Semiotics of visual evidence in law

References

Alcolea-Banegas, Jesús (2009). Visual arguments in film. Argumentation 23(2). 259–275.10.1007/s10503-008-9124-9Search in Google Scholar

Amann, Klaus & Karin Knorr Cetina. 1988. The fixation of (visual) evidence. Human Studies 11(2). 133–169.10.1007/BF00177302Search in Google Scholar

Anthony, Blair J. 1996. The possibility and actuality of visual arguments. Argumentation and Advocacy 33(1). 23–39.Search in Google Scholar

Bainbridge, Jason. 2010. Visual law: The changing signifiers of law in popular visual culture. In Anne Wagner & Jan M. Broekman (eds.), Prospects of legal semiotics, 193–215. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-90-481-9343-1_7Search in Google Scholar

Barthes, Roland. 1977. Image – music – text. New York: Hill and Wang.Search in Google Scholar

Barthes, Roland. 1981. Camera lucida. New York: Hill And Wang.Search in Google Scholar

Bentham, Jeremy. 1810. An introductionary view of the rationale of evidence for the use of lawyers as well as non-lawyers. In James Mill (ed.), The works of Jeremy Bentham. London: Simkin, Marshall.Search in Google Scholar

Bhatia, Vijay K. 1997. Genre-mixing in academic introductions. English for Specific Purposes 16(3). 181–196.10.1016/S0889-4906(96)00039-7Search in Google Scholar

Birdsell, David S. & Leo Groarke. 2004. Toward a theory of visual argument. In Carolyna Handa (ed.), Visual rhetoric in a visual world: A critical sourcebook, 309–320. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.Search in Google Scholar

Carlsson, Bo & Mattias Baier. 2002. A visual self-image of legal authority: “The temple of law.” Social and Legal Studies 11. 187–188.10.1177/096466390201100202Search in Google Scholar

Chandler, Daniel. 2007. Semiotics: The basics, 2nd edn. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203014936Search in Google Scholar

Dahlberg, Leif. 2012. Introduction:Visualizinglaw and authority. In Leif Dahlberg (ed.), Visualizing law and authority: Essays on legal aesthetics, 1–12. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110285444Search in Google Scholar

Den Tandt, Christophe. 2009. Graphic evidence: The referential value of photographs in crime fiction and film. In Kim Gorus, Patrick Lennon & Noël Reumkens (eds.), Word and image: Literature and the pictorial arts in the twentieth century, 35–52. Brussels: Contactforum-Koninklijke Academie Van België Voor Wetenschappen En Kunsten.Search in Google Scholar

Douzinas, Costas. 1999. Prosopon and antiprosopon: Prolegomena for a legal iconology. In Costas Douzinas & Lynda Nead (eds.), Law and the image: The authority of art and the aesthetics of law art, 36–70. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Feigenson, Neal R. & Christina Spiesel. 2009. Law on display: The digital transformation of legal persuasion and judgement. New York: New York University Press.10.18574/nyu/9780814727584.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Fiske, John. 1982. Introduction to communication studies. London: Methuen.10.4324/9780203323212Search in Google Scholar

Gombrich, Ernst H. 1972. The visual image. Scientific American 227. 82–96.10.1038/scientificamerican0972-82Search in Google Scholar

Gombrich, Ernst H. 1975. Mirror and map: Theories of pictorial representation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. Biological Sciences 270(903). 119–149.10.1515/9783110803327-016Search in Google Scholar

Haag, Michael G. & Lucien C. Haag. 2011. Shooting incident reconstruction, 2nd edn. New York: Academic Press10.1016/B978-0-12-382241-3.00032-6Search in Google Scholar

Hausman, Carl R. 2008. Charles Peirce’s categories and the growth of reason. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 21(3). 209–222.10.1007/s11196-008-9064-6Search in Google Scholar

Hawks, Carol. B. S. & Jean Goodall. 2004. Crime scene documentation: A realistic approach to investigating crime scenes. Clemente, CA: Lawtech.Search in Google Scholar

Ho, Hock L. 2008. A philosophy of evidence law: Justice in the search for truth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199228300.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Kevelson, Roberta. 1986. Law. In Thomas A. Sebeok (ed.), Encyclopedic dictionary of semiotics, 438–443. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Kevelson, Roberta. 1988. The law as a system of signs. New York: Plenum Press.10.1007/978-1-4613-0911-6Search in Google Scholar

Kevelson, Roberta. 1990. Peirce, paradox, praxis: The image, the conflict, and the law. Berlin & New York: Mouton De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110849868Search in Google Scholar

Kevelson, Roberta (ed.). 1991. Peirce and law: Issues in pragmatism, legal realism, and semiotics. New York: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar

Kibbey, Ann M. 2000. The semiotics of photographic evidence. Law Text Culture 5 (2). http://ro.uow.edu.au/ltc/vol5/iss2/6 (accessed 1 October 2014).Search in Google Scholar

Klinck, Dennis R. 1992. The word of the law: Approaches to legal discourse. Ottawa: Carleton University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kress, Gunther & Theo Van Leeuwen 1996. Reading images. London & New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Marco, Luzón & José. Maria 1994. A functional-semiotic analysis of visual aids in scientific discourse. Miscelánea 15. 367–390.Search in Google Scholar

Mnookin, Jennifer L. 1998. The image of truth: Photographic evidence and the power of analogy. Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities 10(1). 59–70.Search in Google Scholar

Mnookin, Jennifer L. & Nancy West. 2001. Theaters of proof: Visual evidence and the law in Call Northside 777. Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities 13(2). 329–390.10.4324/9781351126663-7Search in Google Scholar

Mueller, Christopher B. 1993. Evidence under the rules: Text, cases, and problems, 2nd edn. Boston: Little, Brown.Search in Google Scholar

Myers, Greg. 2003. Words, pictures, and facts in academic discourse. Ibérica 6. 2–13.Search in Google Scholar

Peirce, Charles S. 1955 [1902]. Logic and semiotic: Theory of signs. In Justus Buchler (ed.), Philosophical writings of Charles S. Peirce, 98–119. New York: Dover.Search in Google Scholar

Reed, Rowe. 2007. A pluralist approach to argument diagramming. Law, Probability, and Risk 6(1–4). 59–85.10.1093/lpr/mgm030Search in Google Scholar

Roberts, Paul & Adrian Zuckermann. 2010. Criminal evidence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Rowley-Jolivet, E. 2002. Visual discourse in scientific conference papers: A genre-based study. English for Specific Purposes 21. 19–40.10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00024-7Search in Google Scholar

Sherwin, Richard. 2011. Visualizing law in the age of the digital baroque: Arabesques & entanglements. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203815861Search in Google Scholar

Sherwin, Richard. 2013. Visual jurisprudence. New York Law School Law Review Symposium 57. 137–165.10.2139/ssrn.2135801Search in Google Scholar

Stjernfelt, Frederik. 2000. Diagrams as centerpiece of a Peircean epistemology. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 36(3). 357–384.Search in Google Scholar

Tardy, Christine M. 2005. Expressions of disciplinarity and individuality. Computers and Composition 22. 319–336.10.1016/j.compcom.2005.05.004Search in Google Scholar

Tomaselli, Keyan G. 1996. Appropriating images: The semiotics of visual representation. Højbjerg: Intervention Press.Search in Google Scholar

Toulmin, Stephen E. 1958. The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Tushnet, Rebecca. 2011. Worth a thousand words: The images of copyright law. Harvard Law Review 125. 685–759.Search in Google Scholar

Twining, William. 1985. Theories of evidence: Bentham and Wigmore. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.Search in Google Scholar

Valverede, Mariana. 2006. Law and order: Images, meanings, and myths. Abingdon: Routledge-Cavendish.Search in Google Scholar

Van Lier, Henri. 1983. Philosophie de la photographie: Les cahiers de la photographie. Paris: Laplume ACCP.Search in Google Scholar

Wagner, Anne. 2009. Mapping legal semiotics. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 23(1). 77–82.10.1007/s11196-009-9132-6Search in Google Scholar

Wigmore, J. 1913. The science of judicial proof as given by logic, psychology and general experience and illustrated in judicial trials. Boston: Little, Brown.Search in Google Scholar