Clanchy, M. (2012). From Memory to Written Record: England 1066–1307 (3rd ed.). London: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Ainsworth, J. E. (1993). In a Different Register: The Pragmatics of Powerlessness in Police Interrogation. Yale Law Journal 103: 259–322.Google Scholar

Baddeley, A. (2007). Working Memory, Thought, and Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Baddeley, A., Gathercole, S. and Papagno, C. (1998). The Phonological Loop as a Language Learning Device, Psychological Review 105: 158–173.Google Scholar

Bond, Z. S. (1999). Slips of the Ear: Errors in the Perception of Casual Conversation. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Brown, A. (2014). Pronunciation and Phonetics. A Practical Guide for English Language Teachers. New York and Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar

Bruce, D. J. (1958). The Effect of Listeners’ Anticipations on the Intelligibility of Heard Speech. Language and Speech 1: 79–97.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Conley, J. M. and O'Barr, W. M. (2005). Just Words: Law, Language, and Power (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Coulthard, M. (2002). Whose Voice Is It? Invented and Concealed Dialogue in Written Records of Verbal Evidence Produced by the Police. In Cotterill, J. (ed.) Language in the Legal Process. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 19–34.Google Scholar

Ellsworth, P. C. (2012). Legal Reasoning and Scientific Reasoning. Alabama Law Review 63: 895–918.Google Scholar

Fishman, C. S. (2006). Recordings, Transcripts, and Translations as Evidence, Washington Law Review 81: 523–773.Google Scholar

Foulkes, P. and French, P. (2012). Forensic Speaker Comparison: A Linguistic-Acoustic Perspective. In Tiersma, P. M. and Solan, L. M. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 557–572.Google Scholar

Fraser, H. (2003). Issues in Transcription: Factors Affecting the Reliability of Transcripts as Evidence in Legal Cases. Forensic Linguistics 10: 203–226.Google Scholar

Fraser, H. (2014). Transcription of Indistinct Forensic Recordings: Problems and Solutions from the Perspective of Phonetic Science. Language and Law/Linguagem e Direito 1(2): 5–21.Google Scholar

Fraser, H. and Stevenson, B. (2014). The Power and Persistence of Contextual Priming: More Risks in Using Police Transcripts to Aid Jurors’ Perception of Poor Quality Covert Recordings. International Journal of Evidence & Proof 18: 205–229.Google Scholar

Fraser, H., Stevenson, B. and Marks, T. (2011). Interpretation of a Crisis Call: Persistence of a Primed Perception of a Disputed Utterance. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 18: 261–292.Google Scholar

French, P. (1990). Analytic Procedures for the Determination of Disputed Utterances. In Kniffka, H. (ed.) Texte zu Theorie und Praxis forensischer Linguistik. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 201–213.Google Scholar

Guillemin, B. J. and Watson, C. (2008). Impact of the GSM mobile phone net-work on the speech signal. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 15: 193–218.Google Scholar

Harrison, P. (2001). GSM interference cancellation for forensic audio: a report on work in progress. Forensic Linguistics 8: 9–23.Google Scholar

Hollien, H. (2002). Forensic Voice Identification. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Jessen, M. (2008). Forensic Phonetics. Language and Linguistics Compass 2: 671–711.Google Scholar

Kassin, S. M., Dror, I. E. and Kukucka, J. (2013). The Forensic Confirmation Bias: Problems, Perspectives, and Proposed Solutions. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition 2: 42–52.Google Scholar

Katzmann, R. A. (2014). Judging Statutes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Lawrence, S., Nolan, F. and McDougall, K. (2008). Acoustic and perceptual effects of telephone transmission on vowel quality. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 15: 161–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meyer, A. S. (1992). Investigation of Phonological Encoding through Speech Error Analyses: Achievements, Limitations, and Alternatives. Cognition 42: 182–211.Google Scholar

Miller, G. A. (1996). Contextuality. In Oakhill, J. and Garnham, A. (eds.) Mental Models in Cognitive Science: Essays in Honour of Phil Johnson-Laird. East Sussex, England: Psychology Press, 1–18.Google Scholar

Morrison, G. S. (2009). Forensic Voice Comparison and the Paradigm Shift, Science & Justice 49: 298–308.Google Scholar

Nadler, J. and Trout, J. D. (2012). The Language of Consent in Police Encounters. In Tiersma, P. M. and Solan, L. M. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 326–339.Google Scholar

Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises. Review of General Psychology 22: 175–220.Google Scholar

Nygaard, L. C. and Pisoni, D. B. (1998). Talker-Specific Learning in Speech Perception. Perception and Psychophysics 60: 355–376.Google Scholar

O'Grady, G. (2013). Key Concepts in Phonetics and Phonology. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Rose, P. (2002). Forensic Speaker Identification. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar

Scalia, A. and Garner, B. A. (2012). Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts. St. Paul, MN: Thomson/West.Google Scholar

Shuy, R. W. (1993). Language Crimes: The Use and Abuse of Language Evidence in the Courtroom. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Shuy, R. W. (2014). The Language of Murder Cases: Intentionality, Predisposition, and Voluntariness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Solan, L. (1993). The Language of Judges. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Solan, L. M. and Tiersma, P. M. (2005). Speaking of Crime: The Language of Criminal Justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Tang, K. and Nevins, A. (2014). Measuring Segmental and Lexical Trends in a Corpus of Naturalistic Speech. In Huang, H.-L., Poole, E. and Rysling, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 43rd Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society Vol. 2. GLSA (Graduate Linguistics Student Association), 153–166.Google Scholar

Tiersma, P. (1999). Legal Language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Tiersma, P. M. (2010). Parchment, Paper, Pixels: Law and the Technologies of Communication. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Trott, S. S. (1996). Words of Warning for Prosecutors Using Criminals as Witnesses. Hastings Law Journal 47: 1381–1432.Google Scholar

Yarmey, A. D. (2012). Factors Affecting Lay Persons’ Identification of Speakers. In Tiersma, P. M. and Solan, L. M. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 547–567.Google Scholar