1. FACTS Every lawsuit tells a story Legal Storytelling involves the utilization of facts to support and bolster a particular version of reality Lawsuit or Trial is a Contest over whose story is more persuasive to the decision- maker.

2. Narrative Dissonance In a trial, the facts that the jury hears are selected, sorted and controlled by the rules of law-rules of evidence This author called into question the legitimacy of this process when he discovered that the reality (and what he believed to be the truth) upon which he based his verdict was false

3. Organization of Legal Process IN A CRIMINAL CASE Incident Arrest Arraignment Jury selection Opening statements

4. AND- Prosecution case Defense case Summations Judge’s charge Jury deliberation Verdict sentence

5. TRIALS ARE Built around a theory that drives each side’s case In a Criminal Case, the Prosecution and the Defense has a theory of what happened and seek to present evidence that prove that theory, according to a legal standard (beyond a reasonable doubt)

6. Trial-Theory of Defense Alibi defense-Kaplan wasn’t there The defense wanted to create an interpretation of events and a way of thinking about the defendant that the jury could believe. Elements of this defense – Testimony of witnesses – Impeach identification of defendant

7. Trial-Theory of Prosecution Acting in concert Identity was clearly established Defendant “exercising right not to be present” Witnesses victims eyewitness police officers Physical evidence-blood on arms and boots

8. HOW LAW RECONSTRUCTS REALITY WHAT HAPPENEDWHAT JURY HEARD Kaplan skipped bail, rearrested-in jail Exercising right night to be present Multiple prior arrestsNo information Heroin addictNo information First lawyer left-ethics?No information Relationship with womenNo information Detective’s tacticsTape recording not played

9. Verdict Was Justice Done?

10. Jury in “Our Guys” 10 women, six men, 8 black and 4 white. Majority in 30s and 40s, few in late 50s and early 60s-one was 26 Urban and suburban Mixed occupations

11. Lawyers Lawyers for each took different approach in constructing story Goldberg-prosecutor- tried to lay groundwork for who Leslie was Defense could have -argued that she was mentally capable -that she was sexually experienced -didn’t know her but this would require them taking stand -down and dirty approach- she was promiscuous and wanted it

12. VERDICTS Chris Archer-Guilty of two counts of aggravated sexual assault-1 for using force or coercion, 2 for assaulting mentally defective woman. Guilty of 2 nd degree conspiracy Kevin Scherzer-same as Chris Kyle Scherzer-Guilty of 1 count of first degree aggravated sex assault-using force or coercion. Guilty 2 nd degree on mental defective charge.Guilty of 2 nd degree conspiracy

13. Verdicts Bryant Grober-Acquitted of 1 st degree aggravated sexual assault, Guilty of 3d degree conspiracy to commit aggravated sexual assault and aggravated sexual contact

14. SENTENCES Archer and both Scherzers-maximum fifteen years in prison (could have been up to 40 years)-bail pending appeal Young adult offenders institution Grober-3 years probation and 200 hours of community service

15. Appeal Argued in New Jersey Appellate Court in April 1997. Skeptical that force and coercion had been used Dismissed force and coercion charge. Upheld Mental Capacity Charge Result-Jury verdict left standing