- Title Pages
- PREFACE
- INTRODUCTION
- PART I Language Crimes, Conversational Strategies, and Language Power
- 1 How Language Crimes Are Created
- 2 Conversational Strategies Used to Create Crimes
- 3 The Power of Conversational Strategies
- PART II Uses by Cooperating Witnesses
- 4 Overlapping, Ambiguity, and the Hit and Run in a Solicitation to Murder Case: <i>Texas v. T. Cullen Davis</i>
- 5 Retelling, Scripting, and Lying in a Murder Case: <i>Florida v. Alan Mackerley</i>
- 6 Interrupting, Overlapping, Lying, Not Taking “No” for an Answer, and Representing Illegality Differently to Separate Targets in a Stolen Property Case: <i>US v. Prakesh Patel and Daniel Houston</i>
- 7 Eleven Little Ambiguities and How They Grew in a Business Fraud Case: <i>US v. Paul Webster and Joe Martino</i>
- 8 Discourse Ambiguity in a Contract Fraud Case: <i>US v. David Smith</i>
- 9 Contamination and Manipulation in a Briber y Case: <i>US v. Paul Manziel</i>
- 10 Scripting by Requesting Directives and Apologies in a Sexual Misconduct Case: <i>Idaho v. J. Mussina</i>
- PART III Uses by Law Enforcement Officers
- 11 Police Camouflaging in an Obstruction of Justice Case: <i>US v. Brian Lett</i>
- 12 Police Camouflaging in a Purchasing Stolen Property Case: <i>US v. Tariq Shalash</i>
- 13 A Rogue Cop and Every Strategy He Can Think Of: <i>The Wenatchee Washington Sex Ring Case</i>
- 14 An Undercover Policeman Uses Ambiguity, Hit and Run, Interrupting, Scripting, and Refusing to Take “No” for an Answer in a Solicitation to Murder Case: <i>The Crown v. Mohammed Arshad</i>
- 15 Manipulating the Tape, Interrupting, Inaccurate Restatements, and Scripting in a Murder Case: <i>Florida v. Jerry Townsend</i>
- PART IV Conversational Strategies as Evidence
- 16 Eight Questions about the Power of Conversational Strategies in Undercover Police Investigations
- REFERENCES CITED
- INDEX
Eleven Little Ambiguities and How They Grew in a Business Fraud Case: US v. Paul Webster and Joe Martino
Eleven Little Ambiguities and How They Grew in a Business Fraud Case: US v. Paul Webster and Joe Martino
- Chapter:
- (p.69) 7 Eleven Little Ambiguities and How They Grew in a Business Fraud Case: US v. Paul Webster and Joe Martino
- Source:
- Creating Language Crimes
- Author(s):
Roger W. Shuy (Contributor Webpage)
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
This chapter describes an actual case that has been anonymized by request of counsel. It shows how seemingly innocuous words and expressions, such as “exposure”, “clean it up”, “credibility”, “profit sharing”, “involved”, “quid pro quo”, and others were used ambiguously by undercover agents to make conversations with targets to give the appearance of illegality. In this case, their ambiguity strategy failed.
Keywords: ambiguity, business fraud, words, expressions
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .
- Title Pages
- PREFACE
- INTRODUCTION
- PART I Language Crimes, Conversational Strategies, and Language Power
- 1 How Language Crimes Are Created
- 2 Conversational Strategies Used to Create Crimes
- 3 The Power of Conversational Strategies
- PART II Uses by Cooperating Witnesses
- 4 Overlapping, Ambiguity, and the Hit and Run in a Solicitation to Murder Case: <i>Texas v. T. Cullen Davis</i>
- 5 Retelling, Scripting, and Lying in a Murder Case: <i>Florida v. Alan Mackerley</i>
- 6 Interrupting, Overlapping, Lying, Not Taking “No” for an Answer, and Representing Illegality Differently to Separate Targets in a Stolen Property Case: <i>US v. Prakesh Patel and Daniel Houston</i>
- 7 Eleven Little Ambiguities and How They Grew in a Business Fraud Case: <i>US v. Paul Webster and Joe Martino</i>
- 8 Discourse Ambiguity in a Contract Fraud Case: <i>US v. David Smith</i>
- 9 Contamination and Manipulation in a Briber y Case: <i>US v. Paul Manziel</i>
- 10 Scripting by Requesting Directives and Apologies in a Sexual Misconduct Case: <i>Idaho v. J. Mussina</i>
- PART III Uses by Law Enforcement Officers
- 11 Police Camouflaging in an Obstruction of Justice Case: <i>US v. Brian Lett</i>
- 12 Police Camouflaging in a Purchasing Stolen Property Case: <i>US v. Tariq Shalash</i>
- 13 A Rogue Cop and Every Strategy He Can Think Of: <i>The Wenatchee Washington Sex Ring Case</i>
- 14 An Undercover Policeman Uses Ambiguity, Hit and Run, Interrupting, Scripting, and Refusing to Take “No” for an Answer in a Solicitation to Murder Case: <i>The Crown v. Mohammed Arshad</i>
- 15 Manipulating the Tape, Interrupting, Inaccurate Restatements, and Scripting in a Murder Case: <i>Florida v. Jerry Townsend</i>
- PART IV Conversational Strategies as Evidence
- 16 Eight Questions about the Power of Conversational Strategies in Undercover Police Investigations
- REFERENCES CITED
- INDEX
