Language in Evidence: The Pragmatics of Translation in the Judicial Process
Mary Bucholtz · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · 1995
This is an offprint from: Marshall Morris (ed.) Translation and the Law John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia 1995 (Published as Vol. VIII of the American Translators Association Scholarly Monograph Series ISSN 0890-4111 / ISBN 90 272 3183 4 (Eur) / 1—55619-627-X (USA) © Copyright 1995 — John Benjamins Publishing Company No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm or any other means, without written permission from the publisher, Language in Evidence: The Pragmatics of Translation and the Judicial Process MARY BUCHOLTZ University of California, Berkeley Introduction When Nancy Reagan first urged American teenagers to “just say no to drugs” in 1982, her words augured a shift of huge proportions in federal expenditures and policies pertaining to drug crimes in the United States. According to the National Drug Enforcement Policy Board, since 1981 federal spending on drug enforcement has tripled to $3 billion, and in the same period the FBI’s drug—enforcement budget has increased from $8 million to $100 million. Similarly, U.S. Attorney drug-enforcement expenditures are currently $100 million, as compared to the 1981 figure of $20 million. The war on drugs has continued to show its effects in courtrooms across the country: more than one third of the nation’s 44,000 federal prisoners were convicted of drug crimes, and the U.S. Sentencing Commission projects that within fifteen years, the federal prison population will have increased to up to 150,000, with over half imprisoned for drug violations.‘ These figures reflect a tremendous increase in the volume of drug-related cases handled by the federal courts since the war on drugs was declared, and especially since the passage of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986. What is not indicated in the numbers, however, is how federal attorneys have developed prosecution strategies in order to raise conviction rates. One strategy that has been particularly effective is the use of conspiracy law. As a rule, it is far easier to prove conspiracy than the underlying crime, making the use of this charge popular at a time when public opinion and government policy both advocate heavy sentences even for first-time offenders.