Forensic Linguistics
What is Forensic Linguistics?
In its broadest sense, Forensic Linguistics is the intersection between linguistics, crime and law. The adjective forensic most prominently refers to the application of scientific knowledge to the investigation of crime or legal problems. The noun linguistics refers to the systematic study of language and its structure. A Forensic Linguist collaborates with local, state and federal law enforcement agencies and compiles scientific analyses of written or spoken evidence to support criminal and intelligence inquiries. This can be in the form of investigative analyses or expert witness reports.
What is Forensic Linguistics not?
Psychology (study of human mind and behavior)
Statement analysis (study of accuracy of words)
Translation/interpretation of documents
Graphology (study of handwriting)
What types of evidence can a Forensic Linguist analyze?
Any type of written or spoken language can be analyzed as raw intelligence or become evidence if it is complicit in a criminal context.
Tactical Linguistics
What is Tactical Linguistics?
Over the last few years, I have developed, researched and implemented the concept of Tactical Linguistics, a pre-incident approach that illustrates how a linguist can assist investigative authorities in a threat mitigation environment dealing with terrorism and other types of violent threats “left of bang”. It has since become a promising aid for assessing the level of risk and threat in different types of language evidence across various populations of concern, advancing the integration of linguistic expertise into various disciplines, including law enforcement, security, legal and mental health contexts.
Tactical Linguistics is the intersection of language analysis and violence prevention. Through the scientific analysis of linguistic intelligence and evidence, this process assists in identifying, assessing and mitigating different types of violent threats (e.g., targeted violence, suicide, stalking) and contributes to case management approaches.
Whereas Forensic Linguistics tends to be a re-active, post-incident and investigation-focused approach, Tactical Linguistics is a pro-active, pre-incident and intervention-focused method. Linguistic threat analyses can, for instance, include:
An initial assessment of language (instant): e.g., analyzing the level of an emerging or active threat
A tactical analysis of violence or risk of violence patterns (short-term): e.g., assessing the language of several concerning communications authored by one subject
A strategic post-mortem examination (long-term): e.g., comparing the language of various subjects to detect trends or lessons learned to prevent future acts of violence
In a risk management environment, concerning communications are analyzed to determine the severity, probability, immediacy, credibility and complexity of a threat that could indicate an intent or risk for violence, harm and/or disruption. This can, for instance, include identifying pre-attack warning indicators in the language of a subject of concern before a crime occurs, and analyzing the textual substance of concerning language that might signal an imminent threat. By analyzing more specifically the language of concerning communications, I can assist threat assessments teams and help investigators refine their opinions on the level of risk by any given scenario and advise what degree of monitoring should be considered for a subject of concern.
What types of evidence can a Tactical Linguist analyze?
To intervene before an act of violence occurs, a linguistic threat analysis can be applied to written and spoken communications, for instance “leakage” in the form of terrorism, school or criminal threats — such as manifestos, threat letters, audio or video recordings. Leakage is an essential concept in threat mitigation that can lead to violence reduction and prevention if recognized and responded to early on.
I have assisted active law enforcement investigations and multi-disciplinary threat assessments in the corporate, educational and private sectors by analyzing the following language evidence:
Online postings on various social media platforms targeting an art institution
Bomb threats made against law enforcement and districts in Los Angeles
Defamation and harassment letters against law enforcement officials
Hate mail against law enforcement agencies and fire departments
Stalking emails and phone calls sent by a client to an employee
Concerning text messages sent to the CEO of a large company
Extortion emails against an international technology company
Terrorism manifestos and violent online journal-style entries
Threat letters disseminated to minority-owned businesses
Cyber-bullying profiles and messages on social media
Threatening letters against schools and businesses
Handwritten threat letters sent to a public figure
Warning communications sent to a TV reporter
Ideological manuals, declarations and articles
Stalking book sent to a prominent figure
Active shooter suicide audio recordings
Homicide-suicide and criminal threats
Workplace violence manifesto