Notes on Simulated Murder Trial Lecture

Introduction

• Speaker: Michelle, representing in a simulated murder trial.
• Objective: Experience being a defense lawyer in a simulated environment.
• Setup: Live-action courtroom with jurors, a real judge, and actors as witnesses.

The Case

• Title: State vs. Ash Thornhill
• Charge: Murder of Wendell Tucker, a zookeeper.
• Alibi: Ash claims he was watching a baseball game with his friend Drew at the time of the murder.
• Key Players:
  • State Prosecutor: Spencer, experienced with a history of winning cases.
  • Defense Attorney: Michelle (played by the speaker).

Legal Framework

• Importance of understanding how the law works in criminal cases.
• Trial Structure:
  • Opening statements
  • Presentation of evidence through witnesses
  • Closing arguments
  • Jury deliberation and verdict

Opening Statement

• Crucial for setting the tone; jurors often decide after this point.
• Aim: To tell the jury what they will hear and see.
• Michelle's attempt: A mix of various TV characters as inspiration.
• Key points to cover:
  • Ash Thornhill's character and passion for animal welfare.
  • Defense against prosecution narratives of anger and confrontation.
  • Present evidence of Ash's innocence.

Evidence Discussion

• Investigation Concerns:
  • Lack of thorough investigation (fingerprint and gunpowder analysis missing).
  • Alibi corroboration through witness Drew.
• Possible Alternate Theories:
  • Mention of a possible robbery motive due to missing jewelry (Rolex watch).

Witness Examination

• Witnesses include police officers, forensic experts, and friends.
• Importance of objecting to irrelevant or leading questions.
• Techniques for effective examination:
  • Build rapport with the jury.
  • Use suspense and drama to keep jurors engaged.

Cross Examination

• Strategy: Discredit the prosecution's witnesses and findings.
• Important to show weaknesses in their narrative:
  • Focus on incomplete investigations.
  • Highlight lack of evidence directly tying Ash to the crime.

Closing Argument

• Aim: Summarize key points and instill doubt in jurors.
• Suggested structure:
  • Highlight three missing elements in prosecution's case.
  • Emphasize insufficient evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • Conclude with a strong call for acquittal, framing Ash as innocent.

Conclusion of the Trial

• Verdict: "Not Guilty" for Ash Thornhill.
• Michelle's performance noted as impressive for a novice.
• Key takeaways:
  • Importance of adaptability and understanding legal principles.
  • Learning curve of knowing objections and trial decorum.

Final Thoughts

• Trial verdicts depend heavily on the ability to instill reasonable doubt.
• Effective communication and understanding of the law are vital for defense attorneys.