| Abstract: |
Digital communication increasingly incorporates emojis as meaningful semiotic resources, raising complex questions about interpretation and evidentiary reliability in legal contexts. Although digital evidence is becoming more common in litigation, limited empirical research has examined how judges interpret emoji-based communication in courtroom settings. This study investigates judicial perspectives on the interpretation and admissibility of emojis as legal evidence, focusing on the role of context, linguistic framing, and pragmatic inference in meaning attribution. A qualitative research design was adopted. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with six experienced judges from courts in Nigeria. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke's six-phase framework, informed by forensic linguistic and pragmatic theories of meaning. Findings show that judges recognise emojis as meaningful communicative signs but treat their evidentiary value cautiously. Interpretation is highly context-dependent and
shaped by accompanying text, communicative intent, and cultural norms. Concerns about ambiguity and misinterpretation were prominent. The study concludes that emoji meaning in legal contexts is interpretive and pragmatically negotiated, highlighting the need for clearer evidentiary
guidelines. |
