Conflict diagrams for cross-examination dialogues

Abstract

ABSTRACTThis paper builds a practical method of analyzing cross-examination dialogues by using tools adapted from formal dialectic and artificial intelligence to show how an argumentation model can shed new light on our understanding of actual cases of cross-examination in the common law courts. This is done by illustrating how the model brings out certain precise formal features of argumentative cross-examinations, which would otherwise be hidden from view. Cross-examination dialogue is further discussed in relation to ancient and contemporary approaches to formal dialectics.