Recount of a Mock Trial

The Plaintiff, Keller, sued the defendant, DeLong. DeLong was driving Kellers car at Tyngsboro, Massachusetts at approximately 11:40p.m. on April 14, 1963, DeLong collided with a utility pole at the side of the highway. The Trial Court ruled that the sole cause of the accident was the fact that the defendant dozed off to sleep and did not awaken in time to avoid collision with the pole. The driver showed no sign he was going to fall asleep. Defendant, Carl DeLong, suddenly and unexpectedly dozed at the time of the occurrence of the accident. Defendant, DeLong, was not found negligent. Vacated; reversed, affirming trial court’s judgment.

The case of Kusmider v. State, 688 P.2d 957 (Alaska App. 1984), was a state appeal’s court case that addressed the chain of causation for a murder, which had occurred, and the actions of the trial court judge (Brody & Acker, 2010). In this case, the appellant, Kusmider, appealed his conviction for second degree murder, based on the fact that the trial judge did not let him introduce evidence, which may have shown that the victim may have survived his wounds, if not for the actions of the paramedics.

Frosch, D and Johnson, K. (2007). Colorado Hearing Re-examine 1987 Murder Case. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/27/us/27fortcollins.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

“The next thing I knew I had been tasered by this robocop!” I yell across the courtroom at another high school student. This was certainly something I never expected to say, but Mock Trial has put me into situations outside of my comfort zone many times before. I did not think that being dragged to a Mock Trial meeting by a friend would lead me to something I feel so passionate about, but Mock Trial quickly became my favorite after school activity and a great way for me to explore my love for public speaking. This club let me play both the roles of a frail and cranky old women who had been tasered by a cop and a defense attorney fighting for the future of high school baseball player. Neither of these things is how I envision myself, but it became a great creative outlet for me. During my time in Mock Trial I have been able to attend multiple

The video played in the class is a criminal justice case involving two separate important groups, the police who investigate crime and the district attorneys who prosecute the defendant Mr. Garcia in the killing of Warren Slater. Fairhaven Health Insurance (FHI) is the company with whom Mr. Garcia registered an insurance plan for his daughter Courtney Garcia, who suffers from (CML) Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia, and for which he pays a premium. Slater, who was murdered, works for FHI was the plan’s coordinator. Mr. Garcia, the defendant, in my own view is guilty of committing homicide because of the following reasons: First, He did not have enough evidence or verifiable reasons to conclude that administering Gleevec (Drug) would be a better

In a trial, all the attorneys must present their opening statements. The actual trial began in early 1986. Their opening statements consist of the attorneys describing how they’re going to present their rationale. The plaintiffs’ attorneys made their opening statements favor their clients and make their defendants look like big companies that did something terrible and that they needed to be punished for it. The defendants opening statements involved them saying that they had no involvement in the deaths of these

Sarah and Bill Walmsley, a married couple, were both killed in a vehicle accident in North Montana. The Walmsleys were lifelong residents of South Montana. The beneficiaries of the Walmsleys’ estate were their two minor children, who moved to North Montana after the accident. After the accident, the Walmsleys’ estate sued the Lester Stanton, the car driver that caused the wreck that killed the Walmsleys. The estate received a judgment in the amount of $2,000,000 from Stanton for negligence. But the estate only was able to recover $50,000 from Stanton because of the limit on his insurance policy.

After being a part of the mock trial, I think that the verdict was not the right one because even though Leah and Jared harmed Ms. Cullen’s reputation, they were not charged for it. Telling from Scratchy, Mona, and Jock the teacher’s evidence, I can support that Leah and Jared harmed Ms. Cullen’s reputation. They all think that her reputation was broken due to the blog that Leah and Jared created on Facebook and what the kids from the school said about her.

11:30 P.M. approximated time of death. 8:15 A.M. Wednesday, April 15th Victim found. Victor Timm, 20 years old (5’8”, 150 lbs). Cause of death: Strangulation/suffocation. It is thought that there was tension between victim and 6 other students all apart of the “VOCALPALOOZA” ( a local choir competition). Witnesses were able to recreate the crime scene with artificial materials which helped police and detectives find the motive of the murderer. With all of the clues taken into consideration, I was able to come to a conclusion. I charge Ms. Elle Corazon with the brutal murder of Victor Timm.

At first, I was certain that it was not justice served in the case, but I had to attend for more information as in the article wasn’t all the details around this compelling case, and my opinion changed completely. I found the whole history in the New York Magazines. In this article, is seen the defendant guilty because he lied in their testimonies more than once, and when someone lies to us, we believe that he might do something wrong instead of that he might be nervous or afraid that everyone thinks something that it wasn’t true. Nevertheless, it was not enough evidence and non-witnesses that collaborate their history, and the jury was overwhelmed because the state took their freedom for four days, they only want to get home. On the other

The client, Mr. Andy Dwyer (“Dwyer”), wishes to bring a wrongful death claim on behalf of his sister, Ms. Kelly Erin Hannon (“Hannon”). Hannon is a deceased employee of Colonial Charm Garden Apartments (“Colonial Charm”). Hannon died after being stabbed during an attempted robbery of Colonial Charm. Dwyer claims Colonial Charm should have known of the increased criminal activity in the area and that Colonial Charm was negligent in failing to provide extra security patrols for the protection of its employees. Dwyer wants to sue Colonial Charm for $3 million for loss of life, wages, future income, and pain and suffering and $3 million in punitive damages.

Facts: Shepard, defendant, was charged and convicted of the murdering his wife. Prosecution introduced statement Shepard’s wife made to the nurse as evidences during the trial. Shepard’s wife told her nurse stating that her husband had poisoned her. She also asked the nurse to find the whiskey bottle from defendant’s closet and perform the poison test which she had drunk from. The prosecution introduced the wife’s conversation based on the state of mind exception and dying declaration exception under the hearsay rule. Shepard appeared.

A Jury plays a necessary part in the criminal justice system in England and Wales. Trial by jury is one of the ways that could be useful for reaching justice in the courts. The jury has 12 citizens who are chosen randomly from different genders and different ages. (The Guardian, 2005) the jurors work is to help the judge to a make decision about the case so the lawyers show them the evidence and anything related to the case and then the jurors will try to make the right judgment whether the criminal is guilty or not.

I went to the Cole County Courthouse to observe a criminal jury trial that involved a retrial for second degree arson. I was able to be a part of the jury selection proceedings. I witnessed what kinds of questions that are asked of the potential jurors and to see how people respond or act when they are put on the spot about their personal beliefs about certain things. This was a very interesting proceeding for me as I have never been selected for jury

Additional, there was a concern with the old man testimony. Another issue was the declaration of the old man. Jury No. 8 proceeds with his attack on the proof by demonstrating that it was difficult for the old man to have been in the place he was the point at which he supposedly observed the defendant escaping the murder scene. Juror No. 9 expressed the old man was limping and had a stroke a year ago and Juror No. 9 expected the old man was unessential all his life. Through future investigation the jurors decided it took the old man 45 seconds rather than 15 seconds to the stairway.