EXERCISE 1

Sentencing remarks of The Honourable Mr Justice Fraser

1. “The jury convicted you unanimously yesterday of Manslaughter by Reason of Diminished

Responsibility”
This phrase means that the jury reached the verdict in total agreement regarding the murder
committed by the accused man. He was plead guilty, but his liability for the crime was
considered partial due to his mental problems.

2. “Other than the first day when you were arraigned, you have not attended your trial at all”.
Only once, when the defendant was called before the court to answer the charges, he
actually came. He did not appear in person in the court again.

3. “You have some minor convictions from when you were a juvenile but none that are relevant
to this offence”.
Before committing the murder, the defendant had some previous petty misdemeanours
when he was under age, but this fact is a moot point for the case.

4. “You seem to have slipped through the net in terms of care for your mental illness, which
with hindsight was far more serious than was realised at the time”.
You neglected your mental health, without taking proper care of it. And in retrospect, one
can see that psychological issues of the defendant were more harmful than one could expect.
5. “Your rapidly deteriorating mental state went unnoticed on each occasion you presented at
A&E. You expressly asked to be sectioned”
Every time the defendant had a meeting at Emergency Department of the Hospital, his
worsening psychological issues were overlooked, regardless of his explicit requirement to be
detained in the mental institution.
6. “The psychiatrists were not agreed upon whether you knew what you were doing at the
time was wrong by the standards of reasonable ordinary people.

The psychiatrists could not reach an agreement on the nature of the defendant’s awareness.
They could not tell if he realized that his wrongdoings were harmful and not acceptable.
7. “The opinion of both Dr Higgins and Dr Crosby – your treating clinician – is that you met the
legal test for insanity. It was for this reason that the defence contended for the special
verdict on the count of murder you faced at trial, namely that you were Not Guilty by Reason
of Insanity”.
Both doctors agreed that the defendant showed all signs of being mentally unhealthy. That is
why the defense counsel of the accused man fought for a less severe verdict, alleging that he
committed the murder because he was insane.
8. “Conviction for manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility necessarily means that
the offender’s ability to understand the nature of the conduct, form a rational judgment
and/or exercise self-control was substantially impaired”.

Pleading guilty of a murder, when the criminal cannot take full responsibility for his actions
due to the mental health problems, entitles his complete awareness of the wrongdoing,
without any obstruction of the full capacity to reason and to control oneself.

9. “In my judgment your mental illness at the time means that you were at the lower end of the
scale in terms of culpability. You did not always take your medication, but given the lack of
insight you had this does not increase your culpability”.

To the best of judge´s knowledge, when the defendant committed the murder, he could not
understand what he was doing, therefore, he could not be blamed for it. Regardless of the
fact that he was not taking the medication as he was supposed to, his lack of responsibility
for the wrongdoing cannot be reconsidered, bearing in mind his condition.

10. The defence accept that you are properly characterised as dangerous, and this conclusion is
an inescapable one in your case. Dr Higgins explained that in order even to be admitted to
Ashworth, you have to present a grave and immediate danger, and I unhesitatingly conclude
that you are dangerous.

The lawyer agrees upon the fact that his client is dangerous, and this is a very important fact
to take into account in terms of the case. Dr. Higgins stated that a patient can be accepted to
Ashworth only if he shows signs of imminent and serious peril, and the judge strongly
believes that the defendant is demonstrated to be dangerous indeed.

EXERCISE 2
This exercise aims at providing a contrastive analysis of the four texts about the same event
that took place in 2020. I will compare the texts, indicating specific features of each one of
them, illustrating their differences and similarities with examples. I will conclude the paper
with a personal conclusion regarding those similarities and differences, trying to pinpoint
which texts have more in common, and what the reason of this resemblance is.
First of all, there are several similarities shared by the four texts, given the nature of the
subject they report on, which is the crime committed by an insane person in the UK.
There are certain characteristics that are shared by all four texts: exhaustive use of subject-
specific terms intertwined with the general vocabulary, use of references, extensive use of
nouns, direct and indirect speech, passive voice, use of gerunds and participles. Besides, one
can notice the British spelling of the words in all texts, due to their origin.
Subject-specific terms:
Text 1. Jury (1), trial (1), offence (5), verdict (6).
Text 2. Sentencing (2), diminished responsibility (5), psychosis (13)
Text 3. Convicted (1), schizophrenia (7), psychosis (26)
Text 4. Sentenced (5), clinician (9), to be sectioned (33).

General vocabulary (including phrasal verbs):

Text 1. baby, death, tragic (5), come to an end, lead up (14), set out (23)
Text 2. threw into (1), child (1), loved (30), bright (31)
Text 3. Son (1), exchange (18), evidence (29), unwell (24), summing up (31)
Text 4 turn into (7), diagnosed (24), support (31), slip through (14).

Use of references:
Text 1. Dr Crosby, your treating clinician at Ashworth, describes that transfer from the
community mental health team as a mistake (5)

Text 2. "He was dearly loved," she said. (30)

Text 3. "It may be that exchange set the seed in Zak's mind that they would be better off without
Zakari," he told jurors (18).
Text 4. The judge said: “You expressly asked to be sectioned (31) The judge told the defendant
(21)

Extensive use of nouns:

Text 1. Jury (1), trial (1), offence (5), verdict (6).
Text 2. Sentencing (2), responsibility (5), psychosis (13)
Text 3. schizophrenia (7), psychosis (26)
Text 4. clinician (9), emergency, urgency (34)
Direct and indirect speech:
Text 1. You told a member of the public what you had done (4)

Text 2. The Lowry Nightingale court heard Bennett-Eko told doctors he 'believed his son was the
devil and that he was being told to drown him' (11).

Text 3. Prosecutor Rob Hall said Bennett-Eko's partner Emma Blood, who was eight months
pregnant (15), "It may be that exchange set the seed in Zak's mind that they would be better off
without Zakari," he told jurors (18).
Text 4. The judge said: “You expressly asked to be sectioned (31) The judge told the defendant
(21), Crosby said the defendant’s learning disability meant he would not fully have understood
the effect not taking his medication and using cannabis would have on his mental health (26).

Passive voice:
Text 1. Your son was not found until approximately one hour later (3)

Text 2. he can be transferred away (22), The court heard Bennett-Eko was let out into the
community after a 17-month-long stay (41)

Text 3. He was seen throwing Zakari into the river (12), the baby was thrown into the river (32)
Text 4. should “never have been discharged” from community (10), you were again simply
referred back to your GP (34)

Use of gerunds and participles

Text 1. Picking up (6), agreed (10), approaching (13), having regard (22)
Text 2. Walking into (61), indicated (57), swinging (59)
Text 3.summing up (31), expanding (14), killing (1)
Text 4. Taking, using (26), being found (1)

British spelling and general vocabulary

Text 1. Honourable (1), behaviour (6)
Text 2. Defence (38), clinicians (22)
Text 3. Pub (12)
Text 4. clinician (9)

Clearly, the first text is different from the others. It is a legal document, which implies its
more complicated nature. Sentences are more complex, there is an abundancy of the legal
terms, linkers, and paragraphs are longer. Nevertheless, some traits are peculiar for the
 official document. Regardless, of a supposed objectivity of the text, one can observe the
extensive use of emotive language, descriptive adjectives, opinion adverbs, intensifiers, and
attitudinal clauses.
Complex sentences with relative clauses
You have some minor convictions from when you were a juvenile but none that are relevant
to this offence (5).
Legal terms
Arraigned (1), defence (6), manslaughter (1), diminished responsibility (1), culpability (5), jury
(27)
Linkers
Therefore (21), however (2)
Extensive paragraphs
For example, paragraph 5.
Emotive language
Sad (2), shocked (3), devastation (12), tragic (2)
Opinion adverbs and expressions
Clearly (5), plainly (18), I am satisfied (25)
Intensifiers
Extremely (15), very (2), extremely sad (2), extremely shocked (3)
Attitudinal clauses.
I am satisfied (25), I unhesitatingly conclude (17)

Logically, three last texts have more similarities, due to the conventions of the journalistic
genre. Three articles published in Manchester Evening News, BBC News, and The Guardian
share many grammatical, lexical and stylistic features, for example, the use of narrative
tenses. The sentences are precise and succinct, paragraphs are normally short and do not
include more than three sentences, there is no redundancy and all extra information is cut.
There are almost no descriptive adjectives, and the articles are objective, impersonal,
objective and to the point, which is achieved through the use of passive voice and
predomination of the direct speech. The grammar is clear and simple.

Narrative tenses
Text 2 He had spiralled into a severe state of psychosis, the court heard (13)
Text 3 He was seen throwing Zakari into the river before walking to the Lock Keeper pub
nearby where he was later arrested (12)
Text 4 He added that he had “unhesitatingly” concluded that Bennett-Eko was dangerous.
(17)
Succinct sentences
Text 2 "He was dearly loved," she said. (30)
Text 3 Zakari Bennett-Eko: Dad convicted of killing son he threw into river (1)
Text 4 The judge said: “You expressly asked to be sectioned ( 33)

Lack of redundancy. Precise sentences

Text 2 If he is ever released further, Bennett-Eko will be under lifelong supervision. (26)
Text 3 A man has been found guilty of killing his 11-month-old son by throwing him into a river
(1).

Text 4 Zak Bennett-Eko, 23, sentenced to hospital order after being found guilty of 11-month-
old son’s manslaughter (1)
Passive voice
Text 2 Ford Focus being driven by a man. (55)
Text 3 A man has been found guilty (2)
Text 4 He should never have been discharged (28)
Predomination of the direct speech
Text 2"He was dearly loved," she said. (30)
Text 3 "It may be that exchange set the seed in Zak's mind that they would be better off without
Zakari," he told jurors (18).

Text 4 The judge said: “You expressly asked to be sectioned. (33)

Simple grammar (SVO)
Text 2 Zak Bennett Eko threw his 11-month-old Zakari… (8)
Text 3 He has been convicted of manslaughter (6)
Text 4 The judge told the defendant… (21)
I believe that text 3 and text 4 are the most similar in genre and content. Both texts show
conventions of the journalistic writing, that are not present in other two texts, for example,
ellipsis. Besides there is a constant repetition of the same words in both texts (judge said,
judge said, defendant…). Relative clauses are very common too (Emma Blood, who was eight
 months pregnant (15. Text 3), Bennett-Eko, who was too unwell to appear at the trial or the
sentencing (23, text 4)

Ellipsis

Text 3 Dad convicted of killing son he threw into river (1). “Who was” is omitted.

Text 4 Zak Bennett-Eko, 23, sentenced to hospital order (1). WAS is omitted.

In a nutshell, all four texts deal with the same topic. Undoubtedly, three articles published in
the media were based on the first official document. Apart from the grammatical and
syntactic similarities of the articles, direct quotes, use of the sentencing remarks as a source,
is another common aspects of the last three texts, as well as the treatment of the
information. The first text is more descriptive than the three others, that are predominantly
narrative.