conviction <of the crime> [Redundant?]

< Previous | Next >

High on grammar

Senior Member
Farsi
Hello everyone:

I wrote the following sentence: Is the "of the crime" part considered redundant?

Substantial evidence led to her wrongful conviction of the crime.

Thanks
 
  • owlman5

    Senior Member
    English-US
    It's hard to comment on the redundancy of a phrase in an isolated sentence, High. If I saw this sentence in a newspaper article about her crime and conviction, I wouldn't need to see "of the crime" after "conviction": Substantial evidence led to her wrongful conviction.

    By itself, the first half of your example makes it pretty clear that you are talking about her being convicted of some crime, but I don't really see "of the crime" as a horrible redundancy in that isolated sentence.
     
    Last edited:

    velisarius

    Senior Member
    British English (Sussex)
    Should it be wrongful conviction "for the crime"? I agree that we can say "He was convicted of the crime", but do we say "It led to her wrongful conviction of the crime"?

    As often happens, the more I think about it the less sure I am.:confused:
     

    The Newt

    Senior Member
    English - US
    Should it be wrongful conviction "for the crime"? I agree that we can say "He was convicted of the crime", but do we say "It led to her wrongful conviction of the crime"?

    As often happens, the more I think about it the less sure I am.:confused:
    I think "wrongful conviction for the crime" sounds more natural.
     

    JamesM

    Senior Member
    (It's an odd statement that makes me very curious to learn more. How was there substantial evidence of her guilt that led to a wrongful conviction?)

    It seems to me it would make more sense to say "Substantial evidence led to her conviction, despite her innocence", but we try not to do proofreading or re-writes here.

    As for the original question, I don't see a need to add "of the crime/for the crime".
     

    JamesM

    Senior Member
    Of course. That makes sense. I think I was mixing up wrongful conviction with something else. To me a wrongful conviction is not just an erroneous conviction but an erroneous conviction due to negligence, perjury, improper proceedings and the like. That may not be the legal sense of the term.
     

    DonnyB

    Sixties Mod
    English UK Southern Standard English
    Should it be wrongful conviction "for the crime"? I agree that we can say "He was convicted of the crime", but do we say "It led to her wrongful conviction of the crime"?

    As often happens, the more I think about it the less sure I am.:confused:
    I would say "Substantial evidence led to her wrongful conviction for the crime".

    I think the difference is that she had a conviction (noun) for murder but she had been convicted (verb) of murder. :)
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top