Wed/Thur

Most important life lessons
Discuss
Write 1/2-1 page explaining why it's so important
What lessons are the following people learning in the novel?

Grant

Jefferson

Minister

Miss Emma

HOMEWORK: Finish page 32
CLASSWORK: Chapter 3 in vocab book. Hand in

Create a list of Ten Important Life Lessons (maybe more than 10)
1.Take risks
2.Be kind/compassionate/helpful
3.Treat others the way you want to be treated
4.Choose love
5.Look at the long term perspective
6.Fear is an illusion
7.Never fail to try more
8.Make every moment count
9.Don't depend on people
10.Anger isn't worth it
11. "Do or do not, there is no try"--Yoda
12. "The training is nothing; the will is everything. The will to act"--Ra's Al Ghul, Batman Begins
13. “When men are romantically interested in you, it's really simple. Just ignore everything they say and only pay attention to what they do” --Randy Pausch, to his 2 year-old daughter (his dying words)
14.Appreciate your journey
15.Everyone has their own timeline
16.Start telling yourself how you can, not why you can't
17.One of the best ways to learn is to simply start doing it
18.Health is priority #1
19. Give back
20. Try new things
21.Don't take things for granted. "When it comes
22.Don't trust anybody
23.It's not about what happens to you it's about how you react to it
24. Be unique
25. Don't waste your life being angry
26. Think before you act
27. Love yourself
28. accept your failure in order to be successful
29. only trust those who trust you
30. Love yourself before you try to love someone else.
31. be respectful to others, you don't know what they're going through.
32. live life to the fullest.
You can find some good ideas here (7 Most Important Life Lessons)

A Lesson Before Dying

Accused: Jefferson
Defense Argument: Jefferson is like a hog.
    Why does the defense attorney compare Jefferson to a hog?
     (Why would a hog-like man be innocent?)

Most likely, the Defense's comparison of Jefferson to a hog backfired and made the jury more likely to convict. Give three reasons why this might be:
1.
2.
3.

HOMEWORK: READ CHAPTERS 1, 2, 3 (to page 23)
HOMEWORK: TURN IN YOUR OPENING ARGUMENT
2nd Period:  CLASS ID: 20997121
                    Enrollment Key: southsaxons
3rd Period: CLASS ID: 20997121
                     Enrollment Key: southsaxons
7th Period: CLASS ID: 20997121
                     Enrollment Key: southsaxons

OPENING ARGUMENT PAPER DUE MONDAY

3 pages double-spaced.
SEE EXAMPLE AT BOTTOM (DO not COPY!)
The examples are approximately 600 words each and that's about how long yours should be.
If you are having a difficult time writing that much, do a closing argument, instead.

CLOSING ARGUMENT
1. Sum up your argument
    What points did Cody make? How does that show motive, means, opportunity?
       1)
       2)
      etc.
    What points did Kripke make? How does that show motive, means, opportunity?
       1)
       2)
      etc.
  What points did Hobbes make? How does that show motive, means, opportunity?
       1)
       2)
      etc.
2. Sum up the other side's argument and point out the weaknesses in their testimony (doubt)
    What points did Beck try to make? Explain problems with their story and testimony
       1)
       2)
      etc.
     What points did Kripke try to make? Explain problems with their story and testimony
       1)
       2)
      etc.
  What points did Gracian try to make? Explain problems with their story and testimony
       1)
       2)
      etc.
EXAMPLE 1:

Opening Statement

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, today you have been selected to participate in the trial of Martin vs Utah. This case is about a Beck Martin who had let his anger and fear get the better of him which lead to the murder of Anne Marcus on Sunday, June 8th, 2003 at Cottonwood Canyon in Salt City. It is your responsibility to vote guilty of Beck martin killing Anne Marcus. Today you will be hearing from three witnesses on the side of the prosecution. They are Cody Ward, Officer Loren Kripke, and Dr. Aidan Hobbes who paint a picture of how Beck Martin killed Anne Marcus.

Cody Ward was just a high school student at Salt City High School who had gone down the wrong path to maintain a perfect grade which lead to him reluctantly cheating on an exam with fellow classmate Beck Martin. Cody’s testimony proves that Beck Martin had the opportunity and motive to commit the murder of Anne Marcus. When Anne caught Cody and Beck cheating, Cody knew that he had to face the consequences since Anne could also get in trouble for not turning in Beck and Cody. Beck on the other called Anne and backstabber for “threatening” him. This Beck’s second offense so he knew that if Anne turned them in he would get an F in the class on his permanent transcript ruining his future and disappointing his parents who expect a lot out of Beck. All of this stress, fear, and anger built up enough to cause him to commit murder in an attempt to save his high school career. After Beck snapped at Anne and grabbed her by the collar of her shirt when Cody and Beck arrived at Cottonwood Canyon, Beck wanted to talk with Anne at the cove. Cody not wanting to be apart of Beck yelling at Anne left to go sit in his car which he arrived to at approximately 7:50pm. He waited until 9:00pm for Beck to come back from the Cove which he had been at for over an hour alone with Anne.

Dr.Aidan Hobbes, after doing an autopsy of Anne concluded that Anne was killed in that 70 minute time frame that Beck and Anne were alone. The autopsy showed that Anne Marcus was tied up with her climbing rope before being struck on the side of the head and perhaps knocked unconscious. It was after this assault that her body was thrown into the creek where she subsequently drowned.

Officer Loren Kripke who was assigned to this task. After learning that she was killed with a rock to her head, which only Hobbes and Kripke knew about at the time, conducted an investigation. After talking with Cody and hearing that he and Beck were at Cottonwood Canyon at the time of the murder and that Beck was alone with Anne for 70 minutes, Beck was called in for an interview. It was then that Beck had said how sad it was that Anne had hit her head and died almost immediately after sitting down with Kripke, which would’ve been impossible to know about because not even Anne’s parents knew how she died.

After putting all three testimonies together it shows a picture that Beck Martin had the opportunity of 70 minutes alone with Anne to commit the murder. He had the means to do it with a rock and his muscular physique from doing soccer and weights to kill. Also the motive to save his grades, future, and reputation in his family and community.Today it is your responsibility to vote guilty of Beck Martin for the murder of Anne Marcus.

EXAMPLE 2:

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, today we are deciding the fate of Beck Martin, the boy accused of murdering Anne Marcus. Each person must vote guilty, or not guilty. To vote guilty you must believe beyond reasonable doubt that he did, in fact, murder Anne Marcus. We will be interviewing the accused, Beck Martin, a high school student. Dr Sage Gracian, a retired coroner with a bachelors in biology and a coroner for over 20 years. Then finally ranger Dale Plotnick who has been a ranger for 14 years, and has known Beck for years.

    Beck martin is just a high school student who made a mistake whilst trying to make his parents proud. According to beck he arrived back at Cody’s car at about 8:30, with no sign of Cody. Beck took a walk north, away from the scene of the crime, when he returned, so did Cody. When they first found Anne at the top of the cliff, the rock underneath her slipped and Beck stopped her from falling while Cody laughed. He clearly does not have intent for her to die, otherwise he would have just let her fall. Towards the end of his statement, Beck clearly states that he watched anne begin climbing again, then left the cove. Rock climbing alone can be dangerous, but when you do it at night too, it makes it much worse.

A major piece of evidence from Dr. Gracian that disproves the accused is that there was no rope at the scene of the crime. There wasn't even rope fibers on annes body left, as if she was tied up like D’r hobbes said. These lacerations could have been old, or a rope burn from climbing. This proves that she was in fact not bound up like Dr. Hobbes had stated. Dr. Gracian also stated that there is insufficient evidence to prove ‘her time of death is 8 or 8:30. Rigor mortis does not prove when she died, but it can give an estimate, but there are many variables that can change it. Beck said he found  Cody sweating, why would an athlete be sweating from either a short run or walk unless it was warm outside. Rigor mortis is slower in the cold, but there's more evidence pointing to a warmer temperature so her body decomposed at a different rate, so she had to have died after they left.

Our last witness is ranger Dale Plotnik, he has been a ranger at the state park for 14 years and worked at cottonwood canyon for the last 3 years. Dale knows this area better than anyone else. Dale will occasionally see people climbing down the cove, but advise them against it because it's too dangerous, but when it's dark and you need to get home soon it can take too long to take the safe way back to your car. Anne must have decided to climb the cliff on her way back to save time and get away from Beck since they have been arguing. With Anne climbing a dangerous cliff at night its very easy to justify that she just fell. Dale plotnik had also seen what sounds like Cody walking back to the car from the back way to the cove, and what seemed like Beck returning to the car around the same time. Dale has also known Beck for years, he's known him from church since he was young. Beck consistently helps organize food drives and other charitable events. He has also stated that Beck has stopped many conflicts, he's gotten a community service award from the chamber of commerce for the work he has done.

In conclusion, we do not have enough evidence to convict Beck Martin for murder. You can't vote guilty unless you honestly believe, that beyond reasonable doubt, he did it. There is more evidence to keep him innocent rather than guilty. Dale has given many statements to prove what kind of person Beck is, and all the evidence from Dr. Gracian helps prove Becks case. Prosecution does not have sufficient evidence. The window of when all of this happened is too big, the ME did not find rope fibers on the wrist lacerations. The ME also determined the time of death in a 4 hour window, Beck is on his way back to the car in the first hour of this window. This leaves another 3 hours of unaccounted time when nobody has seen Anne, therefore we cannot say Beck is the reason she died. Officer Kripke seems to have a bias towards beck, he read him the miranda rights before even hearing his side of the story, so he already knew he was going to arrest him. Based on the evidence from prosecution and defence, we must vote not guilty. There simply is not enough evidence to say Beck Martin has murdered Anne Marcus

Mock Trial Thur/Friday

Cross-examination

Each team will need lawyers assigned to witnesses from the opposing side. Your job is to cross-examine them to emphasize points you would like to make, points that weaken their argument. Cross-examination is all about poking holes in the other side's argument so that you win. 

You will need to anticipate what points they will be making and ask Yes/No questions to point out for the jury that their argument is flawed.

Cross-examination Questioning

Today your team needs to find three weak points in each of the opposition's testimony.

You will then write a series of questions that will point out the weakness in that testimony.

To practice, three of your team members will pretend to be the witnesses for the other side and each will work with an attorney. During the trial next time, this attorney will cross-examine the real witness, so this is practice.
ASSIGNMENT:
AS A TEAM, DISCUSS ALL THREE OF THE OTHER SIDE'S WITNESSES AND FIND A FEW PROBLEMS WITH THEIR TESTIMONY. THESE ARE YOUR AREAS OF ATTACK AND YOU WILL WEAKEN THEIR ARGUMENT BY DISCREDITING THEIR WITNESS TESTIMONY (do this the way we did the True Story of the Three Little Pigs)
PLOTNIK
Point 1.
  "You said that _____, right?"
  "And you also said ______, correct?"
  "And you said _____, didn't you?"
Point 2.
Point 3.
DR. GRACIAN
1.
2.
3.
BECK
1.
2.
3.
----------
OR
CODY
Point 1.
  "You said that _____, right?"
  "And you also said ______, correct?"
  "And you said _____, didn't you?"
Point 2.
Point 3.
OFFICER KRIPKE
1.
2.
3.
DR. HOBBES
1.
2.
3.

The True Story of the Three Little Pigs

What points in his story of Alexander T. Wolf sound a bit hard to believe?

Write down at least three.

What questions could you ask to point out the weakness in his argument?

Writing Your Opening Statement

Mock Trial: Beck Martin v. The State of Utah

HOW TO WRITE A DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT FOR MOCK TRIAL

HOW TO WRITE A PROSECUTION OPENING STATEMENT FOR MOCK TRIAL

HOW TO WRITE A DEFENSE OPENING STATEMENT FOR A MOCK TRIAL

HOW TO WRITE A PROSECUTION CLOSING ARGUMENT FOR MOCK TRIAL

HOW TO WRITE A PROSECUTION OPENING STATEMENT FOR MOCK TRIAL

Here is a template and suggestions for writing a prosecution opening:

THE INTRODUCTION

Good afternoon, my name is so-and-so, and it is my pleasure to represent the State of Columbus and to serve as a prosecutor on this very important case. On June 14th, 2018, the defendant in this matter [describe in detail what he or she is alleged to have done]. [You may choose to point to the accused at this time [and other times of the trial] for dramatic effect.] At the conclusion of the case, and after you have heard all the evidence, we are confident that you will return a verdict of guilty.

THE THEME:

Ladies and gentlemen, this case is about… [a man who cannot control his anger] or [a woman whose own greed got the better of her] or [an individual who is feigning insanity because he was caught red-handed and has no other possible defense.] Try to summarize your case and your position in a sentence or two. It is difficult to think about themes in the abstract. When you see court cases on the TV news or on Law and Order think about the themes of those cases.

SUMMARIZE EACH WITNESS:

Examples:

Members of the jury, the State will call three different witnesses in this trial. We will call Detective Smith who will testify that he was on duty in Jefferson County on the night of the murder, and he witnessed the defendant’s car fleeing the scene at high speed. While we will admit the detective did not see who was in the car, the prosecution will be calling the victim’s neighbor to the stand, and the neighbor will explain that she clearly saw the defendant flee the crime scene with a weapon still in his hand. Lastly we will call a very experienced psychiatrist who will testify that he did a thorough mental health evaluation of the defendant in this matter. The psychiatrist will testify that the accused as sane at the time of the killing, and suffered from no medically recognized psychological defect.

or

Members of the jury, the State will call three witnesses to the stand. The first witness will be Mr. Hernandez who will testify that he was at his place of work at 7-11 when the defendant attacked at the check-out counter and did so without provocation. We will call the emergency room doctor who will testify that Mr. Hernandez sustained a broken nose and an orbital fracture. Lastly, the prosecution will call the defendant’s girlfriend to the stand who will testify that the defendant boasted about robbing Mr. Hernandez when he returned home late that night.

[These samples I have provided are obviously quite brief. You will want to provide a lot more details. Studies show that many jurors are likely to make up their mind about a case after simply hearing the opening statement. After a person has made up their mind, it can be hard to change their opinion. You will want to highlight all the important evidence you have. But keep in mind the time limits that your mock trial competition sets. Work with your teammates in this respect.]

CONCLUSION:

After you have heard all the evidence, we would ask that you find the defendant guilty as charged on all counts. Thank you.

HOW TO WRITE A DEFENSE OPENING STATEMENT FOR A MOCK TRIAL

INTRODUCTION:

Good afternoon members of the jury, my name is so-and-so, and I together with my colleagues, represent the defendant in this case [name]. The defendant stands here today wrongly accused of the crime of______, a very serious matter. At the end of this trial, we are going to ask you to render a verdict of not guilty, the only appropriate verdict.

THE THEME:

Members of the jury, this case is of [mistaken identity] or [My client punched Mr. Jones, but did so out of self-defense] or [my client did stab her husband, but was temporarily insane due to mental illness]. [There are a limited number of defenses to a criminal charge in a court of law. I cannot list them all here, but a defense lawyer should always be able to summarize his or defense in one or two sentences. Sometimes it is the position of the defense that the defendant is not guilty of the charge as alleged, but is guilty of a lesser charge. (For example, my client struck the victim with a stick, but the stick was too small to count as a “assault with a deadly weapon.”)]

CONTRADICT THE STATE’S THEORIES:

A common defense attorney strategy in opening statements is to start critiquing the state’s case, and letting the jury know that there are two sides to the story. Remember that as a defense attorney, you get the last word in opening statements. The prosecutor has to go first and unlike closing arguments, they may not speak again and rebut what you have to say. So take the opportunity to shoot holes in their case. In theory, you can reserve your opening statement until after the prosecution has rested, but this is rarely done (particularly in mock trial competitions). So how do you contradict the prosecutor’s opening? Here are some examples:

Members of the jury the prosecutor explained in her opening statement that her witness Mrs. Wong will testify that she witnessed the robbery from across the parking lot and she identified my client as the guilty party. However, Mrs. Wong will herself admit that it was very dark and rainy that night, and that she admitted she was only “90 percent sure” it was my client.

Or:

The prosecutor explained in his opening statement that my client confessed to the murder. However, this “confession” only happened after my client was with the police for 14 hours straight, and was kept up all night without any food or even any water.

So it is your job from the start to explain to the jury that there are two sides to the story.

Having coached mock trial for over 20 years, one thing I have noticed is that in every mock trial packet, there are little inconsistencies in both sides of the case for lawyers to point out in their presentations. However, it also does seem like there are some inconsistencies that are not terrible relevant, and you do not have to cover all of them due to the time restrictions. Even in real trials, lawyers make tactical decisions to not cover everything they possible could due to the limited attention span of jurors.

SUMMARIZE EACH WITNESSES’ TESTIMONY:

Members of the jury, as the defense attorney, I will call three witnesses to testify. My first witness will be Doctor Jerome McGinnis. He will testify that he has been a psychologist for 30 years, and his specialty is forensic psychology. He will testify that he did an evaluation of my client and found him to be insane due to paranoid schizophrenia. My second witness will my Martha Jackson, who is a school psychologist at Lakeside High, where my client went to school. She will testify that my client suffered from mental illness dating back to 1999. Lastly my third witness will be Antonio Garza. Mr. Garza will testify that he was roommates with my client when he was in college, and he will testify as to the psychological breakdown that my client suffered during his years at Columbus University.

Laying out each witness’s expected testimony sequentially is a little formulaic and can come across as a little dry sometimes. Overreliance on this structure will mean you are unlikely to win a mock trial national championship, but if this is your first competition, a structure like this will be a good starting point. As you progress in the competition, you can vary from the formula to make it a little unpredictable and think on your feet a bit more.

CONCLUSION:

At the conclusion of this trial, the defense will ask that you find that our client is not guilty. The prosecution will not meet their burden of proof. Thank you.

MONDAY, MARCH 18, 2019

How to write a Mock Trial Opening Statement

COMPONENTS OF A SUCCESSFUL OPENING ARGUMENT

There are four major elements to a complete opening argument. Although the exact structure and order of these elements within the overall argument will vary, it is important to include significant detail about each in order to lay the proper groundwork for the case an attorney intends to present. The elements include:

1. A factual and sequential overview of the major facts in the case important to the presenting attorney’s side. The amount of storytelling involved will vary depending on many factors, including whether the argument is for the prosecution or the defense team.

Because the prosecution team presents their opening statement first, and because they have the burden of proof (the requirement to prove the defendant guilty), their opening will include much more storytelling. Often, a prosecution opening statement can be structured entirely around the storyline of the case. Such an intensive retelling is not necessary for the defense, as they must simply cast a reasonable doubt on the allegations made. Thus, a defense opening will often include a story of much more limited scope and one targeted specifically towards the prosecutorial weaknesses of the case.

2. A description of what the prosecution or defense intends to prove or show. For the prosecution, this should be a statement of the charges, and the corresponding list of actions the defendant must have taken to be found guilty. This statement should be accompanied by a short description of what exactly the defendant did. For the defense, a focus should be placed on the weakest legal elements that the prosecution must prove. Mock trial cases will never favor one side over the other, so there will always be the opportunity to poke holes in the argument of the other side.

For example, if the prosecution must prove “malice aforethought” by the defendant, but the defense will call a character witness to testify to the defendant’s good nature, this should be brought up in the opening statement. One thing the defense should take care to avoid is appearing to argue their case with the opening statement. The opening statement is not the place to draw legal conclusions, as no evidence has been presented yet. The opening statement is the place to present a side’s theory of the case and any important facts that will come to light during the trial.

3.  A short explanation of the evidence that will be presented. For the prosecution, this can include actual physical evidence, such as a diagram or letter. These should be referenced and used during opening statements by the prosecution. Additionally, both the prosecution and defense should be sure to emphasize particularly important facts to their side during the opening. If the defense plans to have a witness testify who will provide an alibi for the defendant, this should be brought up in the opening.  

4. A short description of what each of the witnesses will testify. This provides a roadmap for the judge and scoring attorneys and helps them know what to expect from each witness. It often helps to present a side’s witnesses in the order that they will appear. This allows for a streamlined introduction to the facts, as well as the structure of the case, and minimizes confusion created by varying orders.

To summarize, the four elements of a successful opening argument are an overview of the major facts of the case, a description of what the prosecution/defense intends to argue, a description of the evidence to be presented, and a description of each witness’ testimony.  By including these four elements into an opening argument, an attorney will be sure to cover all the bases necessary for a solid case foundation and will fill in any gaps of knowledge the judge may have, allowing them to focus entirely on the direct examination of witnesses that follows.