The People of Allegheny County

th 9 Grade Civics The People of Allegheny County

2 vs.

Pat Haines

3 Table of Contents

Mock Trial Fact Situation……………………………………………………………………….. 3

What You Will Be Arguing…………………………………………………………………...... 6

Prosecution Witness Statements……………………………………………………………. 7

Defense Witness Statements…………………………………………………………………..18

Evidence……………………………………………………………………………………………… 33

4 The Form and Substance of a Trial...... 36

Role Description…………………………………………………………………………………… 37

Procedures for Presenting a Mock Trial Case…………………………………………. 39

Mock Trial Simplified Rules of Evidence………………………………………………… 44

Allowable Evidentiary Objections………………………………………………………….. 46

Allowable Objections for Inappropriately Phrased Questions…………………. 50

Summary of Allowable Evidentiary Objections………………………………………. 54

5 6 7 Mock Trial Fact Situation

8 After deciding to have some carpentry and woodwork done in the basement of his house, Pat

Haines was very anxious to get the best deal possible and asked a number of friends for suggestions.

Pat’s friend, Jackie Thomas, recommended Pat call the New Start Job Skills Center. Jackie had used

New Start employees the previous year to perform remodeling work on his home. Jackie explained to

Pat Haines that New Start’s work force was drawn largely from youths in the community who had

been disadvantaged in one way or another. By training these disadvantaged youths in different job

skills, Jackie explained to Pat that New Start had the capability to begin most projects almost

immediately at very competitive prices, and had established a reputation for high quality work

because its employees took their jobs very seriously. Pat Haines was very anxious to get the project

at his home started as quickly as possible and called New Start the following day, March 14, 20___.

9 The New Start contact that Pat Haines spoke to that day was Lee Chang. Lee Chang was

responsible for assigning jobs to New Start employees and serving as the contact person should any

problems arise during the performance of the assigned job. Lee informed Pat Haines that an

employee, Jordan Davis, would be available to start the project at M__. Haines’ home the following

Monday if Pat was interested.

In response to Pat Haines inquires, Lee Chang explained that Jordan Davis had hung out with a

tough crowd throughout his High School career and that he had never graduated. In addition, Lee

Chang informed Pat that Jordan Davis had been working for the New Start for approximately one

year, had worked on a number of jobs, and that he had never received a complaint about Jordan from

10 any of his customers. In addition, Lee Chang mentioned to Pat Haines that Jordan Davis was a very

competent carpenter with a particular talent for cutting intricate designs in wood.

Pat Haines was wary about Jordan Davis’ past and asked Lee Chang about the risks of having

“juvenile delinquents” working in one’s home. Lee Chang reiterated to M__. Haines that Jordan Davis

had no problems on any previous jobs, and reassured Pat the New Start employees were

trustworthy. Pat Haines still seemed hesitant, but once Lee Chang quoted a very reasonable price for

the job and repeated that the work could begin the following Monday morning, Pat Haines decided to

go ahead with the project.

th On Monday, March 18 , at 9:00 am, Jordan Davis arrived at Pat Haines home. Jackie Thomas,

Pat’s friend, was there when Jordan arrived. Jackie greeted Jordan warmly, but from the start, there

11 was instant tension between Pat Haines and Jordan Davis. Because Pat worked and would therefore

be away from house for most of the day, Jordan Davis asked Pat for an extra key in case he was

inadvertently locked out. Pat refused, and informed Mr. Davis that the next-door neighbor, Gail Perez,

had a key if necessary.

Pat Haines’ home was set up so that upon entry into the home through the front door, the

stairs down to the basement were located on the right, while the main body of the house stretched

out on the ground floor. A second floor contained a bedroom, a study, and a bathroom. When Pat

th arrived home at lunch time on Tuesday, March 19 , Jordan was coming out of the kitchen with a glass

of ice water. Because Pat Haines had many valuable possessions on ground floor, Pat was very angry

12 to find Jordan there. Pat instructed Jordan Davis to remain downstairs in the basement from then on,

and, instructed Jordan that if he got thirsty, to use the sink downstairs.

th On Wednesday morning, March 20 , concerned that Jordan Davis may not heed the

instructions given to him the day before, Pat Haines asked his neighbor, Gail Perez, to keep an eye on

Jordan and the house during the day. While observing Jordan Davis that day, Gail Perez noticed that

Jordan carried a large hunting knife in a sheath on his left hip, hidden by his work smock. In addition,

Gail witnesses Jordan, who was right-handed, fool with his knife through his entire lunch break.

Upon returning home that night, Gail Perez informed Pat Haines about Jordan’s hunting knife.

After hearing this news, Pat asked Gail to keep an even closer eye on Jordan over the net couple of

days and Gail agreed. Concerned, Pat Haines called his friend Jackie Thomas and asked if Jackie knew

13 anything about the knife. Jackie informed Pat that Jordan had not carried the knife all the time while

working at Jackie’s home, but that Jordan certainly did know how to use it.

st On Thursday evening, March 21 , after talking to Gail and being informed that Jordan Davis

had once again brought his knife to work with him; Pat Haines went to Sunuva Guns and Ammo

where he was a regular customer. Pat owned a 9mm MAC 10 pistol and enjoyed firing his weapon at

the local firing range or in the country from time to time. After chatting with the owner Kim Gerson

for a while, Pat Haines purchased two boxes of ammunition.

nd On Friday afternoon, March 22 , Pat Haines, who had been regularly checking the ground

floor rooms for missing items regularly since Jordan Davis began working there, made a particularly

close inspection of the Civil War era toy soldier collection on display in the living room. The fairly

14 large collection underwent constant changes as Pat borrowed, lent, and traded pieces with other

collectors regularly. At the conclusion of the inspection, Pat Haines concluded that a set of four

soldiers and a cannon were missing from the collection. Assuming that that they had been taken by

Jordan Davis, Pat deducted $100.00 from Jordan’s paycheck.

Meanwhile, after completing the job at Pat Haines home on Friday afternoon, Jordan returned

to the New Start offices with his paycheck in a sealed envelope. Upon opening the envelope and

finding that it was $100.00 less than the agreed upon amount, Jordan Davis called Pat Haines to find

out why. With Lee Chang present, Jordan and Pat argued heatedly over the phone about the missing

soldiers and check. At the conclusion of the phone call, nothing had been resolved and both parties

were very angry.

15 After eating dinner with Jordan Davis, Lee Chang drove him to Pat Haines’ home at 2439

Fowler Avenue. They arrived at approximately 8:10 p.m. Once parked outside the home, Jordan Davis

exited the passenger side of Lee Chang’s car while Lee waited. Jordan, still in clad overalls and work

smock, began to stride up the walk towards the porch lit front door of Pat’s house. Just as Jordan

Davis approached the front porch, Pat Haines opened the front door about halfway and stood there.

Jordan stopped and the two began to converse. Bits of the conversation were heard by both Lee

Chang and Kelly Trumbo, Pat Haines’ friend who was in the home, standing at the living room

window. The conversation was bitter in nature. It was full of hostility and mutual accusations. Pat

shouted at Jordan, who responded forcefully. Jordan’s right arm rose while he quickly turned. A shot

blazed from the doorway, and as Jordan Davis clutched at a hip, a second shot was quickly fired. Lee

16 Chang, watching the incident from the car, was momentarily stunned. Lee started the car, raced to

the nearest phone booth and called the police to report the shooting and Pat Haines’ home.

Officers Corey Delgado and Jackie Lazar were patrolling just two blocks away and

immediately took the call from the dispatcher. They arrived approximately four minutes after the

shots were fired.

As the officers approached Pat Haines’ home, they found the dead body of Jordan Davis lying

face down, on the walkway, approximately twelve feet from the front entrance. They were then

approached by Kelly Trumbo who came out the front door holding a MAC 10 9mm pistol, by the butt,

with two fingers. Kelly told the officers that Pat Haines had shot Jordan Davis and then gave her the

gun. In addition, Kelly Trumbo told the officers that she was in the process of calling 911 when they

17 arrived. When the officers asked Kelley Trumbo if anyone had touched the body, Kelly, who had kept

a constant watch over Jordan’s body, stated that nobody had gone near it and that Jordan had not

moved at all since falling. When asked about the whereabouts of Pat Haines, Kelley Trumbo informed

Officer Delgado that Pat had just taken off towards the back of the house right as the patrol car

arrived.

Officer Lazar took the gun into his possession and remained at the front of the house with

Kelley Trumbo while Officer Delgado ran to the back of the house. Once there, Officer Delgado found

Pat Haines in the middle of the backyard, walking dazedly, and breathing heavily. Upon seeing Officer

Delgado approach, Pat stated, “I had to shoot. There was a knife.” Officer Delgado then escorted Pat

Haines back to the front of the house. Officer Delgado then instructed Officer Lazar to check the body

18 and the area around Jordan Davis to see if he could find a knife. After inspection, Officer Lazar

informed Officer Delgado that there was no knife to found on, or in the immediate vicinity of the

body. The victim was however carrying an empty knife sheath on the left hip.

While Officer Lazar called the homicide unit, Officer Delgado handcuffed and arrested Pat

Haines. Pat Haines was administered his Miranda Right and then asked by Officer Delgado whether

the MAC 10 9mm pistol used in the shooting had been registered and found out that it had not. While

the County Coroner performed an examination of Jordan Davis’ body, Officer Delgado, upon receiving

Pat Haines’ consent, searched the premises. The officer found two 9mm shell casings on the floor of

the home just inside the front door. Outside the discovery of the shell casings, nothing unusual was

found either in the home or the front yard.

19 The County Coroner determined that Jordan Davis had been killed almost instantly by a single

shot which severed his aorta. The bullet entered the right side of Jordan Davis’ body and exited his

left.

The police interviewed both witnesses to the crime, Kelley Trumbo, Pat’s diner guest, and Lee

Chang, who had returned after fleeing to call police. Upon completion of these interviews the

authorities left the scene.

20 EVIDENCE: The Prosecution is responsible for bringing the evidence to Trial

1) Map of the crime scene

2) Coroner’s diagram of body

3) Photo of Gun

STIPULATIONS: Both sides stipulate that:

21 1) The weapon in question is a MAC 10 (a semiautomatic pistol firing a 9mm

round) as specified in the statute.

2) Pat Haines is the owner of the MAC 10 in question and the gun is in fact not

registered as required by the statute.

3) The wounds suffered by the victim were in fact caused by the shots fired by

the defendant as described in the Mock Trial Fact Situation

4) The bullet found in the tree was the bullet that killed Jordan Davis

5) No Miranda problem exists in this case because Pat Haines lawfully waved his

right to counsel.

22 What You Will Be Arguing

23 CHARGES: The Prosecution is charging the Pat Haines with First Degree murder.

(Pennsylvania Penal Code Section 192 (a))

First Degree Murder: An intentional killing by means of poison, or by lying in wait, or

by any other kind of willful, deliberate and premeditated action.

(killing a human being with intent & planning)

24 SELF-DEFENSE: The defendant may invoke the right of self-defense under

Pennsylvania Penal Code Section 197 (2) as a defense to the charge of First Degree

Murder. Self-Defense requires that, at the time of the killing, the defendant had a real

fear of serious bodily injury and that the circumstances must be such as to give

reasonable cause for such belief. In other words, it is not enough that the defendant

25 believe himself or herself to be in peril, but a reasonable person in the same

circumstances would have to have a similar belief.

It is not essential that the victim should have had or attempted to use a weapon

to enable a defendant to claim self-defense. But if the defendant uses more force than

is necessary to meet the perceived danger, or if the defendant resorts to self-defense to

inflict vengeance rather than to repel violence, then the justification for self-defense

will not stand.

Threats alone will not justify the taking of another’s life in self-defense, but

evidence or testimony that the victim made prior threats against the defendant is

26 admissible to support a claim of self-defense if there is evidence tending to show that

the victim had the intent to attack the defendant at the time of the killing. Additionally,

if it is doubtful whether the defendant was justified in believing herself or himself in to

be in imminent danger at the hands of the victim, evidence as to the reputation (good

or bad) of the victim is admissible, as long as it can be shown that the defendant had

knowledge of such reputation.

27 BURDEN OF PROOF: The burden of showing that a killing was justifiable through

self-defense rests on the defense. The defense is not required to prove self-defense by

a preponderance of the evidence, but need simply create a reasonable doubt in the

minds of the jury as to his or her guilt. On the other hand, the prosecution must prove

beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not justified in taking the victim’s

life.

28 29 PROSECUTION ATTORNEYS

______

30 ______

______

Prosecution Witness: Kim Gerson, Co-Owner of Sunuva Guns & Ammo

31 To Be Questioned By: ______

Played By: ______

1 My name is Kim Gerson. I am 31 years old. I am a co-owner of Sunuva Guns

2 & Ammo, which my partners and I opened four years ago. Pat Haines come into

3 my shop to buy ammo fairly regularly throughout the year, and we are friendly

32 4 on this casual basis.

5 I don’t know whether it’s just a result of being in a gun shop or what, but I

6 find that some of my customers seem to adopt a tough, fairly aggressive attitude

7 when they’re in here. They aren’t necessarily rude or aggressive to me

8 personally. It’s just that they seem to swagger and strut a little more as they are

9 browsing or inquiring about some merchandise. A good example is Pat Haines,

10 who was really on a roll on the night of March 21, 20___. I remember Pat’s visit

11 pretty well, because it was a slow night and I found Pat to be particularly

12 entertaining.

33 13 Pat’s main subject that night was “victims.” Pat spoke of having a lot of

14 respect for people who stood up for themselves. Pat boasted that any thugs who

15 sought to take advantage of Pat would surely regret it. Then Pat talked about

16 some young kid who seemed to be looking for trouble at Pat’s house. Pat assured

17 me that the kid might just find more trouble than he had been bargaining for. Pat

18 was really warmed up by then.

19 Next it was Pat’s dad who got a working over. From the way Pat talked

20 about him, the poor man was always letting people slide if they were a little

34 21 short on cash when paying for their meals. Pat talked about how his father was

22 constantly bullied by hustlers and held up by young punks. According to Pat, his

23 father qualified for the “Victims’ Hall of Fame.” Then Pat slammed down

24 slammed down one of the boxes of ammunition I had just gotten off the shelf and

25 proclaimed, “ I loved my father, but I’ll never allow myself to be victimized like

26 that. Anybody who tries to take me for a fool had better watch out because I’ll

27 act first and ask questions later!”

28 I just laughed and called Pat “one tough cookie.” Pat paid for the two boxes

29 of ammunition, grabbed them off the counter, thanked me, and said something

35 30 about how there wasn’t a knife blade in the world that could stand up to a gun in

31 the hands of someone who knew how to use it. I didn’t have a clue what Pat was

32 talking about, but I had enjoyed our little chat so I just agreed wholeheartedly

33 and thanked Pat for coming in. Pat wished me a good night and left.

______

36 ______

______

37 ______

______

38 ______

______

39 ______

______

40 ______

______

Prosecution Witness: Lee Chang, Manager/Contact Person for New Start Job Skills Ctr.

To Be Questioned By: ______

41 Played By: ______

1 My name is Lee Chang. I am 27 years old. I have worked at the New Start

2 Job Skills Center for almost three years. Before that, I worked at Crisis Hotline

3 after graduating from college. Jordan Davis was a good kid, but the product of a

4 fractured family and one of the countless casualties of as overburdened public

5 school system. When two of the kids in the tough crowd Jordan hung out with

6 started working for New Start a couple of years ago, they were scorned by

42 7 almost everybody in the group. Jordan, however, stayed in touch with both of

8 them. Soon after, Jordan decided to begin training at New Start himself. Jordan’s

9 love for construction, and specifically woodworking, were evident almost

10 immediately. In that specific area, Jordan Davis quickly became one of our best

11 workers.

12 Pat Haines seemed intimidated by Jordan right from the start. Jordan had

13 the kind of physical appearance that might make some people uncomfortable

14 and was quiet by nature.

43 15 When Pat Haines and I spoke for the first time after Pat met Jordan, I tried

16 to advise Pat not to overreact. I advised Pat Haines to judge Jordan Davis only by

17 the quality of his work, but obviously Pat wasn’t listening. Looking back now, I

18 realize it was foolish of me not to see that someone like Pat, who would

19 immediately jump to the conclusion that all our employees were “juvenile

20 delinquents,” would hardly be able to treat Jordan fairly. And Jordan Davis

21 wasn’t treated fairly. Jordan informed me of several examples of Pat’s profound

22 distrust and disrespect for him. Pat wouldn’t provide Jordan with a key in case

23 Jordan got locked out, and Pat expected him to stay in the basement the whole

44 24 time he worked on Pat’s house. Pat made Jordan feel like such an intruder that

25 one afternoon when Pat wasn’t there, Jordan really had to use the bathroom, but

26 couldn’t use the one in the basement because it was filled with lumber. Jordan

27 told me he waited until the last possible minute and sprinted upstairs into the

28 bathroom, used it, and sprinted back downstairs, afraid that Pat would come

29 home and make an issue of it. Jordan even became convinced that the next-door

30 neighbor might be spying on him because the neighbor spent so much time in

31 the shrubbery outside the den window.

45 32 Jordan returned to the office about 5:25on Friday, March 22. After opening

33 the envelope Pat had given him for completion of the job, Jordan noticed Pat’s

34 check was $100.00 short of what they had agreed to. Jordan phoned Pat and

35 explained that there must have been a mistake. Pat exploded. I could hear Pat’s

36 voice through the receiver from two desks away. It seemed Pat was accusing

37 Jordan of having stolen some pieces from a precious collection of Pat’s. At first,

38 Jordan seemed bewildered, then grew very angry as Pat refused to listen to

39 Jordan’s assurance of having done no such thing. Jordan wanted to go over to

40 Pat’s house to work things out, but Pat just screamed at Jordan not to come

46 41 without the missing pieces and hung up.

42 I insisted to Jordan that we go eat some dinner first, and I listened as he let

43 off some steam. Jordan was still determined to go to Pat’s house, but promised

44 he would try to be as cool and professional as possible. I realized Jordan was

45 going to go to Pat’s house with me or without me, and while I would not

46 normally go to a customer’s house like that on a Friday evening, I felt that it

47 would be better for everyone if I was there. Jordan carried a knife sometimes to

48 practicing carving, and to be on the safe side I asked if Jordan had it now. Jordan

49 told me that he did, so I asked him to leave it at the office. Jordan said, “Sure, I

47 50 don’t want any trouble.” and immediately took the knife out and put it on my

51 desk. I placed it in a drawer and we left.

52 As we turned down Pat’s street, Jordan mentioned wanting to deal with

53 Pat alone to work things out. I thought that showed a lot of maturity on Jordan’s

54 part, so I agreed, but I told him if that didn’t work out to come back to the car

55 and get me and that I would try. Jordan agreed and climbed out of the car.

56 When I saw the door open only halfway as Jordan was going up the walk, I

57 got an uneasy feeling. I could only hear snippets of the conversation, but enough

58 to tell it wasn’t going well. I heard Pat call Jordan a thief and a liar and say

48 59 something about not being afraid of Jordan. Then Jordan shouted something

60 final at Pat and started to turn to come back to the car to get me, I assumed. All

of 61 a sudden, I saw and heard two blasts from the doorway and I saw Jordan jerk

62 and then fall like a rock. I realized that Pat Haines had just shot my friend and

63 from the way Jordan fell, it looked like Jordan was dead. I raced the car to the

64 phone booth a block and a half away and called the police, telling them that Pat

65 had just killed Jordan and where. I didn’t know how dangerous Pat was, so I

49 66 waited until I heard the police sirens and saw the car pull up before I went back.

67 When I got back to the house, I saw that Jordan was in fact dead. I waited while

68 the police arrested and took Pat away. Then the coroner came and examined

69 Jordan’s body, and the police talked to somebody who had been in the house and

70 to me. After that I went home nearly in shook.

______

50 ______

______

51 ______

______

52 ______

______

53 ______

______

54 ______

______

55 ______

______

Prosecution Witness: Corey Delgado, West Mifflin Police Officer

To Be Questioned By: ______

56 Played By: ______

EXPERT WITNESS

1 My name is Corey Delgado. I am 28 years old. I have been a patrolman for

2 the West Mifflin Police Department for five years. I have been teamed with my

3 partner, Jackie Lazar, for the past three years.

4 On Friday, March 22, 20_____, at 8:10 p.m., my partner and I took a call

57 5 from the dispatcher about a shooting at 2439 Fowler Avenue. We were cruising

6 two blocks away at the time, and arrived at the scene about one minute after

7 taking the call. As we arrived, we observed a body, subsequently identified as

8 that of Jordan Davis, lying face down on the walkway leading to the front door,

9 approximately 12 feet from the entrance. I bent over the body to check for any

10 sign of life. There was none. Kelly Trumbo came through the open front door,

11 holding a pistol out by the barrel with two fingers. Officer Lazar took the gun

12 from Kelly Trumbo as I verified that Jordan Davis was in fact dead. Kelly Trumbo

13 informed us that Pat Haines, the owner of the home, had shot Jordan Davis.

58 14 Trumbo had gotten the gun from Pat and checked on Jordan to try and help.

15 Trumbo had not been able to do anything for the deceased, but had kept an eye

16 on the body the whole time. Kelly Trumbo had been calling the police when we

17 arrived.

18 Kelly informed us that Pat Haines had taken off toward the back of the

19 house just prior to our arrival. I left Officer Lazar with Kelly Trumbo and went

20 around the side of the house towards the back yard. I found the Pat Haines in the

21 middle of the backyard, in what appeared to be a confused state. Pat Haines’ first

22 words to me as I approached were “I had to shoot. There was a knife.” Pat

59 23 appeared to be a little dazed, but was well aware of what had happened. I

24 checked to make sure that Pat Haines was unarmed and then we headed back to

25 the front of the house. As we walked, Pat Haines told me that the two of them

26 had an argument over something allegedly stolen from the home of Pat Haines

27 by Jordan Davis. Pat then told me that Mr. Davis reached for a large knife to

28 attack Pat with and that’s when Pat Haines had to shoot. Pat told me that I could

29 find the knife in a sheath on Mr. Davis’ left hip.

60 30 When we got back to the body lying in front of the house, I asked Officer

31 Lazar to examine the body of the deceased and the surrounding area for a knife,

32 but all he found was an empty sheath attached to Jordan Davis’ left hip. There

33 was no evidence of a knife to be found. Upon hearing the news that no knife was

34 found on Jordan Davis, Pat Haines protested that there must be a knife.

35 After verifying with Kelly Trumbo that no one else besides her had been

36 near the body, I arrested and administered the Miranda warning to Pat Haines. I

37 asked Pat if the MAC 10 9mm pistol had been registered in accordance with

38 Pennsylvania law and Pat Haines replied that it hadn’t. Pat made no further

61 39 statements.

40 After placing Pat Haines in the back seat of my cruiser, I investigated the

41 premises. I found two shell casings lying on the floor just inside the front door,

42 and the phone off the hook, but nothing else. Upon the subsequent search of the

43 second floor, I found one full box and one partially full box of bullets on a shelf in

44 the study. Further investigations disclosed a bullet lodged in the trunk of a tree

45 at the end of the front walk. The bullet was removed and held for testing.

62 ______

______

63 ______

______

64 ______

______

65 ______

______

66 ______

______

67 ______

______

68 ______

______

69 ______

______

70 ______

______

Prosecution Witness: Lyn Kowalski, Medical Examiner, Allegheny County Coroner’s

Office

To Be Questioned By: ______

Played By: ______

71 EXPERT WITNESS

1 My name is Lyn Kowalski. I am 35 years old. I work as a Medical Examiner

2 for the Allegheny County Coroner’s Office. I have worked there for five years. I

3 began working as soon as I finished my residency and passed the boards. For

4 many aspiring doctors, this may seem like one of the least attractive career

5 options, but I have found the work in the Coroner’s Office to be interesting and

6 rewarding.

72 7 My job is to determine the manner, cause, and circumstance of death for

8 each body I examine. My examination of the deceased, identified as Jordan Davis

9 by his next of kin, performed on the night of March 22, 20____ revealed that the

10 deceased died from massive loss of blood resulting from the passage of a 9mm

11 bullet which passed through the ribcage. The bullet entered the body on the

12 right side and exited the body on the left side. The bullet punctured the

13 deceased’s aorta during its passage through the body. This bullet wound led

14 directly to the massive hemorrhaging from which Jordan Davis died. Death

73 15 would have resulted from within minutes of the shooting. There were no other

16 wounds, bruises, or abrasions found on the body during my examination. The

17 angle and nature of the entrance and exit wounds indicate that the bullet was

18 fired from approximately 3.5 feet above the ground and from a distance of

19 between eight and twelve feet. There is no evidence of a second bullet entering

20 the body of the deceased at any point, and only one bullet was recovered from

21 the surrounding area. A 9mm bullet matching the weapon taken from the scene

22 was found lodged in a tree in the front yard.

74 ______

______

75 ______

______

76 ______

______

77 ______

______

78 ______

______

79 ______

______

80 DEFENSE ATTORNEYS

______

81 Defense Witness: Gail Perez, Defendant’s Neighbor

To Be Questioned By: ______

Played By: ______

82 1 My name is Gail Perez. I am 38 years old. I am a free-lance writer and work

2 at home. I write mostly about computer software. I had just hit a relatively slow

3 period in my work when Pat Haines asked me whether I might just be able to

4 keep an eye on the kid who was doing some carpentry work in Pat’s basement. I

5 agreed to Pat’s request because I wasn’t very busy.

6 By opening the window above the desk in my study I can see over the

7 hedge and through Pat’s basement windows. I can’t see that much of the den,

83 8 which takes up most of the basement floor, but I have a good view of the bottom

9 of the stairs. I can take in much more of the den by setting myself up at any of the

10 several different spots along the hedge between our houses. Using all these

11 vantage points, I would check out what was happening pretty constantly,

12 although I certainly didn’t spend each minute that Pat was gone monitoring

13 every movement in the house.

14 The one thing I noticed more than anything else while watching Jordan

15 Davis was the knife. I couldn’t usually see it because Jordan’s work smock came

16 down over it, but Jordan would take the jacket off during lunch breaks. That’s

84 17 when it was most noticeable in the fancy sheath he wore on his left hip. For

18 three days in a row I watched Jordan fool with that knife all the way through his

19 lunch break. Jordan would sharpen it, rub it with an oiled cloth, sharpen it some

20 more and then use it on whatever was lying around. He would do things like

21 slice paper into tiny strips, carve designs into little pieces of scrap wood, dice a

22 sandwich into two dozen little pieces, and things like that. In addition Jordan

23 was always playing with it, twirling it between fingers or tossing it quickly back

24 and forth from one hand to the other. I would get mesmerized just observing

85 25 this, and then I would remember that this was a knife he was playing with, and I

26 would get upset. It just seemed so dangerous.

27 Sometimes Jordan would take a little break from working and do the knife

28 business again. It seemed that if Jordan just lifted up the bottom left end of the

29 smock, he could easily just dip a hand into the hip area and when it came back

30 out, there was the knife. I informed Pat about the knife and what I had seen

31 Jordan doing with it. I made sure Pat realized that this wasn’t just some kid

32 carrying a Swiss Army Knife around, but, at the same time, I hadn’t seen Jordan

33 Davis doing anything wrong and I didn’t want to create a false alarm. As I was

86 34 talking, Pat’s eyes widened, but when I finished Pat took a couple of deep

35 breaths and then assured me that it was much better to know about this and

36 thanked me for the information. I felt bad about having caused my neighbor to

37 worry, so when Pat asked that I keep an even closer eye on Jordan from then on,

38 I said sure. I think I ended up being too obvious, though, because on Friday

39 afternoon I was out at the hedge and Jordan just stood in the middle of the den,

40 hands on hips, and stared daggers out the window for almost a full minute.

41 Because of the light on the glass of the window, I couldn’t be completely sure

87 42 that Jordan knew I was there and was staring at me, but I went back to the house

43 and stayed there the rest of the day.

______

88 ______

______

89 ______

______

90 ______

______

91 ______

______

92 ______

______

93 ______

______

94 ______

______

95 ______

______

Defense Witness: Jackie Thomas, Friend of the Defendant/New Start Job Ctr. Customer

96 To Be Questioned By: ______

Played By: ______

1 My name is Jackie Thomas. I am 26 years old. I work as an assistant

2 manager and shuttle driver at a local hotel. I have been friends with Pat Haines

3 since I first moved here at the age of seventeen. I wish I had never opened my

97 4 mouth to Pat about the New Start Job Center. Then none of this would have

5 happened.

6 I had some carpentry work done by two New Start employees on my own

7 home last year, one of whom was Jordan Davis. I had no problems with the job

8 at all. The kids were pretty young, but they knew what they were doing and they

9 worked hard. I got along with them really well, too. That s why when Pat

10 mentioned wanting to get a good deal on a cabinetmaking job, I immediately

11 thought of New Start. Pat was very enthusiastic about getting the job started

12 right away, but had reservations about New Start’s employees from the

98 13 beginning. Pat has always been much more suspicious than I am of anyone who

14 comes form outside the mainstream. In the end though, Pat just couldn’t resist

15 the idea of having all the work in his home done within a week, and decided to

16 try and forget any misgivings about New Starts employees.

17 I was at Pat’s house on Monday when Jordan got there, and right away it

18 was pretty clear that these two were not exactly going to be buddies. First of all,

19 Jordan had a scruffy appearance, which I could tell made Pat tense. Secondly,

20 although I already knew that Jordan was by nature a quite person, when dealing

21 with Pat that morning Jordan seemed almost sullen, and Jordan should probably

99 22 have known better than to ask Pat for a key to the house before Pat even had a

23 chance to see that Jordan could be trusted. I went home that day just hoping that

24 things would get better between them.

25 It was pretty evident that things certainly had not gotten better when

26 called me on Wednesday night. Pat sounding both angry and anxious. Pat said

27 that not only had Jordan been caught in parts of the house which were off limits,

28 but Pat’s next-door neighbor had seen Jordan carrying a big hunting knife

100 29 around and doing things which certainly showed that Jordan knew how to use it.

30 I laughed and said that, indeed, Jordan certainly did know how to use his knife. I

31 told Pat that once during a break in the work at my house, Jordan had showed

32 me a number of knife tricks. I told Pat how Jordan had twirled the knife on the

33 edge of his finger, and showed me this hot-dog move where, with his back facing

34 a tree, Jordan turned, whipped the knife from its sheath like a six-gun, and

35 flung it into a tree, hitting the tree dead center. I told Pat not to worry though,

36 because although Jordan should probably be in the circus, I didn’t think that he

37 would ever draw his knife on another human being. Also, Jordan only had the

101 38 knife at my house a couple of the days they worked, not all the time. Pat didn’t

39 really seem convinced, but I just figured it would all blow over. What a mistake.

______

102 ______

______

103 ______

______

104 ______

______

105 ______

______

106 ______

______

107 ______

______

108 ______

______

109 ______

______

110 ______

______

Defense Witness: Kelly Trumbo, Friend of Defendant/ Crime Scene Witness

To Be Questioned By: ______

Played By: ______

111 1 My name is Kelly Trumbo. I am 23 years old. I work at a record store

2 which my family started 27 years ago. I’ve known Pat Haines for a long time

3 because my family’s record store is right next to what used to be Pat’s dad’s

4 coffee shop.

5 As soon as I arrived at Pat’s house for dinner on Friday, March 22, 20_____,

6 I could tell that there was something seriously wrong. For one thing, Pat was

7 completely unprepared for my visit, which was extremely unusual, since Pat is a

8 very punctual and meticulous person. I also couldn’t help but noticing how

112 9 distracted and agitated Pat was that night. As we were making dinner, Pat told

10 me what was going on. Pat had reluctantly agreed to let some scruffy young kid

11 do some carpentry work in the basement. Pat didn’t trust this rude kid, Jordan

12 Davis, for a second. Pat had also found out that this Jordan kid was handy with a

13 knife, and had gotten more and more concerned.

14 Just that afternoon, Pat had discovered some pieces of the toy soldier

15 collection missing. That must have driven Pat crazy, because that collection was

16 Pat’s favorite thing in the whole world. Every time Pat borrowed, bought, or

113 17 traded for a new piece or set, we all ad to hear about it constantly. Sometimes it

18 seemed that Pat acquired or gave up a new piece practically every day. I

19 mentioned the possibility that someone else might have the missing pieces, but

20 Pat would have none of it.

21 We were drinking coffee after dinner when a car pulled up and someone

22 got out. Pat jumped up, looked out the window and said, “That’s Jordan. Stay

23 right here.” As Pat ran to the front door, I watched Jordan, who did look pretty

24 determined, striding up the front sidewalk. I then heard the front door open and

25 Pat said something. Jordan stopped a couple of yards or so from the front door. I

114 26 couldn’t see Pat from where I was, but I could see Jordan clearly. The window I

27 was standing next to was open just enough so that I could hear most of what

28 Jordan was saying, although what Pat said was not as clear because there was a

29 wall between us. It was pretty clear they were arguing about the soldiers and the

30 money. Then, Pat said something to Jordan Davis about the knife, and Jordan

31 smiled in a creepy way and replied, “You’re scared, aren’t you.” to Pat. That

32 exchange was followed by Jordan muttering something else and Pat shouting

33 that Jordan was a thief and a liar. They were both really steaming. Then Jordan

34 yelled something like, “I’ve had it” or “I’ve had enough” and began to turn to his

115 35 left. That’s when I heard a shot and saw Jordan jerk and then heard another shot

36 real fast. I yelled “Pat!” and went running to the front door. Pat stood there

37 holding the pistol in his right hand. Pat looked kind of dazed and said something

38 about a knife. I looked out the door and Jordan was lying motionless on the front

39 walkway. I immediately asked Pat for the gun and got no response. I then asked

40 Pat a second time, louder, and Pat handed it to me without saying anything.

41 Once I had the gun, I told Pat, “We’ve got to call the Police. Sit down and try

42 to collect yourself.” I walked out to where Jordan Davis had fallen to see if I could

116 43 do anything to help. He made no movements and no sounds. I felt to see if Jordan

44 had a pulse but didn’t find one. I immediately got up, walked back to the front

45 door and grabbed the phone from the desk inside the door. I kept watching

46 Jordan’s body the whole time.

47 As I was about to dial 911, Pat, who had been sitting quietly on the floor

48 next to the front door, all of a sudden swept past me towards the back of the

49 house. As I watched Pat walk, I heard the sirens screaming and a car screech to

50 halt in front of the house. When the Officers approached, I took the gun from the

51 desk where I had put it and I walked outside to give it to them. Once they took

117 52 the gun from me, I proceeded to tell them what happened.

53 I told the first officer that Pat had just gone to the back of the house, and

54 that Pat had shot Jordan. I then proceeded to tell them that Pat thought Jordan

55 had a knife, but when they searched Jordan’s body, they only found the empty

56 sheath. There was no knife. After the police had arrested Pat and questioned me,

57 they let me go home.

118 ______

______

119 ______

______

120 ______

______

121 ______

______

122 ______

______

123 ______

______

124 ______

______

125 ______

______

Defense Witness: Pat Haines, Defendant, Charged with First Degree Murder

To Be Questioned By: ______

Played By: ______

126 1 My name is Pat Haines. I am 28 years old. I work as a residual real estate

2 broker. I have lived by myself in my house since my father died a year and a half

3 ago. My dad owned a coffee shop in town for 35 years and held onto it even

4 when the neighborhood deteriorated all around him. He was too nice for his own

5 good. People were always bilking him or robbing him, and he just took it without

6 ever fighting back. I always vowed to never allow myself to be treated that way.

7 In March 20____, I decided that I’d redo the basement of my house and I

8 that I needed some carpentry work done. From my first meeting with Jordan

127 9 Davis, I wasn’t comfortable about hiring him. As soon as I had heard about the

10 type of young, tough people they were training at New Start Job Skills Center, I

11 was very uneasy about letting one of these kids into my house, but my friend

12 Jackie Thomas said that Jordan was a good carpenter and had presented no

13 problems while working at Jackie’s house. Besides that, I was pressed for time

14 and knew I could get the job started and finished much faster with New Start. So,

15 unfortunately, I agreed to hire Jordan Davis.

th 16 When Jordan Davis arrived at my home on the morning of March 18 , I

17 could tell almost immediately that this kid was walking around with a major

128 18 league grudge against the world. Jordan was scruffy and would grunt out one-

19 word answers whenever I asked him a direct question. My friend Jackie Thomas,

20 who was at my home that morning, tried to reassure me by saying that Jordan

21 was just quiet by nature, but this behavior was more than that. Even Jackie was

22 taken back by the sheer nerve of Jordan to ask me for an extra key to my house,

23 just because I was going to be away at work during the day. Since I hardly knew

24 this kid, I of course said no and told Jordan to use my next-door neighbor Gail

25 Perez’s spare key if he needed one. Upon hearing that, Jordan gave me a stare

26 that was just plain scary. It was as though little switchblades were coming

129 27 straight out of Jordan’s eyes. For the rest of the day, I couldn’t help thinking

28 about that look.

29 On Tuesday afternoon, I came home to grab some lunch and caught Jordan

30 coming out of my kitchen with a glass of ice water. I thought I had made it clear

31 to Jordan that he was to remain downstairs in the basement at all times. I was

32 really anger. Although the only response I got from Jordan was a dirty look, I

33 made sure the message for him to stay downstairs got through loud and clear

34 this time.

130 35 On Wednesday morning, I could hardly concentrate on what I was doing at

36 work because I was so worried about leaving Jordan alone in my house. I

37 couldn’t trust Jordan to stay in the basement as I had instructed. I have a lot of

38 valuable possessions upstairs, including a unique collection of Civil War era,

39 hand-crafted toy soldiers on display in my living room. Because I was so

40 worried, I asked my neighbor Gail Perez to keep an eye on the house throughout

41 the day. Our houses are situated in a way so that Gail has a pretty good view

42 through my downstairs window and into the den where most of the work was

43 being done.

131 44 That night when I got home, Gail told me that Jordan Davis carried a knife.

45 I told Gail that I hadn’t noticed it, and Gail told me that’s because Jordan kept it

46 hidden under his work clothes. Gail proceeded to inform me that Jordan would

47 spend up to half an hour on his lunch break just fooling around with his knife.

48 Gail said Jordan would sharpen it and then slice and dice sandwiches and pieces

49 of paper. Knowledge of the knife Jordan was carrying really bothered me.

50 Concerned, I called to ask if Jackie Thomas knew anything about this knife

51 stuff, and by the time our conversation was over, I felt even worse. Apparently,

132 52 Jordan had given Jackie a demonstration of the kinds of things Jordan could do

53 with his knife. Jackie seemed to think that this was no big deal. When I heard

54 that Jordan could not only handle the knife with deadly expertise, but could face

55 the other way and turn and throw the knife with total accuracy, I got really

56 worried.

57 Thursday night after work, I went over to Sunuva Guns & Ammo to get

58 ammunition for my MAC 10 9mm pistol. I bought it a couple of years ago. I use it

59 to shoot at the shooting range or in the country a few times a year. I was out of

60 bullets and was planning to take up target shooting again. I had a nice

133 61 conversation with Kim Gerson while I was there and felt a lot better by the time I

62 left the shop.

63 On Friday afternoon, my suspicions about Jordan Davis were confirmed. I

64 regularly checked the upstairs of my home when I returned after being out, and

65 that day I made an especially thorough inspection of my Civil War toy collection.

66 I noticed that a set of four soldiers and a cannon were missing. I was enraged

67 and ripped up the check I was going to give Jordan. I wrote another one, but this

68 time I wrote it for $100 dollars less. The set was worth at least that much to me,

69 and I wanted to make it clear that I knew what Jordan had done.

134 70 About ah hour after Jordan Davis left my home that day, he called

71 pretending not to know what had happened and saying that there was a

72 “mistake” with the check. I replied that Jordan knew there was no mistake. I told

73 him that it was disgusting to come into my house to work, steal from my

74 collection, and still ask for the rest of the money. Of course Jordan denied

75 stealing anything and then spoke of coming to my house to straighten everything

76 out. I warned him not to come over without the pieces of my collection that he

77 had stolen and an apology. Before hanging up, Jordan made a comment that

135 78 really bothered me. He told me that, “I was going to pay one way or the other.” I

79 immediately went and put my gun into a drawer in a table next to front door,

80 just in case Jordan did show up looking for trouble.

81 My friend Kelly Trumbo came for dinner on Friday night. We were sitting

82 in the living room having coffee a little past 8 p.m. when a car pulled up in front

83 of the house. When Jordan Davis jumped out of the passenger side door, I

84 assumed that the driver was one of his cronies. I told Kelly to stay put. I ran to

85 the front door, grabbing my gun on the way. I opened the door about halfway

136 86 just as Jordan was getting to the porch. I told Jordan to stop right there. He was

87 wearing the same work smock as always, and I could see the telltale bulge on

88 Jordan’s left hip. I didn’t think there was any other reason for Jordan to still have

89 the smock on if not to hide the knife.

90 I asked Jordan for the Civil War pieces of my collection back, but Jordan

91 ignored me and demanded the money. I told him there would be no money until

92 he acknowledged the theft and returned the pieces. Jordan called me a liar and

93 started to step forward. I warned him to stay right there, told him that I knew

94 about, and that I was ready to protect myself. Jordan responded by telling me

137 95 that I was scared and that I should be. I called Jordan a thief and a liar and told

96 him to get away from my house. Jordan’s responded, “You’re the lying thief.

97 That’s it. I’ve had enough!” While saying this, Jordan turned away and I

98 remembered what Jackie Thomas had said about Jordan throwing his knife and I

99 fired. Jordan jerked and I thought it was to let the knife fly, so I fired again

100 quickly. I’m not that clear on what happened after that. I remember Jordan

101 staggering away and then falling, Kelly yelling, and the car screeching away. I

102 wanted to go get the knife, but I wasn’t sure that Jordan wasn’t still alive. I

138 103 thought he might be faking being dead by lying still. I remember Kelly coming

104 and taking the gun and telling me to sit down. Then, all of a sudden, I felt like I

105 couldn’t breathe and had to get some fresh air. I couldn’t go out the front, so I

106 ran to the backyard. The police showed up and arrested me. They searched the

107 body and surrounding area for the knife. They told me they couldn’t find it, but I

108 could swear it was there.

139 ______

______

140 ______

______

141 ______

______

142 ______

______

143 ______

______

144 ______

______

145 ______

______

146 ______

______

147 ______

______

148 ______

______

149 ______

______

150 151 Diagram #2: Coroner’s Report

Path of the 9mm. Round

152 153 Murder Weapon

MAC 10 / 9mm.

154 155 The Form and Substance of a Trial

I. The Elements of a Criminal Offense

The penal (or “criminal”) code generally defines two aspects of every crime.

These are the physical part and the mental part. Most crimes specify some physical act,

such as firing a gun in a crowded room, and a guilty, or culpable, mental state. The

intent to commit a crime and a reckless disregard for the consequences of one’s

156 actions are culpable mental states. Bad thoughts alone though, are not enough. A crime

requires the union thought and action.

The mental state requirements prevent the conviction of an insane person. Such

a person cannot form criminal intent and should receive psychological treatment

rather than punishment. Also a defendant may justify his/her actions by showing a

lack of criminal motivation. For instance, the crime of burglary has two elements: (1)

breaking and entering (2) with the intent to steal. A person breaking into a burning

house to rescue a baby has not committed burglary.

157 The Presumption of Innocence

Our criminal justice systems in based on the premise that allowing a guilty

person to go free is better than putting an innocent person behind bars. For this

person, the prosecution bears a heavy burden of proof. Defendants are presumed

innocent. The prosecution must convince the judge or jury of guilty beyond reasonable

doubt.

The Concept of Reasonable Doubt

Despite its use in every criminal trial, the term “reasonable doubt” is very hard

158 to define. The concept of reasonable doubt lies somewhere between probability or

guilt and lingering possible doubt of guilt. Reasonable doubt exists unless the trier of

fact can say that he or she has an abiding conviction, to a moral certainty, of the truth

of the charge.

A defendant may be found guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt” even though a possible

doubt remains in the mind of the judge or junior. Conversely, triers of fact might

return a verdict of not guilty while still believing that the defendant probably

committed the crime.

159 Jurors must often reach verdicts despite contradictory evidence. Two witnesses

might give different accounts of the same event. Sometimes a single witness will give a

different account of the same event at different times. Such inconsistencies often result

from human fallibility rather than intentional lying. The trier of fact (in the Mock Trial

Competition, the judge) applies his/her own best judgment in evaluating inconsistent

testimony.

160 Role Description

Attorneys

Trial attorneys control the presentation of evidence at trial and argue the merits

of their side of the case. They do not themselves supply information about the alleged

criminal activity. Instead, they introduce evidence and question witnesses to bring out

the full story.

The Prosecutor Attorney presents the case for the state against the defendant(s).

By questioning witnesses, you will try to convince the judge or jury that the

161 defendant(s) are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. You will want to suggest a motive

for the crime and will try to refute any defense alibis.

The Defense Attorney presents the case for the defendant(s). You will offer your

own witnesses to present your client’s version of the facts. You may undermine the

prosecution’s case by showing that the prosecution witnesses cannot be depended

upon or that their testimony makes no sense or is seriously inconsistent.

Trial attorneys will:

 Conduct direct examination

162  Conduct cross-examination

 Conduct re-direct examination, if necessary

 Make appropriate objections. Please note rule #13, appearing on page iv: “Only

the direct and cross-examination attorneys for a particular witness may make

objections during that testimony.

 Do the necessary research and be prepared to act as a substitute for any other

attorneys.

 Make opening statements and closing arguments.

163 Each student attorney should take an active role in some part of the trial.

Witnesses

You will supply the facts in the case. Witnesses may testify only to facts stated in or

reasonably implied from the Signed Witness Statements or Fact Situation. Suppose

that your witness sheet states that you left Ajax Store and walked to your car. On cross

examination, you are asked whether you left the store through the Washington or

California Avenue exit. Without any additional facts upon which to base your answer,

164 you could reasonably name either exit in your reply—probably the one closer to your

car. Practicing your testimony with your team’s attorney coach and your team

attorneys will help you to fill in any gaps in the official materials. Imagine, on the other

hand, that your witness sheet included the statement that someone fired a shot

through your closed curtains into your living room. If asked whether you saw who

shot the gun, you would have to answer, “No”. You could not reasonably claim to have

a periscope on the roof or have glimpsed the person through a tear in the curtains.

Neither fact could be found in or reasonably implied from the case materials.

165 The fact situation is a set of indisputable facts from which witnesses and

attorneys may draw reasonable inferences. The witness statements contained in the

packet should be viewed as signed statements made to the police by the witnesses as

identified. If you are asked a question calling for an answer which cannot reasonably

be inferred from the materials provided, you must reply, “I don’t know” or “I can’t

remember.” It is up to the attorney to make the appropriate objections when witnesses

are asked to testify about something which is not generally known or cannot be

reasonably inferred from the fact situation of a signed witness statement.

166 Witnesses can be impeached if they contradict the material contained in their

witness statements using the procedures as outlined on page 43.

Bailiff

When the judge has announced that the trial shall begin, say:

“All rise, the Superior Court of the State of Pennsylvania, County of ______, is now

in session. The Honorable Judge ______presiding. Please be seated and come to

order.”

167 When you have brought a witness to testify, you must swear in the witness as

follows:

“You do solemnly affirm that the testimony you may give in the cause now pending

before this court shall be the truth, and nothing but the truth.”

168 169 PROCEDURES FOR PRESENTING A MOCK TRIAL CASE

Introduction of Physical Evidence

170 Attorneys may introduce physical exhibits, if any, provided that the objects correspond

to the description given in the case materials. Below are the steps to follow when

introducing physical evidence (clothing, maps, diagrams, etc…). All items are

presented prior to trial.

1. Present the item to an attorney for the opposing side prior to trial. If that

attorney objects to use of the item, the judge will rule whether it fits the official

description.

171 2. When you first wish to introduce the item during trial, request permission from

the judge, “Your Honor, I ask that this item be marked for identification as

Exhibit #______.”

3. Show item to the witness on the stand. Ask the witness if she/he recognizes the

item. If the witness does, ask him/her to explain it or answer questions about it.

(Make sure that you show the item to the witness, don’t just point!)

172 4. When finished using the item, give it to the judge to examine and hold until

needed again by you or another attorney.

Moving the Item into Evidence

Exhibits must be introduced into evidence if attorneys wish the court to consider the

items themselves as evidence, not just the testimony about the exhibits. Attorneys

must ask to move the item into evidence at the end of the witness examination.

173 1. “Your Honor, I ask that this item (describe) be moved into evidence as People’s

(or Defendant’s) Exhibit #______. And request that the Court so admit it.”

2. At this point opposing counsel may make any proper objections they may have.

3. The judge will then rule on whether the item may be admitted into evidence.

The Opening Statement

The opening statement outlines the case as you intend to present it. The prosecution

delivers the first opening statement. A defense attorney may follow immediately or

174 delay the opening statement until the prosecution has finished presenting the

witnesses. A good opening statement should:

 Explain what you plan to prove and how you will do it

 Present the events of the case in an orderly sequence that is easy to understand.

 Suggest a motive or emphasize a lack of motive for the crime.

Begin your statement with a formal address to the judge:

175 “Your Honor, my name is ______(Full Name), the prosecutor

representing the People of the State of Pennsylvania in this action.”

“Your Honor, my name is ______(Full Name), counsel for

______(defendant) in this action.”

176 Proper phrasing includes:

“The evidence will indicate that ……..”

“The facts will show……..”

“Witness ______(name) will be called to tell……..”

“The defendant will testify that ……….”

Direct Examination

177 Attorneys conduct direct examinations of their own witnesses to bring out the facts of

a case. Direct examination should:

 Call for answers based on information provided in the case material

 Reveal all the facts favorable to your position

 Ask the witness to tell the story rather than using leading questions which

call for “yes” or “no” answers. (an opposing attorney may object to the use

of leading questions on direct examination)

178  Make the witness seem believable

 Keep the witness from rambling about unimportant matters.

Call for witnesses with a formal request:

“Your Honor, I would like to call ______to the stand.”

The witnesses will then be sworn in before testifying.

179 After the witness swears to tell the truth, you may wish to ask some introductory

questions to make the witness feel comfortable. Appropriate inquires include:

 The witness’ name.

 Length of residence or present employment, if this information helps to

establish the witness’ credibility.

 Further questions about professional qualifications are necessary if you wish to

qualify the witness as an expert.

180 Examples of proper questions on direct examination:

 “Could you please tell the court what occurred on ______(date)?”

 “What happened after the defendant slapped you?”

 “How long did you see………?”

 “Did anyone do anything while you waited?”

 “How long did you remain in that spot?”

181 Conclude your direct examination with:

“Thank you, Mr./Mrs./Ms. ______. That will be all Your Honor.”

Cross-Examination

Cross-Examination follows the opposing attorney’s direct examination of hi/her

witness. Attorneys conduct cross-examinations to explore weaknesses in the

182 opponent’s case, test the witness’ credibility, and establish some of the facts of the

cross-examiner’s case whenever possible. Cross-examination should:

 Call for answers based on information given in Witness Sheets or Fact

Situation.

 Use leading questions which are designed to get “yes” or “no” answers.

 Never give the witness a chance to unpleasantly surprise the attorney.

183 In an actual trial, cross-examination is restricted to the scope of issues raised on

direct examination. Because Mock Trial attorneys are not permitted to call opposing

witnesses on their own, the scope of cross-examination in a Mock Trial is not limited.

Examples of proper questions on cross-examination:

 “Isn’t a fact that…….?”

 “Wouldn’t you agree that…….?”

 “Don’t you think that ………?”

184  When you spoke with your neighbor on the night of the murder, weren’t

you wearing a red shirt?”

Cross-examination should conclude with:

“Thank you, Mr./Ms./Mrs. ______. That will be all Your Honor.”

Re-Direct Examination

185 Following cross-examination, the counsel who called the witness may conduct

re-direct examination. Attorneys re-direct examination to clarify new (unexpected)

issues or facts brought out in the immediately preceding cross-examination only. They

may not bring up any issue brought out during direct examination. Attorneys may or

may not want to conduct re-direct examination. If an attorney asks questions beyond

the issue raised on cross-examination, they objected to as “outside the scope of cross-

examination.” It is sometimes more beneficial not to conduct it for a particular witness.

The attorneys will have to pay close attention to what is said during the cross-

186 examination of their witness, so that they may decide whether it is necessary to

conduct re-direct examination.

If the credibility or reputation for truthfulness of the witness has been attacked

on cross-examination during re-direct, the attorney whose witness has been damaged

may wish to “save” the witness. These questions should be limited to the damage the

attorney thinks had been done and should enhance the witness’ truth-telling image in

the eyes of the court.

187 Closing Arguments (Summation)

A good closing argument summarizes the case in the light most favorable to your

position. The prosecution delivers the first closing argument. The closing argument of

the defense attorney concludes the presentation. A good closing argument should:

 Be spontaneous synthesizing what actually happened in court rather than

being “pre-packaged”

188  Be emotionally charged and strongly appealing (unlike the calm opening

statement)

 Emphasize the facts which support the claims of your side, but not raise

new facts.

 Summarize the favorable testimony

 Attempt to reconcile inconsistencies that might hurt your side.

 Be well organized. (Starting and ending with your strongest point helps to

structure the presentation and gives you a good introduction and

conclusion.)

189  The Prosecution should emphasize that the “People” have proven guilt

beyond a reasonable doubt.

 The Defense should raise questions which suggest the continued existence

of a reasonable doubt.

Proper phrasing includes:

 “The evidence has clearly shown that ……..”

 “Based on this testimony, there can be no doubt that……”

190  “The prosecution has failed to prove that……”

 “The defense would have you believe……”

Conclude the Argument with an appeal to convict or acquit the defendant

191 192 193 194 Mock Trial Simplified Rules of Evidence

Criminal trials are conducted using strict rules of evidence to promote fairness.

To participate in a Mock Trial, you will need to know a little about the role that

evidence plays in trial procedure.

Studying the rules will prepare you to make timely objections, avoid pitfalls in

your presentation and understand some of the difficulties that arise in actual cases.

195 The purpose of using rules of evidence in the competition is to structure the

presentation to resemble those of an actual trial.

Almost every fact stated in the material will be administered under the rules of

evidence. All evidence will be admitted unless an attorney objects. Because rules of

evidence are so complex, you are not expected to know the fine points. To promote the

educational objectives of this program, students are restricted to the use of a select

number of evidentiary rules in conducting the trial.

196 Reasonable Inference

Due to the nature of the competition, testimony often comes into question as to

whether it can be reasonable inferred given facts A, B, C, etc. Consider the following:

Defendant while inside a department store puts a necklace into her purse.

The security guard sees her. The guard approaches the defendant and says, “I

want to talk to you.” The defendant runs away.

197 The fact at issue is, did the defendant steal something? The logical

inference is that a reasonable person does not run if he/she has nothing to hide.

The fact of running away can be used to show the defendant’s state of mind, i.e.

that the defendant had a culpable (guilty) mind.

The above hypothetical is an example of an accurate use of reasonable inference.

It is ultimately the responsibility of the trier of fact to decide what can be reasonably

inferred. However, it is the students’ responsibility to work as closely within the fact

situation and witness statements as possible.

198 199 Objections

It is the responsibility of the party opposing evidence to prevent its admission by

a timely and specific objection. Objections not raised in a timely manner are waived.

Attorneys can and should object to questions which call for improper answers before

the answer is given.

200 For the purpose of this competition, teams will be permitted to use only certain

types of objections. The allowable objections are summarized below. Other more

complex rules may not be raised at trial. As with all objections, the trier of fact will

decide whether to allow the testimony, strike it, or simply note the objection for later

consideration. Judges’ rulings are final. You must continue the presentation even if you

disagree.

A proper objection includes the following elements:

201 1. attorney addresses the judge,

2. attorney indicates that he/she is raising an objection,

3. attorney specifies what he/she is objecting to, e.g. the particular word,

phrase, or question, and

4. attorney specifies the legal grounds that the opposing side is violating.

Example: (1) “Your Honor, (2) I object (3) to that question (4) on the grounds that it is

compound.”

202 203 204 Allowable Evidentiary Objections

1. Facts in the Record

One objection available in the competition which is not an ordinary rule of

evidence allows you to stop an opposing witness from creating new facts. If you

believe that a witness has gone beyond the information provided in the Fact Situation

or Witness Sheet, use the following form of objection:

205 “Objection, Your Honor. The answer is creating a material fact which is not in the

record.”

“Objection, Your Honor. The question seeks testimony which goes beyond the

scope of the record.”

2. Relevance

206 To be admissible, any offer of evidence must be relevant to an issue in the trial.

This rule prevents confusion of the essential facts of the case with details which do not

make guilt more or less probable.

Either direct or circumstantial evidence may be admitted in court. Direct

evidence proves the fact asserted without requiring an inference. A piece of

circumstantial evidence is a fact (Fact 1) which, if shown to exist, suggest (implies) the

existence of an additional fact (Fact 2), (i.e. If Fact 1, then probably Fact 2). The same

evidence may be both direct and circumstantial depending on its use.

207 Examples: 1. A witness may say that she saw a man jump from a train. This is direct

evidence that the man had been on the train. It is indirect evidence that

the man had just held up the passengers.

2. Eyewitness testimony that the defendant shot the victim is direct

evidence of the defendant’s assault, while testimony establishing that

the defendant had a motive to shoot the victim, or that the defendant

208 was seen leaving victim’s apartment with a smoking gun is

circumstantial evidence of the defendant’s assault.

Form of Objection:

“Objection, Your Honor. This testimony is not relevant to the facts of this case. I

move that it be stricken from the record.”

“Objection, Your Honor. Counsel’s question calls for irrelevant testimony.”

209 3. Laying a Proper Foundation

To establish the relevance of circumstantial, you may need to lay a foundation.

Laying a proper foundation is showing that the evidence comes from a source which is

legally competent to demonstrate necessary underlying facts. If the opposing attorney

objects to your offer of proof on the ground of relevance, the judge may ask you to

210 explain how the offered proof makes guilt more or less probable. Your reply would lay

a foundation.

Examples: 1. The defendant is charge with stealing a diamond ring. Evidence that the

defendant owns a dog is probably not relevant, and if the prosecution

objected to this evidence, it would not be admitted.

2. In an assault and battery case, evidence that he victim had a limp is

probably not relevant to the guilt of the defendant. Laying a foundation

211 by suggesting that the victim fell, rather than being pushed, might make

the evidence admissible.

Form of Objection:

“Objection, Your Honor. There is a lack of foundation.”

4. Personal Knowledge

212 In addition to relevance, the only other hard and fast requirement for admitting

testimony is that the witness must have a personal knowledge of the matter. Only if

the witness has directly observed an event may the witness testify about it.

Witnesses will sometimes make inferences from what they actually did observe.

An attorney may properly object to this type of testimony because the witness has no

personal knowledge of the inferred act.

213 st Examples: 1. The witness knew the victim and saw her on March 1 . The witness

heard on the radio that the victim had been shot on the night March 3.

The witness lacks personal knowledge of the shooting and cannot

testify about it.

2. From around a corner the witness heard a commotion. Upon

investigating, the witness found the victim at the foot of the stairs, and

saw the defendant on the landing, smirking. The witness cannot testify

214 over the defense attorney’s objection that the defendant had pushed the

victim down the stairs, even though this inference seems obvious.

Form of Objection:

“Objection, Your Honor. The witness has no personal knowledge to answer that

question.”

215 “Your Honor, I move that the witness’s testimony about...... be stricken

from the case because the witness has been shown not to have personal

knowledge of the matter.” (This motion would follow cross-examination of the

witness which revealed the lack of a basis for a previous statement.)

5. Character Evidence

216 Witnesses generally cannot testify about a person’s character unless character is

an issue. Such evidence tends to add nothing to the crucial issues of the case. (The

honesty of a witness, however, is one aspect of character always at issue.) In criminal

trials, the defense may introduce evidence of the defendant’s good character and, if

relevant, show the bad character of a person important to the prosecution’s case. Once

the defense introduces evidence of character, the prosecution can try to prove the

opposite. These exceptions are allowed in criminal trials as an extra protection against

erroneous guilty verdicts.

217 Examples: 1) The defendant’s minister testifies that the defendant attends church

every week and has a reputation in the community as a law-abiding

person. This would be admissible.

2) The prosecutor calls the owner of the defendant’s apartment to testify.

She testifies that the defendant often stumbled in drunk at all hours of

the night and threw wild parties. This would probably not be admissible

unless the defendant had already introduced evidence of good

character. Even then, the evidence and the prejudicial nature of the

218 testimony would probably outweigh its probative value making it

inadmissible.

Form of Objection:

“Objection, Your Honor. Character is not an issue here.”

“Objection, Your Honor. The question calls for inadmissible character evidence.”

219 6. Opinion/Speculation

Witnesses may not normally give their opinions on the stand. Judges and juries

must draw their own conclusions from the evidence. However, estimates of the speed

of a moving object or the source of a particular odor are allowable opinions.

220 Example: A taxi driver testifies that the defendant looked like the kind of guy who

would shoot old people. Counsel could object to this testimony and the judge

would require the witness to state the basis for his/her opinion.

Form of Objection:

“Objection, Your Honor. The question calls for inadmissible opinion testimony

(or inadmissible speculation) on the part of the witness. I move that the

testimony be stricken from the record.”

221 7. Hearsay

If a witness offers an out-of-court statement to prove a matter asserted in the

witness’ own testimony, the statement is hearsay. Because they are very unreliable,

these statements ordinarily may not be used to prove the truth of the witness’

testimony. For the reason of necessity, a set of exceptions allows certain types of

hearsay to be introduced.

222 Examples: 1) Joe is being tried for murdering Henry. The witness testifies, “Ellen told

me that Joe killed Henry.” If offered to prove that Joe killed Henry, this

statement is hearsay and probably would not be admitted over an

objection.

2) However, if the witness testifies, “I heard Henry yell to Joe to get out of

the way,” this could be admissible. This is an out-of-court statement, but

is not offered to prove the truth of its contents. Instead, it is being

223 introduced to show that Henry had warned Joe by shouting. Hearsay is a

very tricky subject.

Form of Objection:

“Objection, Your Honor. Counsel’s question calls for hearsay.”

“Objection, Your Honor. This testimony is hearsay. I move that it be stricken

from the record.”

224 Allowable Objections for Inappropriately Phrased

Questions

8. Leading Questions

225 As a general rule, the direct examiner is prohibited from asking leading

questions: he/she cannot ask questions that suggest the desired answer. Leading

questions are permitted on cross-examination.

Example: Counsel for the plaintiff asks the witness, “During the conversation, didn’t

the defendant declare that he would not deliver the merchandise?”

226 On the other hand, counsel could rephrase his/her question. “Will you state

what, if anything, the defendant said during this conversation, relating to the

delivery of the merchandise?”

Form of Objection:

“Objection, Your Honor. Counsel is leading the witness.”

227 9. Argumentative Questions

An argumentative question challenges the witness about an inference from the

facts in the case.

Example: Assume that the witness testifies on direct examination that the defendant’s

car was going 80mph just before the collision. You want to impeach that

witness with a prior inconsistent statement. On cross-examination, it would

228 be permissible to ask, “Isn’t it true that you told your neighbor, Mrs. Ashton,

at a party last Sunday that the defendant’s car was only going 50mph?”

The cross-examiner may legitimately attempt to force the witness to concede the

historical fact of the prior inconsistent statement.

Now assume the witness admits the statement. It would be impermissibly

argumentative to ask, “How can you reconcile that statement with your testimony on

229 direct examination?” The cross-examiner is not seeking any additional facts; rather,

the cross-examiner is challenging the witness about an inference from the facts.

Questions such as “How can you expect the judge to believe that?” are similarly

argumentative and objectionable. The attorney may argue the inferences during

summation or closing argument, but the attorney must ordinarily restrict his or her

questions to those calculated to elicit facts.

230 Form of Objection:

“Objection, Your Honor. Counsel is being argumentative.”

“Objection, Your Honor. Counsel is badgering the witness.”

10. Asked and Answered

231 Asked and answered is just as it states, that a question which had previously

been asked and answered is asked again. This can seriously inhibit the effectiveness of

a trial.

Examples: 1) On Direct Examination – Counsel A asked B, “Did X stop for the stop

sign?” B answers, “No he did not.” A then asks, “Let me get your

testimony straight. Did X stop for the stop sign?”

Counsel for X correctly objects and should be sustained.

232

BUT: 2) On Cross-Examination – Counsel for X asks B. “Didn’t you tell a police

officer after the accident that you weren’t sure whether X failed to stop

for the stop sign?” B answers, “I don’t remember.” Counsel for X then

asks, “Do you deny telling him that?”

Counsel A makes an asked and answered objection. The objection

should be overruled. Why? It is sound policy to permit cross-

233 examination attorneys to ask the same question more than once to

conduct a searching probe of the direct examination testimony.

Form of Objection:

“Objection, Your Honor. This question has been asked and answered.”

Compound Question

234 A compound question joins two alternatives with “or” or “and” preventing the

interrogation of a witness from being as rapid, distinct, or effective for finding the

truth as is reasonably possible.

Examples: 1) (Using “Or”) “Did you determine the point of impact (of a collision)

from conversations with witnesses, or from physical marks, such as

debris in the road?”

235 2) (Using “And”) “Did you determine the point of impact from

conversations with witnesses and from physical marks, such as debris

in the road?”

Form of Objection:

“Objection, Your Honor, on the ground that this is a compound question.”

236 The best response if the objection is sustained on these grounds would be, “Your

Honor, I will rephrase the question,” and then break down the question accordingly.

Remember, there may be another way to make your point.

12. Narrative

A narrative question is one that is too general and calls for the witness in

essence to “tell a story” or make a broad-based and unspecific response. The objection

237 is based on the belief that the question seriously inhibits the successful operation of a

trial and ultimate search for the truth.

Example: The attorney asks A, “Please tell us all of the conversation you had with X

before X started the job.”

The question is objectionable and the objection should be sustained.

Form of Injection:

238 “Objection, Your Honor. Counsel’s question calls for a narrative.”

13. Non-Responsive Witness

Sometimes a witness’s reply is too vague and doesn’t give the details the

attorney is asking for or he/she “forgets” the event in question. This is often purposely

used by a witness as a tactic in preventing some particular evidence to be brought

239 forth. This is a ploy and the questioning attorney may use this objection to :force” the

witness to answer.

“Objection, Your Honor. Counsel’s question calls for a narrative.”

14. Outside the Scope of Cross-Examination

240 Re-Direct examination is limited to issues raised by the opposing attorney on

cross-examination. If an attorney asks questions beyond the issues raised on cross,

they may be objected to as “outside the scope of cross-examination.”

“Objection, Your Honor. Counsel is asking the witness about matters that did not

come up in cross-examination.”

241 242 243 244 Summary of Allowable Evidentiary Objections

1) “Objection, Your Honor. The answer is creating a material fact which is not in the record.”

“Objection, Your Honor. The question seeks testimony which goes beyond the scope of the record.”

245 2) “Objection, Your Honor. This testimony is not relevant to the facts of this case. I move that it be

stricken from the record.”

“Objection, Your Honor. Counsel’s question calls for irrelevant testimony.”

3) “Objection, Your Honor. There is a lack of foundation.”

4) “Objection, Your Honor. The witness has no personal knowledge to answer that question.”

246 “Your Honor, I move that the witness’s testimony about...... be stricken from the case because

the witness has been shown not to have personal knowledge of the matter.” (This motion

would follow cross-examination of the witness which revealed the lack of a basis for a

previous statement.)

5) “Objection, Your Honor. Character is not an issue here.”

“Objection, Your Honor. The question calls for inadmissible character evidence.”

247 6) “Objection, Your Honor. The question calls for inadmissible opinion testimony (or inadmissible

speculation) on the part of the witness. I move that the testimony be stricken from the

record.”

7) “Objection, Your Honor. Counsel’s question calls for hearsay.”

“Objection, Your Honor. This testimony is hearsay. I move that it be stricken from the record.”

8) “Objection, Your Honor. Counsel is leading the witness.”

248 9) “Objection, Your Honor. Counsel is being argumentative.”

“Objection, Your Honor. Counsel is badgering the witness.”

10) “Objection, Your Honor. This question has been asked and answered.”

11) “Objection, Your Honor, on the ground that this is a compound question.”

12) “Objection, Your Honor. Counsel’s question calls for a narrative.”

13) “Objection, Your Honor. Counsel’s question calls for a narrative.”

249

14) “Objection, Your Honor. Counsel is asking the witness about matters that did not come up in

cross-examination.”

250