Abstract: In juristic criminal trials, verbal behavior is mightily featured by the interactive competition among three parties of defense, prosecution and court. Speakers’ intentions can be obviously divided into two types: cooperation and antagonism. Accordingly, reported speech in criminal trials can be “affirmative” or “negative.” Thus the “direct quotation” and “indirect quotation” in general sense have difference meanings in this respect. Furthermore, 〖JP2〗all facts in court are determined by reporting and the reporters should take their own responsibilities for what they report. Therefore, reported speech in court, whether it is affirmative or negative, whether it is the “direct quotation” or “indirect quotation,” will assume corresponding legal responsibility, which makes reported speech in court different from those in literature, news reports and academic articles.

Key words: intentionality principle, reported speech in court trials, affirmative and negative reported speech, direct quotation, indirect quotation, reporters&rsquo, responsibility