,” well, it would be hard for a person to completely change their way of talking just because of a 5 minute counseling session. A person who was raised to say “We had gone….” could not so easily slip into “We had went….”
A few times some have used the word “Conversate.” There is no such word!

They would have to be really great actors to stay in a purely fictional character for so long without some sort of flag to on lookers. I’m going to actually look at your friends court video, do some comparisating. :D

Well, I can’t find it. Anyway, I enjoy Judge Judy!

A person who was raised to say “We had gone….” could not so easily slip into “We had went….”

Why not? I certainly could. I have, in fact.

I couldn’t, not without having to think for a split second before I said it. That split second would be noticed. This might be a good F-question.

My husband tends to say “We had went….” because that’s how his people spoke. However, he knows better, but when he’s just talking, relaxed, it comes out without him even noticing.

@Dutchess_III I often speak in a certain way if I’m making fun of something or making a joke. I don’t find it hard to imitate certain groups (i.e. uneducated) of people or even people from different areas of the country. It doesn’t take much thought for me to switch it on and off. If I’m getting paid a bit, it would be even easier.

My husband is definitely a product of his upbringing. Things he says that annoy me the most include “over-exaggerate” (the “over” is clearly redundant) or when he tries to put an audible “s” at the ends of “texts” and it comes out sounding like “text-es.” Drives. me. nuts! He knows better, but still does it from time to time when he’s not thinking.

However, the people on those shows are thinking, presumably.

Yes, so do I. I can say “Ain’t,” or “I don’t got none” with a doofy accent, or slip into a silly character with poor grammar when I’m in a relaxed environment, and it’s my idea.

It would be different though, to go on TV, in front of a million people with instructions to talk a certain way for 20 minutes, and to “stay in character” for that whole time. That’s called ‘acting,’ and they have special schools for that, like Julliard.

If all of those hundreds of people are “acting” with only a after a brief counseling session as their training, and I’ve never, ever seen one slip up, will that’s nothing short of a miracle.

@Dutchess_III _“That’s called ‘acting,’ and they have special schools for that, like Julliard.”

How many actors go to Julliard? A great number of them have no formal education at all. Just saying.

And if the actors on the court shows we know are a sham can do it without slipping up, why not the others?

I’m just saying that if they are “acting,” if they’re acting out a make believe script that someone else wrote out for them, and acting like a make-belive character that someone else chose for them, then every one of them have tremendous natural acting ability and incredible memories.

Again, I realize that much of it is staged, and the court room is nothing like a real life court room (which is horribly boring) but I personally think that on Judge Judy the litigants are real people, with real cases, “acting” as themselves.

@Dutchess_III Who says these shows are recorded live? Who says they’re not edited just like any other show? We don’t see actors mess up on any other TV show, unless you’re watching bloopers, but that doesn’t mean they never mess up.

I don’t think that they’re told exactly what to say in every case, but I think they’re influenced in some way to make it more entertaining. I don’t think it matters either way – real, fake, who cares?

“which is horribly boring”

I’ve always found it fun. Being in the courtroom is way more exciting than watching it on TV. I found probation violation hearings fascinating – maybe I’m just a law nerd, which would explain why I have so much fun doing “mundane” things for my attorney at work.

Of course they’re edited. But in movies and in TV series they’re scripted and rehearsed and they do take after take after take to get it all right.
I just do not believe they would put that much effort into a daily TV show featuring different people every episode. I think they just turn them loose, but edit if someone goes WAY out of line or dumps over their water pitcher or faints or something.
I’m sure many episodes never even make it to TV.

@Dutchess_III Sure, there’s no need to speak so formally in most situations. And I agree that it can sound very artificial outside of the appropriate contexts. That said, I imagine it’s just habitual for some people.