1. IHS Literature and the Arts 2017-2018
Mock Trial Procedures
IHS Literature and the Arts

2. There are 2 sides: Prosecution Defense
Responsible for proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the crime.
Defense
Responsible for finding their client not guilty for the crime they are being charged with.

3. Burden of proof! Reasonable Doubt The prosecution has a burden.
Their job is harder than the defense.
The burden is called, “Beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Therefore, the defense just has to create doubt!

4. So how do they do it? The trial: Opening Statements The trial
Prosecution goes first.
Defense goes second.
Why do you think the Prosecution gets/has to go first?
The trial
Direct examinations
Cross examinations
Closing Statements
Prosecution, then defense
Rebuttal by Prosecution. (offering a contrary argument)
Why do they get a rebuttal?

5. Opening Statements Imagine a movie preview. 3 minutes long
Always phrased, “We are going to show you that…” or “We will prove that” or “You are going to see…”
Give the jury an idea of what is coming.
Never phrase it, “We already showed you”, or “This person did this…”
Why? They haven’t seen the movie yet!
3 minutes long

6. Examinations Prosecution gets to direct examine their witnesses first.
Direct Examination:
Example of what is right:
Tell us where you were on the night of… or What happened after you went to your locker? Then what did you do?
Example of what is wrong:
Is it not true that you loaded the gun the night before you killed your husband?
The witness has to tell the entire story.
The attorney may not “Lead” the witness in any way/shape/form to the answer.
Rule of thumb: If the answer is yes/no, then you cannot ask the question in Direct Examination

7. Examinations Cross Examination:
This is a hostile examination. One sides attorney against the other sides witness.
They are from opposite teams.
After the direct examination, the witness stays on the stand, and the cross-examiner approaches.
Control the witness!!! Always ask them to answer all questions with a yes/no unless asked otherwise.
Examples of what is okay: almost anything!
As long as you are controlling the witness, leading and non-leading questions are OK.

8. Examinations
Re-Direct – If you still have time, then the direct examiner may re-approach and clarify anything brought up in the cross-exam. Nothing new.
Re-Cross – same as Re-direct…must have time remaining.

9. Objections: Sometimes an attorney is breaking the rules:
You need to protect your witness and your case.
Only the attorney responsible for the witness on the stand may object…nobody else on the attorney teams!!!
Judge can either
Sustain (says it is a good objection and does not allow the question to be answered) or
Overrule (says it is a bad objection, that question should be answered.)

10. Objections Irrelevant Testimony Badgering the Witness
Lacks Expertise or Not Qualified
Coaching or Leading the Witness
Calls for a Conclusion
Hearsay Evidence

11. Irrelevant Testimony
Questions asked that do not pertain to the packet/trial.
Can also be called an “Irrelevant Question”

12. Argumentative/Badgering
Arguing with the witness.
Did you do this? “No.” Are you sure you did not do this? “Yes.” Positive you did not do this? “Yes.” You did this, why are you not admitting to it?!?
Badgering
Arguing with attitude.

13. Asked and answered …also badgering
Sometimes an attorney will ask the same question over and over again.
You killed him? Yes
So you really killed him? Yes
Like shot him in the face and he died? Yes

14. Leading Can only be used when a direct examination is happening.
Asking yes/no questions
Stating a question that has the answer built in to it so the witness just has to confirm the attorney is correct or incorrect.

15. Examples Q: What did you have for lunch?
A: Not leading
Q: You had a Chicken Caesar salad for lunch, didn’t you?
A: Leading

16. Examples Q: Is it true that you have no siblings?
A: OK in a cross examination
Q: How many siblings do you have?
A: This is what you would ask in a direct examination

17. Calls for a Conclusion
Calling for a Conclusion – Asking the witness to try and guess at what might have happened if circumstances were different.
“Let’s say that you went home instead…do you think…” or “What do you think might have happened if…”
Foundation – Only happens on Direct examinations. This is a big one
If the attorney has not established foundation for a question, they cannot ask it.
Example: First question of the direct exam, “So when you were at the party…who did you see drinking alcohol?
It has not been established that there was a party, with drinking at it, and the witness was actually at that party and saw people drinking. All of that must be established first.

18. Hearsay/First-hand knowledge
Asking questions that the witness does not know from first-hand experience is not allowed.
Was Josh drinking that night?
“Well, I heard (“Objection! Hearsay.”) that he was drinking.”
So was he?
“Yes.”
How do you know?
“I heard from Susie”

19. Establishing a witness as an expert
Only one type of witness may actually speculate and that is an “expert” witness.
But they must be established as an expert during the direct examination.
What are your credentials? Witness lists his/her background/academic credentials.
Your honor, I’d like to establish this witness as an expert in his/her field.
Judge: “Are there any objections from the prosecution/defense”?
If none – the witness is declared an expert by the judge and they may now speculate on certain things.

20. The rule of 3 You want the jury to hear important things 3 times!
But what objection does this sound like?

21. Closing statements Typically written as the trial is progressing.
The attorney giving the closing will know what his/her side will be proving and attempting to prove so they can write some of it before the trial.

22. The end
After the closing, the jury is sent out to deliberate the verdict.