Análise crítica do discurso de uma sentença condenatória em um caso de violência doméstica contra mulher no Espírito Santo

Abstract

In our society there is a legitimation of the idea that the court system is impartial and, therefore, the only one capable of promoting justice. However, considering the status of power created through systematic dialogical relations between social actors and especially the use of the lexicon, syntax and textual structure adopted in the judicial environment, one can wonder whether the judiciary promotes discrimination, mainly because of the legal language. In this sense, the goal of this research is to analyze linguistically and discursively if the legal system contributes to the normalization of cases of violence against women, as well as for the perpetuation of the idea of discrimination and impunity in relation to these cases and how this occurs by means of discursive materiality. To this end, it was adopted as corpus a sentence of a criminal case of domestic violence against women, issued in 2015, in the 6th criminal investigation department of Serra, linked to the Court of Justice of Espírito Santo (TJES) specialized in domestic violence. A qualitative and interpretive method was utilized. As a theoretical apparatus, the social cognitive approach of the Critical Discourse Analysis of Van Dijk (1998, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2015, 2016) was used. In addition, when it comes to reflections on social gender and violence against women, the researches of Butler (1990); Beauvoir (1970); Scott (1980); Figueiredo (1997, 2004); Freitas and Pinheiros (2013); Izumino (2003, 2004, 2011); Nader (2016; 2012; 2006); and Tomazi and Natale (2015) were used. For postulates regarding the legal language, the studies of Cabral and Guaranha (2014); Tomazi and Cunha (2017, 2016); Tomazi and Marinho (2014); Cabral (2016a, 2016b, 2014); Rodrigues (2016a, 2016b); Pinto, Cabral and Rodrigues (2016) were taken into consideration – among others. Finally, the results show a still difficult reality for female victims of gender violence who represent judicially against their aggressors. The legislator, as a social actor, still judges cases based on a patriarchal ideology. In this way, their speech is marked by linguistic constructions that tend to soften the conduct of the aggressor, so that the seriousness of the crime committed against the woman is minimized.