Under Brazilian court practice, the taking of statements (TD, in Portuguese)is characterized as an inquiry in which the judge´s questions are omitted in the document that registers the event. The information given by the testifier in response to the questions, without predetermination of cohesive and/or argumented relationships, are recorded from interpretative decisions. The strategy of retextualization is related to the Gricenean maxims of quantity and manner in the sense of selecting and re-ordering the original text. This empirical analysis selected a TD from the corpus, which has ten hours of recording, and segmented the document into fifteen information units (UI), adopting as the criterion the propositional/phrasal construction of each one of the parts which contain an item of information. We observe that the insertion of connectives (that, because, therefore, etc) perform argumentative operations which were not present in the words the testifier used. The organization of how the argumentation was dealt with, is based on Ducrot; Anscombre (1978). Using this point of view, a ´true´ interpretation with only one semantic value does not exist for each utterance. The context of the utterance defines the instance and semantic value of the utterances. Therefore, the judge interprets based on juridical interests. As a result, we state that, when the oral evidence is turned into a written document, all of the testifier´s utterances, made under a structure of conversational participation, laid out successively in answer to the judge´s questions, are re-ordered in the document with the insertion of connectives which perform argumentative operations, that is to say, the strategy of retextualization determines the direction in which the text leads. The conclusion may be drawn that the text-document does not always correspond to the text given in oral testimony.