Transcript for:
Summary of Mock Trial Competition

surprise [Music] superior court of the State of California County of Monterey Department 14 is now in section honorable Judge Vasquez is presiding please be seated and come to order in silence all cell phones and refrain from Talking good afternoon everyone welcome to the Monterey County Superior Court specifically the Monterey Courthouse I want to start off by saying that it's an honor and a privilege to have the opportunity to preside over this Mock Trial Competition you know I've already had the pleasure and the benefit of being able to see many of you in action and I got to say that this is truly going to be a great experience because I already know that I'm here in the presence of a lot of superstars that have a tremendous amount of talent and a great amount of skill and it's a pleasure to be here and to watch you in action in this Championship competition so get ready to Showcase your talents right here okay in any event at this point in time to help myself and the attorney scores with a prosecution team state your name and your role please good afternoon your honor my name is Sophie cebrano I will be the pre-trial attorney in today's case now maybe trial attorneys please introduce themselves good afternoon your honor my name is Ryan hubings and I will be representing the prosecution in tonight's case good afternoon your honor my name is Zara Kamara and I or a trial attorney in today's case now may the witnesses please good evening your honor my name is Nora Wilcox and I will be playing the role of Clio shape for this good afternoon your honor my name is Phoebe zyberg and I will be playing the role of Dylan Mavis this afternoon good afternoon your honor my name is Amanda Wang and I'll be playing the role of our coach today afternoon your honor my name is Martin Wong and I will be playing the role of Billy share today now will our timekeeper please introduce himself oh good afternoon your honor my name is Michael Butch and I'll be the timekeeper in today's case now may the attorney coaches please introduce themselves happening in New York good afternoon you're on our check today it's just one of the attorney coaches all right so defense team please state your name and your role good afternoon your honor my name is Shayla dutta and I will be arguing the pre-trial motion on behalf of Jordan Franks good afternoon your honor my name is Sophia Cho along with my co-counsel Emma Brown good afternoon your honor we represent the defendant Jordan Franks good afternoon your honor I am Jade Marquez good afternoon your honor I am Ezra Weintraub good afternoon your honor I am Carter lucky good afternoon your honor I am Jordan Franks also with us our courtroom officers good afternoon your honor my name is Nicole mursky and I'll be The Unofficial timer in today's case good afternoon your honor my name is Brianna suto and I'll be serving as the courtroom bailiff in today's proceedings may I go over a few rules of this courtroom you may I'd like to remind the gallery that absolutely no food or drink is allowed in the courtroom water is permitted if Spectators must leave please do so quietly to avoid disrupting participants finally your honor I have a copy of the rules of procedure on hand for the Court's convenience thank you very much finally you're honor our team coach Mr Shire good afternoon good afternoon sir that includes introductions from the defense thank you Council all right so you must complete your presentations within the specified time limits the clerk will signal you as your time for each section of the presentation begins to run out when your total time for each section Runs Out you will be stopped even if you have not finished attorneys must call for Witnesses within time limit this is a bench trial at the end of the trial I will render a verdict of guilty or not guilty in relation to the charge brought the teams will be rated based on the quality of their presentation independent of my verdict barring unforeseen circumstances no recesses will be called if for any reason a recess is necessary team members should remain in their appropriate places and should have no contact with Spectators or coaches remember that objections are limited to the California mock trial simplified Rules of Evidence located in the case packet if there are no questions the pre-trial arguments will begin so this hearing is called to order both sides have four minutes to present their arguments the defense will begin I will interrupt as clarifying questions time spent answering my questions is not included in the four minute time limit at the conclusion of your arguments each side will be offered two minutes of rebuttal time remember that the rebuttal time is to be used to counter your opponent's arguments it cannot be used to raise new issues is Council for the defense ready to begin yes your honor please summarize your arguments your honor Shayla data for Jordan Franks may it please the court when the police coerced Jordan Franks to open her personal safe a safe which contained sensitive medical records they violated her Fourth Amendment rights and the fruits of that search must be suppressed now on the night of June 9th 2022 detective Mavis asked Ms Franks to search her safe on board the Heart of the Ocean Cruise Ship your honor Miss Franks was clear she said no but that and any subsequent refusals did not stop the detective who instead of then getting a warrant stood and blocked the doorway and attempted to use the threat of a warrant to induce Miss Frank's submission now under the totality of the circumstances test laid out in schneckloth vibustamante the detective's conduct violated Miss Frank's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures at your honor among the factors the court in schneckloth identified that our pertinent in today's case the nature of questioning and the length of detention the nature of questioning your honor was misleading and it created resigned inevitability I was a misleading counsel well your honor if I may invite the Court's attention to page 38 line five of the record the detective herself admits she told Miss Franks a warrant was being authorized now at this point the detective had prepared a warrant application she hadn't submitted it to a magistrate she hadn't appeared before a judge it wasn't being authorized is there a case that you're particularly relying on to support your position as to that issue yes your honor that would be United States versus Griffin that's the only other case in our limited library in which a defendant or in that case a third party initially unequivocally refused to consent tell me about the specific case or facts of that case yes your honor the police approached the defendant's apartment on permission to search and Russell denied it citing that he was entertaining after the police had then apprehended someone leaving the defendant's apartment through a window they returned to Russell and Russell stepped aside allowing them to consent allowing them to proceed with the search now the Court held in that case that the police asking for consent multiple times was permissible because of the clear absence of any deception misrepresentation or trickery that's not what we have in today's case because your honor even if detective Mavis had submitted that warrant application that Warren application was prepared before the officer ever entered Miss Frank's cabin she didn't know that safe existed and because of the particularity clause in the fourth amendment that warrant application wouldn't have included Miss Frank's safe a warrant was not being prepared or as she told Miss Franks about to be authorized or would be authorized at any minute in fact detective Mavis didn't even know if once she submitted that warrant application it would be processed in the next 24 hours she led Miss Franks to believe that a warrant was much more guaranteed and much more imminent than it actually was and therefore under United States versus Griffin was coercive we can also look to the cases of bumperving North Carolina and United States versus Hicks tell me about the North Carolina case what are the facts in that case Council yes you're on her owners were investigating a defendant for a felony they arrived at the defendant's grandmother's house and informed the grandmother that they had a warrant when in fact they did not now she permitted them to search believing she had no other option and the Court held that that was not constitutional why not well your honor because by telling a defendant you have a warrant officers are effectively saying they have no right to refuse a search the case did the detective say that he he or she had a warrant and know your honor we agree that these circumstances in today's case don't rise to the extreme level of that and bumper but the detective statements a warrant is being authorized and will be processed at any moment have a similar effect on Miss Franks making her feel as though at any moment detective Mavis will return with a warrant in hand that refusing to consent is ultimately meaningless when that wasn't really true that she had hours if not days in which her privacy would be preserved had she not been overborn or misled by the detective now your honor the nature of this questioning also created resign inevitability at page 40 line 41 in the record the detective tells Miss Franks five or six times I'm going to open that safe whether you agree to it or not your honor even if one knows their rights they start to feel in that moment as though asserting them is meaningless those statements of the detectives they aren't informing Miss Franks of any option she has they're making pardon the interruption Council so you're talking about that circumstance right there rising to the level of causing some type of coercion or duress because of the repeated questioning is that correct your honor the statement itself as well as the repeated question and your honor initially the detective just asked to enter that safe until the detective asked do not order or direct is that correct well your honor initially then after Miss Franks had refused multiple times she said to her I'm going to open that safe whether you agree to it or not at page 40 line 41 in the record and just later miss Franks also states she relentlessly requested she open that safe isn't there any case that exists where you have a circumstance where the officer or the agent that's involved presents the suspect with the chance to select whether to consent or to Simply wait for a search warrant to be issued and also in circumstances such as this you know you talk about the repeated questioning but aren't there other factors also to evaluate from a totality of circumstances standpoint which suggests that there is no coercion overall when you look at other factors yes your honor to your second point the totality of the circumstances cased in schneckloth there's which we will shortly address to your first point we believe you're referring to the cases of people V McClure and people V Ratliff so it's only about the McClure case your honor in the McClure case officers essentially offered the defendant a choice between consenting immediately or waiting for them to obtain a warrant similarly in Ratliff the defendant was informed that if they did not consent to a search of their car the officers would obtain a warrant and break into that trunk in the future so was offering that option to either consent or wait for the warrant to be issued was at a significant factor that ultimately resulted in there being involuntary consent in those matters know your honor in those cases consent was found to be valid why well for a couple of critical reasons in both of those cases those officers were operating on good faith they had a belief a legitimate belief that they had probable cause to obtain a warrant and they were completely honest with the defendant or the involved parties while they were questioning them your honor the defense concedes the detective likely could have had probable cause and in this case part of the interruption Council I apologize for interrupting you let me ask this question did the detective in this particular matter already proceed with the process of applying to get a search warrant reviewed by a magistrate she had not yet applied or that application she already had probable cause and was already in the promises of preparing it or had prepared it is that correct yes we don't know for sure whether she had probable cause as that warrant was never actually reviewed by a magistrate do you think the rad live case for instance your honor we believe the most significant fact in today's case is not only that detective Mavis was being Miss truthful to miss Franks but was using the possibility of a warrant as a threat not an option wouldn't that have also be and again I apologize for interrupting your counsel wouldn't that also be analogous to a declaration of the legal remedies that an officer would be entitled to pursue in that instance isn't there a case that actually addresses that your honor there is a case that addresses that that is Ratliff and no it would not be analogous to that in Ratliff the officers told the defendant that absent his consent they would obtain a warrant that was truthful and it was still offering that choice in today's case detective Mavis told Miss Franks I'm going to open that safe whether you agree to it or not several times until she finally relented that's not offering a choice your honor in fact it's making it clear to miss Franks that she has none and the critical difference as well from Ratliff to today's case is the detective's truthfulness there were no statements in any of those cases in which a choice was offered and consent was valid that were inconsistent with where the warrant actually was telling Miss Franks that warrant will be processed at any moment is clearly inconsistent with the fact that that warrant had not yet been applied for and even if it had been wouldn't have included the safe at issue may I proceed your honor you may you may now another Factor under the schneck law test to consider is the length of detention Miss Franks had been taken back to her cabin by the detective who then stood in the doorway and later instructed her to stay in that cabin and not to leave if custody exists when a defendant doesn't feel free to leave that's proof Miss Franks was detained at the time of this questioning the importance of custody as a factor is addressed in the case of Castaneda V Los Angeles in that situation the defendant had been arrested and was in the back of a squad car and although he had verbally consented to a search went to took measures to misdirect the police from the proper house to search and the Court held because in that case the defendant did not have any power over whether or not that search was actually conducted his consent was not voluntary in case he was also in handcuffs in a patrol car transported to multiple locations because he was not being very upfront about where his true residence was in order to avoid having the officers search the place where he was staying at and where he had drugs illegally stored is that correct yes your honor so he was transported to different locations within the jurisdiction where they were operating here we're talking about a single cabin right yes your honor and is there any case that you've come across that deals with the length of time that constitutes an undue prolonged time know your honor we don't have that specific fact in our limited library and we'd like to acknowledge that the physical restraints present in Castaneda are greater than what we have in today's case was the defendant in this case handcuffed old car either correct yes your honor at the police station correct yes your honor we do agree that the situations physically in Castaneda that there were much more physical restraints in that case she was within the confines of her own cabin where she was staying at is that correct yes your honor okay your honor the reason that our case still can take standards from Castaneda is because not only did she not feel free to leave but that the detective's verbal coercion the statement she made to miss Franks effectively amounted to the same effect on Miss Franks wasn't she standing by the doorway wasn't the detective standing by the doorway in order to give the defendant some space to operate to be able to open the safe that was inside the cabin your honor that was the detective stated purpose but that's irrelevant to the issue in today's case as it's not about what the detective intended to do it's how a reasonable person in Miss Frank's position would have perceived that action and how it would have affected their interpretation of the circumstances understood thank you at your honor there are also a few other circumstances schneck lothy Bustamante mentions that includes the age the level of education and whether Miss Frank's knew her rights now miss Franks had graduated from high school but beyond a few acting classes had no education on top of that she was a young woman without any power in this situation and she knew her rights which raises the question one minute why did she change her mind your honor the people are not going to be able to answer that question absent detective mavis's coercive statements absent I'm going to open that safe whether you agreed to it or not that a warrant is being authorized and will be processed at any moment Miss Franks told the detective she had sensitive medical records in that safe and the detective found those records when she opened it those records didn't become any less private Miss Frank's just didn't think asserting her rights would do anything for her anymore finally your honor we'd like to note that the prosecution Bears the burden in this issue under the authority of bumperby North Carolina for these reasons we ask that you grant our motion excluding exhibit a and any references thereto from today's trial stop thank you thank you Council is counsel for the prosecution ready to begin that's your honor please summarize your arguments thank you for Sophie's brother we're moving to admit the notes about the Signet ring into evidence as they are obtained lawfully under the Fourth Amendment with a voluntary consent of Jordan Franks notes in question were acquired from a safe within France's cabin by the time detective Mavis had arrived at the cabin she had already discovered evidence of a ring box in the blue diamond Cafe discarded in the trash can in close location to where she found Franks she was also told by Cher that Franks had stolen the ring after breaking Cher's arm as a result of the detective's investigation she filled out a warrant application and asked Franks to search the room Frank's agreed which ultimately led to the discovery of a safe Mavis requested Frank's open the safe to which Franks initially refused stating I know my rights but after speaking with Detective Mavis who said a warrant would be authorized Franks changed her mind and consented to the search your honor the case USV Evans is exactly on point tell me about the facts in that case yes your honor in that case uh NBI agent agent consent was not given may I proceed to honor you may what's the issue in that case yes and the issue in this case is whether or not they believed that they had the ability to freely choose against consenting to that search and your honor in our case ever it like Evans the defend the defendant believed that they had that choice may I appreciate your honor you may thank you now here too we see that after detective Mavis stated that she would in fact obtain a search warrant if consent was not given and we see that there let me take you back to the Evans case and I pardon pardon my Interruption okay I apologize for interrupting you Council the evidence case involved a matter where there was an investigation concerning an auto theft incident and they responded to the residents where the vehicle was located I believe in the driveway they arrested the defendant in that case or the suspect in that case the father came out now withstanding the admonitions from the officers to stay away the father nevertheless ignored the admonitions of the officers and went ahead and approached the garage and then ultimately gave consent for them to search the vehicle is that correct yes it is and can you tell me what the holding was on that case yes Ronald the whole thing was that the consent was valid and in fact it was valid as a result of the totality of the circumstances okay so tell me about the different factors that the court considered there well your honor in that case the court considered the the fact that the the defendant there was aware of the fact that they had a choice to consent or not okay so then how does that case help you out in this particular matter this case shows that additionally Franks was not intimidated by detective Mavis Franks knew of his of her right to deny the detective access to that safe and your honor Franks chose to unequivocally deny the detective the right to search that safe initially and after having done that she changed her mind choosing to consent to the to the search of that safe but your honor the defendant was not threatened by detective Mavis choosing to refuse the detective the right to search that safe in fact showed that she was not threatened by detective Mavis wasn't the detective persistently and repeatedly requesting over and over and over to give access to search that safe John R would like to know a discrepancy amongst the statements between detective Mavis and the defendant Franks in Frank's statement yes it was stated that there are five to six times the detective Mavis had requested Frank's open that safe however in mavis's statement Mavis detective Mavis stated that in fact it was in France's best interest and we can infer that this was relating to the surrounding circumstances on that ship the fact that there were 4 000 other passengers there waiting for this investigation to be concluded as well as the fact that Frank's had a airplane to catch the very next day to New York we talk about the totality of the circumstances in this particular scenario what are the relevant circumstances well the relevant circumstances are the defendants that they can in fact deny the detect the die the police the right to search the property so you mentioned that Franks understood that she had the right to refuse the request to search correct yes your honor the defendant had in fact stated I know my rights to the detective case we counter between the detective and franks that's that's conducted inside a cabin is that correct indeed it is in your opinion with the size of the cabin be relevant to the totality of circumstances analysis in this case I wouldn't fact and I would say that given the tight quarters of the cabin I believe 125 square feet we can we can see that when detective Mavis moved away from the defendant after having requested Frank's open that safe this was simply as stated in their in their witness statement that they were giving the defendant space in order to be less intrusive inside of such a small cabin so 125 square feet is extremely tight would you agree or disagree I would say it is small and you have a detective that's standing in the doorway is that correct your honor the defendant the detective moved away from the defendant in order to give them more space and after the detective moved away where the defend the detective go the defendant the detective did in fact stand and how many ways were there to go inside and outside of the cabin so the loan point of Ingress and egress was the doorway where the detective was standing to block Franks is that correct you're again the defendant was in this tight room and had a choice to make the detective attempted to give that defendants get to give the defendant space in order to think over the their choice and after stating I know my rights they didn't were in fact aware of that choice to consent or to wait for a warrant to be obtained please continue with your argument Council thank you your honor the case people V McClure further illustrates that this is a case of voluntary consent the court found the defendants excuse me the court found that the defense consent was valid holding the uh excuse me as law enforcement did not attempt to coerce the defendant into complying and here too there was no coercion your honor the detective statement that a warrant would be obtained was as simple was simply made in good faith as her findings from her investigation led her to believe the search warrant would in fact be off two minutes and your honor the defendant McClure was in custody when he gave consent here French was not under arrest while being interviewed by detective Mavis no improper assertion a police Authority was made and franks wasn't under arrest nor in handcuffs given the totality of the circumstances including Frank's statement that she knew her rights your honor consent was given voluntarily Council pardon the interruption you make reference to the McClure case do you find that the McClure case factually is similar to the circumstances here or is it distinguishable well your honor I find that the fact is factually similar in the fact that the defendant there was in fact given the choice to comply or to wait for that search warrant was the choice given in this case yes Ron I would say that a choice was the choice was given firstly in stating that I know my rights Franks was aware of her choice to consent or wait for that warrant to be obtained and in fact did it by stating and asking the defendant to search that safe she was also given a choice by the detective and I'm going to be paraphrasing here but didn't the detective say I'm going to get into that safe whether you agree or not with the statement that a warrant would be obtained if consent is not given is a simple Declaration of the legal remedy available to an officer if consent is not given in which case supports that proposition there I'm glad you asked the case people be Ratliff the Ratliff case yes your honor in examining the case people be Ratliff the court will see that the defendant there was first under greater stress than in our case having been awoken by officers with their guns drawn on him and yet the court still found that that the consent was valid holding that telling a defendant that if consent that it won't be obtained if consent was not given was again a simple Declaration of the legal remedy available to the officer if consent is on so to be clear on the rat live case officers went into the home of a suspect they woke him up startled him and then guns were drawn yes so they held that individual at gunpoint they did it and ultimately the court declared and held that consent was voluntary in that particular case notwithstanding those particular factors yes they did all right please continue with your argument thank you owner when Mavis stated that a warrant would be a typical Declaration of the legal remedy that the detective reasonably believed would come to the aid of her investigation Franks willingly agreed to the search and let detective Mavis into that safe your honor unlike the case and people be Rattler where consent was still considered valid Frank's was not placed in handcuffs one minute Franks was not under arrest Franks was aware and knew of her right to deny the detective access to anything in the room which she initially chose to exercise your honor Frank's show no apprehension as a result detective mavis's actions and the detective acted in accordance with the law demon consent voluntary the law is clear as such the notes about the Signet ring should in fact be admitted into evidence thank you John thank you Council does the defense have a rebuttal yes your honor please proceed you're on our first I'd like to invite the Court's attention to page 28 line two this is the case of people V Ratliff where it states in the holding the police no longer had their guns drawn when they began questioning the defendant also like to address the discrepancy opposing Council mentioned between Miss Frank's statement and Detective mavis's they insinuated that because it was different it's somehow not as credible but you're honored there's no indication the prosecution have brought no evidence suggesting any of Miss Frank's statements are not credible and as they bear the burden it's not reasonable for the court to assume such your honor would also like to distinguish the cases of Evans and McClure to be clear detective Mavis never said I will obtain a search warrant if you don't consent detective Mavis never offered Miss Franks a choice a warrant was never mentioned in any context other than the fact that it was already being authorized and that fact is not in dispute in any way this clearly sets these cases this our case apart from the cases of Evans and McClure in Evans opposing Council also argued that Miss France was similarly unintimidated 30 seconds but she said I was scared of the detective's attitude talking to me as if I was in a criminal as if I was a criminal she was scared she was intimidated and she showed that your honor Miss Franks only opened that safe because of the detective's coercion we ask that you grant our emotion excluding exhibit a thank you thank you Council does the prosecution have a rebuttal yes Robert may I proceed to you that the defendant was coerced detained and threatened however in the case that the defense the defense counsel mentioned schneck Bustamante this case examines the issue of whether consent is valid looking at the totality of the circumstances specifically of the defendant's awareness of their ability to refute to refuse a search and here Frank said I know my rights she wasn't detained and she was not and she was not intimidated by detective Mavis additionally in the case bump in bumper V North Carolina this case is completely factually distinguishable from our case as a result of the fact that in bumper they had a search warrant they stated they had a search warrant when they in fact did not here detective Mavis simply stated that a warrant would be authorized which protective Mavis had in fact begun the authorization process having having completely filled out a warrant application even before she had arrived at Frank's cabin dude detectives say that the warrant was already being authorized yes well no your honored they said that would be authorized may I proceed you may thank you additionally uh the defense States the case Hicks uh which unlike Hicks detective Mavis was aware of the entire of the facts at hand and in that case what as primary officers said that they in fact had probable cause to acquire when they did not and was told this by and was told that they had problem caused by a secondary officer and consent and consent was deemed invalid however here detective Mavis knew that the new of the entirety of the fact pattern and was well aware of the facts at hand and and again Frank stated I know my rights Franks was aware of her right to deny the detect that search and yet consented your honor with this we respectfully request that you grant the contents of the safe into evidence thank you thank you Council Council for the defense are you requesting to confer with your attorney or teacher regarding any irregularities honor there are no irregularities from the defense counsel for the prosecution are you requesting to confer with your attorney teacher coach regarding any irregularities no your honor all right so at this point in time the court has considered the arguments of counsel the court has read and reviewed the statutory Authority the Constitutional Authority and also the decisional authority that has been provided to the court that has been argued also by Council at this point in time and based on the statutory and decisional Authority that the court has reviewed and based on the evaluation of the totality of circumstances in this particular case the court finds that in this particular matter that the consent was voluntarily given there was no coercion and at this point in time the motion from the defense is respectfully denied so the exhibit and the subsequent evidence that was derived from the search of the safe that will be allowed to be admitted into evidence at this time is everyone prepared to proceed with the trial at this point in time your honor we were permission to rearrange that is granted and additionally we'd like to note that by denying the motion it's allowing the offering of exhibit a but it doesn't necessarily admit it at this time your honor understood and duly noted Council yes your honor all right so at this point in time prosecution do you have any physical evidence that you would like to present for inspection yes your honor at this time the prosecution is like to submit exhibit a which is the notes found in the safe containing information about the Signet ring Additionally the prosecution would like to admit or submit exhibit B which will denote the Signet ring offered in court today Additionally the prosecution would like to submit Exhibit C which is the Velvet ring box that held the Signet ring thank you and does the defense have any physical evidence that it would like to present for inspection yes your honor in addition to the exhibits that opposing Council brought up we have exhibits a through e including some of those exhibits that we asked to be placed on the witness stand and has been pre-approved by opposing Council granted so please hand those to our bailiff in addition your honor the defense has some preliminary matters to take up we ask that all Witnesses be constructively sequestered barring the defendant I'm sorry stay that again we asked all Witnesses be constructively sequestered for the purposes of a mock trial barring the defendant Jordan Franks any objection no your honor all right that request is granted yes your honor in addition we ask us your preference as to approaching Witnesses granted as far as coming up just feel free to walk up you do not need to ask me for my permission don't ask for any request to approach you just simply approach whenever you need to approach understood yes your honor all right with that the defense is ready to proceed okay and any other requests from the people no Jana not at this time all right so in this matter the people of the State of California are charging the defend and Jordan Franks with robbery and Battery of Frank's fellow actor Billy Shear prosecution are you ready to present opening statements yes your honor all right please proceed thank you on June 9th 2021 in the shadow of their roommate and co-star Jordan Frank or Billy share they would go to perceive and say the words you don't deserve the role or the ring how could you do this to me and finally Jordan Franks would say get out of my way these are all manifestations of Jordan France's fervent obsession with Billy share and Billy share signature you see as roommates and co-stars above part of the ocean and also um my apologies and also considering the fact that Jordan Franks never got the dream role never got the dream ring and never got the um apologies never got the recognition they would bring tonight Jordan Franks is charged with battery robbery and Grand Theft you will hear from four Witnesses tonight first comes Billy share Billy share will testify to the tumultuous relationship aboard her the ocean they will talk about how Jordan Franks constantly would make horrendous remarks towards them among other cast members next you will hear from Cleo Schaefer who gifted Billy share the Signet ring Cleo Schaefer as well will testify to the fact that Jordan Franks was obsessed furthermore Cleo Schaefer will see Jordan Franks in the blue diamond Cafe throwing something away in the trash after the altercation had been sued third you will hear from Ari couch our expert witness tonight all right couch a decorated archaeologist and gemologist will talk about the historical parallels about the ring presented in the court tonight as well as the parallels shared with William Shakespeare's ring himself lastly you will hear from detective Mavis the detective aboard the ship detective Mavis will talk about finding a piece of paper in John Francis safe denoting the value of the Ring the number to a courthouse as well as finding the Signet ring in Jordan France's own costume pocket your honor tonight the defense will downplay everything that has the totality of the evidence but truthfully your owner there is no one of the four thousand members of heart of the ocean that knew Billy shared as intimately as they did there is no one with the unique combination of motive knowledge and opportunity other than that Signet ring that was served upon a silver platter that evening in that cabin your owner the the people would like you to keep in mind the fact that tonight Jordan friends is the person who injured Billy share and stole the ring thank you thank you Council and is the defense ready to present the opening statement yes your honor please proceed Sophia Cho for the defense may have pleased the corps it's June 9th 2022 when the final performance of Macbeth at sea has just ended the two leads Jordan Franks and Billy share are arguing backstage your honor it's nothing new the two do not get along afterward Mr share goes back to his cabin when he shared with Miss Frank's for three long years tomorrow miss Frank is going to follow him to New York City to be his understudy and a Broadway play Mr share is fed up he can't take it anymore so he hatches a plan stage a robbery and Frank Miss Franks on his way to the cast rap party he places his Signet ring in Miss Frank's costume then throws out its ring box at the Blue Diamond Cafe at midnight he returns to his cabin accuses Miss Franks of stealing his ring and tries to block her as she leaves your honor it was all a setup the play had ended but the acting hadn't nevertheless the prosecution has charged Miss Franks with robbery and Battery resulting in serious bodily injury they must prove each element of their case Beyond A Reasonable Doubt your honor you'll learn that Mr share had the means the motive and the opportunity to Stage the entire thing and that is Reasonable Doubt you'll hear from four Witnesses today first Jade Marquez will call into question the prosecution expert's appraisal of the ring in today's case you'll learn there is simply no way of knowing whether this ring truly belonged to Shakespeare after that Ezra Weintraub the ship's head of security tell you just how superficial the police investigation was that there was camera footage once available that could tell us what happened that night simply that the police asked too late after that Carter lucky will tell you about the altercation that he witnessed between Miss Franks and Mr Cher your honor he was clear in what he saw pranks did not push Mr share to the ground finally you'll meet Miss Franks you'll learn what she did Where She Went on the night of June 9th above all she'll tell you she did not what not steal Billy shares rank and we'll tell you what she's been saying this entire time she is being framed your honor the play had ended but the acting hadn't at the end of today's trial we'll ask that you find Miss Franks not guilty thank you thank you Council prosecution you may call your first Witness College Billy shares the stand really sure are you able to raise your right hand I'm not it's okay do you solemnly affirm that the testimony we're about to give will faithfully and truthfully conform to the facts and rules of the Mock Trial Competition I do you may be seated your honor I'd like to note that her rule uh 3.10 are this witness is sworn in despite his inability to raise his right arm understood and duly noted for the record thank you spelling your last Billy share s-c-h-e-r what is your name my name is Billy share could you summarize your education for the court I have a bachelor's degree in the dramatic arts where do you work I work aboard the cruise ship the heart of the ocean for how long about three years did you start any plays aboard this ship yes I started in Macbeth at Sea do you enjoy Shakespeare I love Shakespeare so when you're staring in Macbeth did you live on board the ship oh yes I lived in a cabin did you share a cabin with anyone I shared the cabin with my co-star Jordan Franks how big was your cabin it was quite small we had bunk beds so where did you typically keep your valuables we kept our valuables and safes in the cabin's closets did you often use your safe yes why well I have a Signet ring once worn once owned by William Shakespeare it's a Priceless artifact so I like to keep it safe showing you it has been marked as exhibit B do you recognize this yes is this that ring that is uh is this a fair and accurate representation of that ring yes it is your honor the people request to move it did it be into evidence any objection no objection is admitted into evidence when did you obtain this rate my good friend Cleo Schaefer gave it to me in April 2022. how often would you wear this ring I wore that ring every day and I wore it to every performance of Macbeth at Sea and in your personal opinion what is the value of this ring to me the Ring's Priceless but I believe it's been estimated at around 170 000 something like that you're on objection lack of foundation response Council your honor as Billy shared previously testified he's the owner of this property and a property owner has the right to testify towards something value towards something's value according to the mock trial rule book the objection is overruled next question moving on to your roommate Jordan Franks how would you describe your relationship we've never really been on great terms but it went pretty bad on June 9th why is that well after Macbeth at Sea ended on June 9th Frank's just blew up at me right after the curtain dropped blew up at you yes she started accusing me of changing lines to make her look back was there anyone around who witnessed this yes Cleo Schaefer saw it and other cast members how did you respond I was really shocked I didn't know what to do before I could really say anything or defend myself Shaffer stepped in and I took the opportunity to go back to my room to prepare for the wrap-up party that night was this the first time you'd experienced tension with Jordan Franks no as I said we've never really had the greatest relationship I'd always hear about about her talking behind my back about how I only got this role because of my relationships to the casting directors and then finally also comments about my ring and its worth and how I should never have gotten it after this encounter then what did you do I went to my room to prepare for the wrap-up party later that night when you got to your captain cabin then what did you do I took my ring off and put it in its ring box I set the ring box on the dresser next to my table next to my bed sorry did you go to the cast party I did who else is at the cast party Cleo Shaffer and some other cast members were you wearing your ring I was not was Jordan Franks at the cast party yes she was did you speak with Jordan Franks I did not how long were you at the cast party about three hours what time did you leave around 12 a.m did you go back to your cabin I did did anything happen when you got back to your cabin yes describe to the court whatever well when I got to my cabin and opened the door the first thing I noticed was the lights were off but I could still see thanks to the hallway lights as the door was open behind me I noticed Jordan Franks standing next to my bedside table she looked really startled to see me honor objection speculation you response uh it's in this the witness statement that uh Mr share noticed that um Jordan Franks was startled when uh he opened the door any final comment yes your honor just because the witness states that in his witness statement does not mean that it is not speculative as to what he observed I'll sustain the objection your honoring asset the answer is stricken that request is granted next question what else did you observe I observed that Jordan Franks had my ring box in his hand the ring box that normally held your William Shakespeare ring yes the honor objection leading overruled then what happened well I was so surprised I yelled I yelled at Jordan Franks give me back my ring objection hearsay your response um that's our Mr share is testifying to his own statement the objection is overruled next question uh then what happened then instead of putting the ring down or talking to me Jordan Franks started to approach me and started yelling how could you do this to me you don't deserve the role or the ring how are you feeling I was scared I didn't know what she was trying to do I didn't know if she was going to attack me or anything then what happened right as she got right in front of me she yelled at me get out of my way and then with all her might pushed me to the side what did you do after that I felt and hit my arm on the bed as I tried to get up I felt intense pain in my arm as I rolled over partly in shock I saw I saw Jordan Franks run out of our cabin having stolen my ring box then what happened I crawled over to the cabin phoned it down 9-1-1 to report the robbery what time was it when you called 9-1-1 about 12 30 A.M did you speak with any police that night yes I spoke to detective Mavis when she arrived with the paramedics did you get any medical attention for your arm yes I had broken my arm in two places the ulna and the radius has that injury affected your career in any way yes how well earlier on June 9th I had learned that I had gotten a role that I had wanted into Broadway play Jefferson Jefferson the musical because of this injury I lost that role can you tell the court who is your understudy for that part Jordan Franks so with Jordan Frank theft would have gotten the role yes is Jordan Franks in the courtroom today yes can you point her out please the lady in blue that is my roommate that is Jordan Franks your honor with the record reflect that the witness has identified the defendant so noted for the record thank you no further questions wrong cross-examination yes your honor you mean good afternoon Mr chair good afternoon I'd like to talk with you about June 9th 2022. okay after the form the final performance of Beth at C say that Miss Frank's accosted you she began to argue with me after this curtain dropped well after that you went back to your cabin right correct I went back to get ready for the wrap-up party at Schaefer was hosting you took off your ring I took off my ring you put it in your ring box that's right and you left that ring box on your dresser correct I put that on the dresser right next to my bedside table and like you said on direct examination there's a safe in your room correct you didn't put that ring box in your safe no I was in a rush to get to the wrap-up party so it's just more convenient for me I'd like to talk about the route that you took to get to that route party if you could please direct your attention to exhibit D in the finer in front of you please let me know when you get there I've got it this is a fair and accurate depiction of the heart of the ocean's layout as it was on June 9th I believe so yes recognize the layout of this ship yes yarn at this time the defense would like to move exhibit D into evidence any objection no objections exhibit D's admitted into evidence at this time step two that's correct the midnight Lounge is on Deck eight that's right so to get from deck two to deck eight you'd have to walk through deck seven that's correct the F7 is where the cast dressing room is that's right and to walk to the midnight Lounge you'd have to walk through deck eight I would have to I would have to cross through it yes objection relevance why is it relevant where Billy share has to walk speaking objections so just State the legal basis understood counsel and what's the legal basis again I don't why is it relevance relevance your response Council yes your honor to plant the ring and frame our client this goes to the heart of the defense's case to walk the midnight Lounge you have to go through deck eight that's correct deck eight is where the Blue Diamond Cafe is yes after the party you went back to a cabin right that's correct you got there at around 12 15. 12 30. no you say in your statement that you left the party at around midnight right that's right and it's stipulated too that it takes about 15 minutes to walk from deck eight to deck two do I have that right I believe so and as a witness testifying today it's your duty to be aware of all the relevant stipulations that's right so you got back to your cabin at 12 15 in the morning perhaps I might have I might be a little fuzzy on my memories oh sure an altercation between you and Miss Franks and Sue that's right that happened pretty fast didn't it you could say so yes Mr chair you didn't call 9-1-1 until 12 30. correct thank you your honor I have nothing for prosecution like to redirect no your honor may this witness be excused Council May the witness be excused your honor this is not my witness and nobody crosses away okay so yes is the answer this gentleman may be excused so thank you for your testimony you are excused the people's next Witness received the witness then often face me raise your right hand if you solemnly affirm testimony you are about to give will faithfully and truthfully conform to the facts and rules of the Mock Trial Competition you may be seated please State your full name spelling your last for the record Cleo Schaefer s-h-a-f-f-e-r made procedure honor you may good evening Miss Schaefer may please state your name to the court good evening I'm Cleo Schaefer now what do you do for a living I'm retired being that I'm in my 70s and where do you live part of the ocean and are you aware of your best at Sea yes I'm a benefactor of it you said benefactor yes now as a benefactor are you aware of any of the cast and crew above the production uh yes Billy share and how do you know Billy share specifically um I went to school with Billy shares grandmother and so we're close family friends I regard them I see them as like a child of mine child yours yes now am I to understand that you gave Billy share a Signet ring that is cracked in April and why did you do so well I believe that they deserved it it's a Priceless ring in a family heirloom and I have no errors of my own Priceless you say yes why is it Priceless well I wouldn't sell it to anyone for any amount of money it's a family heirloom now moving on our as a benefactor are you aware of any relationships held above um Macbeth at C yes I am and there seemed to be some hostile Dynamics hostile Dynamics between who uh between uh Billy share and Jordan Franks in particular and why do you say so well on several occasions I would hear Jordan Franks mention how he believes uh Billy share gets special treatment and that they don't deserve the roller of the Ring they don't deserve the role of the Ring no now moving on you threw a cast party on June 9th for the closing of the play isn't that true yes that's correct and did all the cast attend uh yes they did so Jordan Franks was there yes objection leading overruled now at the party did you hear any state or did you notice anything at the cast party uh well I saw Jordan Franks and uh Carter lucky speaking and did you hear their conversation well I heard Jordan Franks mention how uh he hopes that Billy share would break his leg because then someone competent could take his place they said that yes they did now um what time did you leave the party around 10 45 and why did you do so uh well I was feeling a little tired and after you left where did you go I went to my room for a little bit and then I decided I wanted a little snack from the Blue Diamond Cafe and at the Blue Diamond Cafe did you notice anything significant uh yes I saw Jordan Franks throw something away in the trash throw something away in the trash that's correct now did you notice notice anything after that I saw Jordan Franks and Carter lucky speaking I wanted the tables and did you interact with them at all no they seem to be having a deep conversation thank you no further questions cross-examination yes your honor good afternoon Miss Schaefer good afternoon you just testified on direct examination to hearing Miss Frank say you don't deserve the roll or the ring do I have that right um well yes you didn't mention that anywhere in your witness statement I recall mentioning them say that they believed that Jordan Frank sorry that Billy Cher didn't deserve it Miss Schaefer you didn't mention that anywhere in your witness statement well I apologize if I didn't but I believe that I did mention that the Schaefer is that yes to my question um I suppose now I'd like to talk about your relationship with Billy share the two of you are quite close uh yes I as I said in my direct I see um Billy shares like a son of mine you also know someone named Jordan Franks that is correct I do you're quite close or you don't like Miss Frank's do you um oh I don't have any strong uh bad feelings towards them you think that Miss Franks is jealous of Mr chair well I mean jealousy is quite common and they did mention once that they believed that Cher Got special treatments I'm not asking about that you think that Miss Franks is jealous of Mr Cher well I suppose yes you testified under examination to hearing a statement about breaking the leg do I have that right yeah so then someone competent could take the place their place you overheard this conversation Miss Schaefer uh my cast party yes I did you weren't a part of it well no but I could hear them I was close by you didn't ask Miss Franks what she meant by it well I didn't feel there was a need to is that a yes to my question why not yes I didn't ask them about it afterward you went back to your cabin that is correct now you also testified to seeing miss Frank threw something away at the Blue Diamond Cafe do I have that right oh yes that's correct I'd like to turn your attention to what's been marked for identification as Exhibit C in the binder in front of you oh yes you recognize this uh yes that's the ring box this is the ring box that was in your family for Generations oh yes it was a family heirloom as I mentioned you'd recognize this ring box if you saw it uh yes I said yes I would you can't tell the court this is what you saw Miss Franks throwing out that night I didn't look at the top I didn't like look inside the trash can so I'm not sure what they threw out is that a yes to my question um yes I don't know what they threw out thank you Miss Schaefer your honor I have nothing further at this time any redirect examination yes your honor just to clarify in your weight witness statement Ms Shafer you did say that you heard Jordan Franks saying that Billy said didn't deserve the lead role or the ring isn't that true yes that is true thank you no further questions all right so at this time you're requesting to have this witness excuse is that correct yes your honor all right thank you for your testimony you are excused and the people's next witness your honor prior to the people calling their next witness the defense would like to request a time check on behalf of both parties prosecution has 5 as funded the defense has four minutes and 16 seconds left on Cross thank you any other request Council no weather requests from defense counsel no other requests your honor all right please call your next Witness calling re couch to the stand raise your right hand do you solemnly affirm that the testimony you're about to give will faithfully and truthfully conform to the facts and rules of the Mock Trial Competition I do you may be seated please State your full name spelling your last the record all right coach k-o-u-c-h ome may I proceed you may what is your name Ari Kosh and what is your occupation I'm a certified jury appraiser What entity certifies you I'm certified by both the American and French Association could you summarize your educational background sure I majored in archeology at the Oxford University I then completed The Graduate gemologist program at the at the gemological Institute of America and as a graduate student did you specialize in any specific area yes I focus on the 15th and 16th century jury Miss couch are you prepared to testify today about your opinions regarding the authenticity of a Signet ring owned by Billy share yes I am please tell the court your opinion the second ring owned by Billy share was once owned by William Shakespeare in the late 1500s what is your opinion based upon well I first reviewed the supporting paper provided by Cleo Schaefer second there's a strong historical evidence that that I am familiar with let's examine that historical evidence could you list that evidence for the court please sure first I'm a familiar with William Shakespeare's last will and testament in which he left the Signet ring to a distant relative of Cleo Schaefer second the ring was examined by the Royal Academy of Arts in 7080 and was certified to have belonged to Shakespeare third the ring Bears initial ws and as an archaeologist I can say that the ring has a distinct Elizabethan style a fourth the ring size and style are consistent with the Elizabethan era fifth the ring has been displayed at the Royal Academy of Art for over a hundred years long and finally the ring was shown in a large portrait of William Shakespeare from the early 1600s and now hangs out the Shakespeare birthplace for us now did this ring disappear for a period of time yes and it was rediscovered in 1780. did you take that into account reforming your opinion yes and it doesn't change my opinion when the ring was rediscovered it was discovered at a place that was frequently visited by Shakespeare showing what you had been marked as exhibit B do you recognize this yes this is the Signet ring that was asked to appraise and it is your opinion that this ring was once owned by the William Shakespeare yes one last question Miss couch what is your opinion on the value of this ring well this ring weighs 14 grams and is made of gold given the historical connection with William Shakespeare I praise the ring at being Wars 170 000 dollars thank you no further questions your honor cross-examination yes your honor Verona May proceed you may good afternoon Miss couch good afternoon I'd like to talk a little bit about the Providence papers that you examined how like you said on direct examination there's a gap in documentation as the location of Shakespeare's ring yes and just as I mentioned in the direct it was found at a place that was frequently visited by Shakespeare and I do assume that The Disappearance of the Signet ring does not affect its own value and who it was once owned I'm not asking you about that okay the ring disappeared in the late 1500s yes and unlike what you said on direct examination it was rediscovered in 1769 yes at the um Stratford I want to be clear on direct examination who said that the ring was in the possession of a distant relative of Cleo Schaefer yes you said that John Hemmings and William shaper were related well they were distant relatives but you provide no evidence as to how you came to that conclusion well I believe that was their own family business but even if they weren't I assume it doesn't change the value of the rain this couch I'm not asking you about that you have no evidence that John Hemmings and William Shaffer were related yes I mean I don't you don't mention that evidence anywhere in your report yes you do mention evidence of that in your report oh no I just don't found how that is relevant I'm not asking if you find it relevant you have no direct evidence that the person who received William Shakespeare's ring is related to Cleo Schaefer no thank you Miss couch your honor of nothing redirect examination know your honor may this witness be excuse yes thank you for your testimony you are now excused and the people's next Witness the people called Dylan Mavis to the stand Dylan Mavis who's proceeded the witness stand please stop and faced me raise your right hand do you solemnly affirm that the testimony you're about to give will faithfully and truthfully conform to the facts and rules of the Mock Trial Competition you may be seated he State your full name spelling your last for the record so Mavis m-a-v-i-s M receiver you may good evening Miss Mavis may you please address yourself to the court I'm Dylan Mavis so lead detective at the Portsmouth Police Department and were you working on the early morning hours of June 10th I was where were you I was not the heart of the ocean and at what time did you arrive on the ship around 1am now what did you first do when you arrived I spoke with Billy share and were you two alone no the paramedics were there as well and why were the paramedics there Cher had injured his arm in an altercation and how did Billy share scene to You Cher was in a substantial amount of pain but also aggravated and upset and you were able to communicate with them correct yes what did they tell you they told me about the altercation between them and their roommate Franks did they say anything else they said they walked into their room around midnight and saw Frank's holding their ring box they thought the ring was in it and asked for it back objection hearsay your honor This falls under an extended utterance Dylan Mavis just testified to the fact that an altercation ensued and the fact that Billy share had suffered a significant injury any final comment defense counsel okay yes your honor of the excited excited utterance exception per page 73 line 23 reads a statement that describes or explains an event perceived by the declaren Billy share explaining what had just happened doesn't describe or explain an event perceived by the declarant made during or shortly after starting event while the client is still under the stress of excitement caused by that event all over all the objection moving on after you spoke with Billy share who did you speak to next Carter lucky and Cleo Schaefer now did you ever make contact with Jordan Franks that evening yes I did what did you find out the blue diamond Cafe and before approaching Jim Franks did he observe anything significant well I scanned the room for evidence and I found a black velvet ring box inside a trash can and did you collect it as evidence yes I did showing you it has been marked as Exhibit C do you recognize this yes what is it it is the Black Velvet ring two minutes and is this a fair and accurate description of what you found yes all right moving on did you interact with John Franks yes I introduced myself to him and did you guys speak yes what did John Franks tell you Frank's told me that they did not know anything about the the ring box and did Jordan French speak with you about the altercation that had ensued yes they told me a different side of the story now moving on did you apologies after you converse with Franks did you conduct a search yes I asked Franks to search their cabin and did they comply yes but they did not let me search a safe did they eventually comply yes and what did you find inside I found some medical documents that I set aside and then I also found a piece of paper a piece of paper you say yes on the piece of paper there was a phone number um some information about a Signet ring and dollar bills signs pointing to what has been marked as exhibit a do you recognize that yes this is the piece of paper and is it a fair and accurate description of what you found in this safe yes now did you ever find the missing ring yes I found it inside Frank's costume coat pocket their costume objection like a foundation your response your honor the detective testified to conducting a search and I'm asking whether or not they found the ring because that is what has that has what that is the object of interest of both parties maybe heard your honor you may I'm not objecting to the relevance of it just the lack of foundation as to this being Miss Frank's costume opposing castles like no Foundation as to that melee Foundation your honor the objection is sustained next question a move to strike that request is granted moving on did you speak to anyone else that night Mr Weintraub John Franks yes I showed it to Jordan Franks and they recognized thank you no further questions cross-examination yes your honor May proceed your honor you may good afternoon detectives I'd like to walk through your investigation when you first arrived on board you spoke with Mr Billy share yes Billy share gave you his version of events yes from that point on Miss Franks was your primary suspect I took both versions of events and yes that led me to think that Franks was the primary suspect you eventually yes at the Blue Diamond Cafe as you testify yes now while they are you discovered a black ring box I did in the trash can near Frank's this was sitting on top of the trash yes this was out in the open sure you asked Miss Frank about the spring box on direct examination Interruption is that a yes or a no yes I apologize on direct examination you testify that Miss Franks didn't know anything about spring box do I have that right Frank's recognized the ring box as Cher's ring box right Miss Frank's toy told you it was Mr Cher's ring box yes afterward you asked to go back to miss Francis cabin yes she complied yes however she was hesitant about the safe I'm not asking about that detective she complied to go back to the cabin yes and while there she let you search her cabin yes but the safe detective I'm not asking about that okay did you let you search for cabin yes now during the course of your investigation she told you that she had been grabbing her cell phone during the altercation with Mr chair do I have that right I did not testify to that but yes detective Miss Franks told you that she had been grabbing her cell phone do I have that right that's yes Miss Franks owns a cell phone sure yes most people do detective Miss Franks owns a sell-off yes I said yes I'd like to talk with you about the timeline of your investigation there was some urgency to it not necessarily I waited I told the ship to not leave the port but I'm sure that could be seen as some time constraint but not really detected seven hours after arriving on board you arrested Miss Franks well the totality of the evidence pointed to transaction non-responsive that's sustained please answer the question okay detective seven hours after arriving on board you arrested thank you any redirect examination yes your honor after presenting the ring to Jordan Franks what did Jordan Franks say objection outside the scope of cross-examination which on your honor thank you enough for the questions all right thank you for your testimony you are excused any additional Witnesses on behalf of the prosecution Runner a time though any objection none to a your honor all right so exhibit a is admitted into evidence at this time yes and at this point the prosecution rests all right is the defense ready to proceed with their case yes your honor the defense calls Jade Marquez Jade Marquez please stop and face me raise your right hand do you solemnly affirm that the testimony you're about to give will faithfully and truthfully conform to the facts and rules of the Mock Trial Competition I do you may be seated please State your full name spelling your last for the record Jade Marquez m-a-r-q-u-e-z you want to May proceed you may good afternoon Miss Marquez good afternoon what do you do for a living I own a jewelry appraisal firm an auction house I specialize in appraising jewelry for more high-end clients how are you qualified for that line of work I have over 40 years of experience in the jewelry industry I was a leading expert in historical appraisals at mcduff's a prestigious auction house where I served as their senior vice president I've also worked with several museums auction houses and private collectors through my own independent firm Miss Marquez what is a jewelry appraisal it's how we determine the value of a piece of jewelry how do you go about doing that I examine the piece test its composition and review any of its supporting documents in an effort to determine the item's provenance all of which is within industry standards Miss Marquez what is Providence it's a way to determine if an item is what it is purported to be by attempting to trace its ownership from the present back to its claims origin did you perform a jewelry appraisal for today's case I did I was retained by the defense to examine Mr Cher's ring and its supporting papers specifically to determine whether or not it belonged to William Shakespeare your honor pursuant to stipulation for the parties have agreed that Miss Marquez is a qualified expert in antique jewelry appraisals so noted for the record Miss Marquez if you could please turn to exhibit B in the binder in front of you do you recognize this I do it's a photo of the Ring I examined what did you find upon your examination of this piece I found that this ring is 14 grams of gold and could have dated back to the Elizabethan era earlier you mentioned provenance were you able to establish provenance for this piece no I was not why is that I found no concrete evidence directly linking this ring back to William Shakespeare what do you mean by concrete evidence specific well there is paperwork suggesting that this ring may have belonged to Shakespeare both sources of that paperwork recognize that it is of doubtful authenticity are you familiar with re Couch's report I am do you agree with his conclusion I read Miss Couch's report but I don't agree with her analysis of the Rings history why is that well the chain of custody she references includes over a century long Gap where the whereabouts of an original ring are unknown based on your examination of the ring and your analysis of the evidence were you able to determine this Ring's provenance and value this ring cannot conclusively be linked to William Shakespeare and as such is worth around 770 dollars thank you Miss Marquez your honor at this time I have nothing further cross-examination yes Yoder may I proceed you may the defendant hired you to testify in this case is that correct I was retained by the defense in your statement you note that the Signet ring made it back to the 15th or 16th century yes it is of Elizabeth now this would be around The Shakespearean era right I believe Shakespeare lived during that and you're saying and you also note that the W and S markings are consistent with the Shakespearean era right again it is of Elizabethan Style yet you also go on to state that the ring could have been created long after Shakespeare died right yes it counterfeit or a forgery but you also go on a state that the ring could have been owned by say a WS or William Smith during Shakespeare's life yes my point was that there are many possibilities of where this ring could have came from so let me see if I can get this straight this ring Bears markings WS similar in style to The Shakespearean era right the Elizabethan era yes and this Ring's overall appearance is also consistent without Shakespeare of the Elizabethan era yeah in your words there is no evidence for this report to conclude that the ring once belonged to William Shakespeare no conclusive evidence thank you any redirect examination yes your honor Miss Marquez is a similar style to Elizabeth in pieces indicative of the fact that this ring belonged to William Shakespeare not at all as I said this ring could have belonged to someone else during that time period or it could have been a counterfeit created much later thank you Miss Marquez your honor I have no further questions may this witness please be excused yes you may thank you for your testimony you were excused your honor trying to prior to calling our next witness the defense would like to request a time check on behalf of both parties that request is granted uh the prosecution has eight minutes and 39 seconds on cross and the defense has nine minutes and 53 seconds on Direct thank you Mr Clark all right please call your next witness counsel yes your honor the defense calls Ezra Weintraub to the witness stand Le a firm with a testimony you're about to give will faithfully and truthfully conform to the facts and rules of the Mock Trial Competition I do you may be seated please State your full name spelling your loss for the record Ezra Ezra Weintraub w-e-i-n-t-r-a-u-b you may appreciate your honor you may good afternoon Miss Weintraub good afternoon what do you do for a living I'm head of security on board the Heart of the Ocean Cruise Ship what is your job entail as head of security it's pretty standard I monitor our security cameras guest Wi-Fi and key card usage now Ms Weintraub are cell phones permitted on board the Heart of the Ocean yes ma'am cell phones are permitted now were you working on the night of June 9th 2022 I was I was working the later shift 7 P.M to 7 A.M did you have any contact with the Portsmouth Police that night I was contact contacted by a detective Dylan Mavis did detective Mavis request video footage from you that night she did she requested footage from between the hours of 11 pm June 9th to 3 A.M on June 10th were you able to provide her with that footage Miss Weintraub no why not simply ma'am because she asked too late what do you mean by too late well although our cameras run 24 7 all day every day footage isn't requested by 3am it's deleted now miss Weintraub you mentioned that you wanted her security cameras do you monitor a camera outside of a cast dressing room on board I do there is a camera positioned in the hallway outside did you see anyone enter on the night of June 9th well yes it was the end of the production I saw several cast members come and go do you know a billy share Miss Weintraub actually I do I was able to catch a performance of Macbeth at C right before it closed can you tell the court whether you saw Billy share enter that night I monitor 18 different security cameras simultaneously I truly couldn't give you a yes or no to that question not miss Weintraub I'd like to talk with you about the layout of the Heart of the Ocean are you familiar with it yes I'd say so based on your experience working on board can someone go from Billy sharer's cabin to the midnight Lounge without passing through deck seven no ma'am that's physically impossible can someone go from Billy shares cabin to the midnight Lounge without passing by The Blue Diamond Cafe no thank you Miss Weintraub your honor I have nothing further at this time cross-examination yes Charlotte may I proceed you may now miss Juan chop you said that you were called watching a performance just a few nights before June 9th I was able to take in early June now you said you know the cast members quite well and you're witnessing it isn't that right I'd say so I've been working on board for eight years now and you said that there was a camera position outside the cross dressing room exactly yeah in your witness statement you said that you weren't able to recall Billy share entering the dressing room isn't that right exactly I couldn't be sure if I saw him or not now you were able to recognize other cast members entering the dressing room that night isn't that true I recall seeing Carter lucky and Jordan Franks but nobody else in specifics and you saw them entering the dressing room separately after the performance had ended isn't that right yes so to be clear after the performance ended you saw Jordan Franks entering the dressing room alone as I said I saw Jordan enter along with several other cast members but they entered alone isn't that right yes thank you no further questions any redirect examination no reader of your honor made a sweetness please be excused yes thank you for your testimony you are excused next witness for the defense prior to proceeding the defense requested time check on behalf of both parties their request is granted the defense has seven minutes and 21 seconds on direct and prosecution has uh seven minutes and 36 seconds on across thank you it's time the defense calls please stop face me and raise you right now do you solemnly affirm that the testimony you're about to give is faithfully and truthfully conformed to the facts and rules of the Mock Trial Competition I do you may be seated please State your full name spelling your last for the record Carter lucky Lucky's l-u-c-k-y good afternoon Mr Lucky good afternoon what do you do for a living I'm an actor or at least I'm trying to be I recently got my first role in Macbeth at sea how long were you with Macbeth at sea I'd say about six months do you know someone named Jordan Franks yeah absolutely how do you know Miss Franks well we started off as crewmates but now we're close friends we talk all the time would you say you know her well certainly um I'd even consider her my mentor she really took me under her Wing when I first got here are you aware of the fact that Miss Frank's has been charged with robbery I am yes is that consistent with the Jordan you know no absolutely not are you aware of the fact that Miss Franks has been charged with battery yes I am is that the Jordan you know no that's not Jordan do you know a billy share Mr Lucky yes I do how do you know Mr chair well he was another member of the cast on Macbeth itsy based on that experience do you have an opinion as to whether Mr share is trustworthy I do addiction yarn or speculation your response Council your honor this is permissible character evidence under rule eight any final comment no your honor was gone the objection is overrule you may answer could you please re-esque the question of course Mr Lucky based on your experience with Mr share do you have an opinion as to whether he's trustworthy he's not he's manipulative now did you see Miss Franks and Mr share interact on the night of June 9th I did I was coming back from the wrap party when I heard some shouting which I thought was coming from their room what did you do when you heard this shouting well the door is open so I went to take a look Mr luck it's the prosecution's contention that Miss Frank's pushed Mr share to the ground is that what you saw no if anything Billy's the one who ran into Jordan thank you Mr Lucky your honor I have nothing further at this time cross-examination may I proceed your honor you may you consider Jordan Franks as a mentor isn't that right absolutely now you attended the cast party isn't that true yes it was great and you were conversing with Jordan Franks um along with other cast members now didn't John Franks say something along the lines of that they hope Billy show would break a leg she said something like that yeah now moving on Joy Frank's left a while before you did isn't that right that's right yes and you left around midnight that's right and after leaving you headed towards Billy Sharon Jordan Frank's cabin room isn't that true I realized I hadn't seen Jordan so I went to go find her and down the hall you testified to hearing shouting yes and the cabin was dark isn't that right that's right so to be clear you couldn't see exactly what was happening in the cabin room billing the hallway helped me get a good idea now after you heard an altercation ensue isn't that right yes that's right and you heard Billy share fall to the floors and that right oh I saw it yes and in fact Billy's Cher cried out in pain isn't that right yes and you just stood in the doorway isn't that true objection relevance what's the relevance your honor um Carl lucky has witnessed the fact that an altercation has ensued and the fact that they just stood in the hallway um goes to show it goes to show the fact that they witnessed the event that occurred without interacting with the two of them maybe heard your honor the final comment the fact that Mr Lucky didn't stop to help Miss Frank or Mr share when he saw him fall has no relevance in today's case objection is sustained moving on after the altercation of ensued you converse with Jordan Franks isn't that right yeah I told her I'd meet her at the Blue Diamond Cafe and you said that you would meet her 50 th crew the cast and crew member floor to the Blue Diamond Cafe in just 15 minutes that's right yes yet you met it's later objection relevance your honor this goes to show the time frame of what had occurred right after the altercation had ensued final comment you are the fact that it took Mr Lucky 30 minutes to meet uh Miss Franks as opposed to 15 has no relevance on the facts of today's case I respectfully disagree so with respect to that objection that's overruled moving on you met 30 minutes later isn't that right yes we did and you conversed in the blue diamond Cafe that's right thank you no further questions any redirect examination yes yes what does that mean in theater speak it's just our way of saying good luck to each other thank you Mr Lucky you're on arm nothing further at this time may this witness please be excused yes thank you for your testimony you are excused any additional Witnesses yes your honor the defense calls Jordan Franks can stop and face me and raise your right hand do you solemnly a verb when the testimony you're about to give will faithfully and truthfully conform to the facts and rules of the Mock Trial Competition I did you may be seated please State your full name spelling your last for the record my name is Jordan Franks f-r-a-n-k-s your honor May proceed you may good afternoon Miss Franks good afternoon ma'am what do you do for a living I'm a professional actress most recently I starred in Macbeth at Sea on board the Heart of the Ocean Cruise Ship how long were you on board the Heart of the Ocean I was there for about four years we closed on June 9th of 2022. do you know someone named Billy share I do Billy was a cast mate of mine and he was also my roommate how would you describe your relationship with Mr share I respect Billy as an actor but we didn't really get along too well Miss Franks I'd like to talk about June 9th 2022 did you attend a cast rap party that night I did I was there for a few hours but I left around 11. did you go anywhere else that night uh about an hour later I decided to go get a snack from the Blue Diamond Cafe did you hear Mr share testify today about an encounter that happened between the two of you in your cabin at around midnight yes I was but that's not what happened could you please tell the court your recollection of the events yes it was around midnight that I decided to go to the Blue Diamond Cafe I was grabbing my phone off the dresser when Billy burst into the room it seemed like he was taunting me about what about the fact that he had the lead in Jefferson the musical and I didn't did you respond I did uh Part of Me no I just wanted to get out of there you we heard Mr chair testified today that you said you don't deserve the role or the ring Miss Franks did you say that no he's lying did you intend to bump into Billy share no of course not Miss Franks did you go anywhere after this encounter yes after we collided I continued with my plan to go to the Blue Diamond Cafe did you see detective Dylan Mavis when you were there I did she came up to me and asked if I recognized a box that she had found in the trash can did you recognize it I did it was Billy's Signet ring box and that's exactly what I told the detective Miss Franks did you put that ring box in the trash no I don't even remember seeing the ring box or the ring that night before the detective showed it to me what happened after you and the detective spoke she escorted me back to my room and she asked if she could search it did you let her I did what happened after the detective searched your room she asked me to stay put she said she had to complete her investigation on the rest of the ship did you stay put yes I hadn't done anything wrong Miss Franks I want to be clear did you steal Billy shares ring two minutes no I'm being framed thank you Miss Franks your honor I have nothing further at this time cross-examination yes the prosecution calls for a time check the prosecution has five minutes and 54 seconds left on for us your honor I'd like to request a time check for closing arguments on behalf of both parties uh precluding arguments the prosecution has exactly six minutes and the defense has five minutes and 19 seconds you're an actor correct yes I'm a professional actress you're also a big fan of William Shakespeare yes I am an avid fan a self-proclaimed huge William Shakespeare fan yes sir you've starred in numerous Shakespearean plays right yes some Off-Broadway some um on Heart of the Ocean as well so you start writing Macbeth on part of the ocean right yes that's correct now Billy share with your roommate aboard this ship yes for three years and you shared a cabin together we did and it was a quite small cabin yes it was pretty small and like you said for three years yes sir so you share the same 150 square foot room and performed together four nights a week for three years yes that's correct sir now Cher's grandmother worked aboard this ship right uh I think she helped write the play but the her grandmother didn't work on the ship she worked as a casting director yes she did but she wasn't on the ship Sir you thought Sherry got special treatment I felt like she did sometimes or he did sometimes just because of his family connections moving on to your love of Shakespeare you're a Bard leader right yes I am a fan of Shakespeare sir you once said that so few things belonging to William Shakespeare are still around yes it's true there are rarely found artifacts of William Shakespeare that are really his and then in April 2022 Cher was gifted a ring right yes from Cleo Schaefer a ring with the initials w s on it yes that's correct a ring in which he claimed once belonged to the William Shakespeare yes but I wasn't really sure if that was true share where the swing a lot right uh during every performance of Macbeth at Sea and he would keep this ring in a black velvet ring box correct yes that's correct a ring box which he would keep in your cabin at night uh yes you once said that something with WS initials on it could cause quite a stir at an auction if it was real it could really cause a stir yes sir moving on oh excuse me to be clear those were your words though uh yes sir moving on to June 9th that morning you were cast in Jefferson the musical right yes I was cast as the understudy it's a very good opportunity to be on Broadway at all and this would commence performances June 20th in New York City right yes that's correct and this was a dream role for you yes being on Broadway is an amazing opportunity for any s out there and like you said you were cast in the lead role but as an understudy right yes sir Cher Got the lead rule yes that's correct Cher always gets what share wants yeah it sure did feel like that sometimes Cher stole my dream role you said that I did say that but I've realized that having any role on Broadway is a great opportunity moving on to later that night you got upset with Cher during the final showing of Macbeth right yes I did he mixed up some lines and I felt really embarrassed in front of the whole audience embarrassed enough to make you angry right yes that's exactly why I confronted him about it after the show later that night you went to the cast party right I did yes and you left around 11 yes you went back to your cabin I did I went back to my cabin for about an hour and then I decided to go to the Blue Diamond Cafe and you were in the cabin for an hour by yourself yes that's correct and then like you said you decided you need to go to the Blue Diamond Cafe yes I wanted a snack you wouldn't have to turn off the light uh yes the light was off when I was planning on leaving and at this moment Cher enters the room right yes Billy burst in and started taunting me so share with yelling at me right yes that's it yes and you were yelling back no no Cher was blocking the door correct uh well he entered where the door was yes and you still needed to get out of the room I wanted to get out of that situation yes so you accidentally you touch share on your way out of the room right we sort of collided as I was trying to leave and he fell to be clear there was physical contact on your way out of the room yes but I didn't mean to hit Billy at all I just wanted to leave Cher was the one who fell to the ground right you were left standing yes that's correct and then Cher when he when he fell he started crying out right uh I think he yelled or screamed yes so we can agree he was crying out in pain right your honor objection speculation response Council you're out of the Jordan Franks clearly saw as she testified Frank's fall and hit his arm and he she admit she was yelling in um in some form of emotion and it's a reasonable uh interpretation to believe that she could have known that was pain final comment yes your honor an interpretation it clearly means that this is speculation opposing counsel is asking my witness to speculate as to why Billy share was screaming the objection is overruled crying out in pain right well at the time I didn't know Billy had been hurt or broke his arm so I wasn't sure I just thought he was being dramatic and you left one minute uh yes because I didn't know he broke his arm showing you it has been marked as or let's exhibit a please um that was found in your safe correct yes and you took the time and effort to research what Billy share's ring could be worth well I am a fan of Shakespeare as we already is objection not responsive I asked the witness um I I didn't I asked the witness whether she took the time to research what the ring was worth the objection is sustained please answer the question can I moved to strike from the record that's granted would you like me to repeat the question yes please you took the time and effort to research what Billy shares ring could be worth yes I was curious if it was real or not I'm a fan of Shakespeare you got an appraisal on your own roommate's property no I just wrote down the number you also wrote the words Shakespeare's heirloom uh yes I did but as you can see the objection not responsive that request is respectfully denied why don't we allow the witness to answer the question go ahead uh well I was just saying I wrote question marks all over this paper I wasn't sure if any of it was true or not later in Texas made us value the Ship's Cafe is that right uh yes I was sitting there when the detective approached me she showed you a black velvet ring box yes she said she found it in the trash can and she asked if I recognized it and this ring box was found in extremely close process thank you any redirect examination yes your honored Miss Franks could you please direct your attention to exhibit a why did you write this note well I'm a really big fan of Shakespeare and I wanted to know if this ring that Billy was showing off in front of us was fake or not were you sure that this ring was authentically Shakespeare's of course not I had no idea if it was real or fake also heard that when Mr share fell you didn't stop to help Ms Franks why is that well I didn't know that he was hurt especially not that he had broken an arm thank you Miss Franks your honor I have nothing further may this witness please be excused she may step down from the witness stand and return over to council table any additional Witnesses from the defense know your honor at this time the defense rest all right at this time prosecution would you like to give your closing arguments yes your honor may I proceed you may no one on that ship had the unique combination of motive knowledge and opportunity like Jordan Craig's had on June 9th after leaving that cash party and heading back to her cabin the ensuing string of culpable actions as she swiftly attempts to conceal her crime are more than just evidence of Jordan Franks and while they leave the case bound to the theory that Billy share did the defense has promptly chosen to ride off Jordan France's bumblingly obvious missteps as pure coincidence your honor first to establish why Jordan Franks is guilty far beyond any other reasonable conclusion let's examine the motive no one is disputing that Frank's had a long-standing jealousy and hatred of Cher he was a more successful actor he stole Frank's dream role and he owned a Signet ring that Jordan Franks was absolutely obsessive so infatuated with that she spent loads of time researching it hiding the guilt in her safe the defense would like you to believe this to be a coincidence like everything else in their case your honor let's not even pretend that Jordan Franks didn't have the motive to steal that ring because it wasn't the motive that finally made her take it with the opportunity we know that Billy share always kept that ring in his ring box locked away in a safe every night perhaps this is why Jordan Franks put such an interest in finding out if that ring was truly once indeed owned by William Shakespeare she wanted to see if that ring was truly as valuable as Cher claimed it to be and then she got her answer Shakespeare's heirloom so just imagine Jordan Franks a surprise after a long and contentious day with Cher when she walks back into her cabin only to find that very ring box sitting on the nightstand free from the taking at this moment the opportunity was laid at her feet after all this was the very ring owned by the man she hated the very ring she has spent loads of time researching The Very ring she booked to have once been owned by the William Shakespeare so of course in this instance Jordan Franks decides to commit her first crime grand theft she moves to take the ring but at this very moment the stakes drastically elevated as Billy share enters the room this was no longer just a simple theft Cher was now present in the room this had become a robbery and Jordan Franks was caught red-handed she now had a choice for me she can put the ring box back down on the table and play it off or she can take the ring the innocent caricature the defense wants you to believe Jordan Franks to be certainly would have left the ring box on the table but no In This Moment Franks doubles down yelling how could you do this to me you don't deserve the rule or the ring get out of my way Frank's Russia's chair intentionally shoving him to the side breaking Cher's arm watching as he falls and hits the knife thing she then rushes out into the hallway ring box in hand Jordan franks's wish that Cher would break the bone so she could acquire her dream role in Jefferson the musical had come through and I asked the defense is this a coincidence as well because Frank's didn't even look back after hearing her own roommate cry out in pain she was all in she had elevated her crime to battery but soon after Frank's became desperate she is now in possession of the Ring box and she needs to hide it but she isn't willing to get rid of it entirely no eventually we have just thrown it off into the ocean no Franks wants to take the ring to take it to New York City where she will become the star in Jefferson the musical everything was going perfect she rushes over to the cast dressing room where she hides the ring unknowingly being spotted by Weintraub she then rushes over to the Blue Diamond Cafe where to hide the ring box where she spotted by Cleo Schaefer maybe with Jordan Franks thought was the perfect crime had completely Fallen Apart Her opportunity while ideal in the moment had deceived her there's a house of cards detective Mavis arrest her not long after for the obvious crime that has been committed Frank's then suddenly decides to change her opinion regarding the value of the Ring hiring Mr Miss Marquez to testify against its authenticity but miss Marquez has failed pranks entirely because all of her theories contradict each other she says the ring was probably a counterfeit that was created long after Shakespeare died but if not it was probably owned by William Smith during Shakespeare's life but if not you see where I'm going with this you get the picture she's talking out of both sides of her mouth in fact all the witnesses and Francis favor are equally incoherent Carter lucky isn't just bias she's completely manipulated Frank's is her Mentor Frank's told her endlessly about the ring and the crazy amount of money it was worth and now miss lucky wants to call the ring fake maybe he'll trick us next time and then there's wine shop the security guard who has worked aboard the heart of the ocean for eight years the security guard who personally knew Jordan Franks watching him perform a few nights earlier the security guard who saw Jordan Franks confidently stroll right on into the dressing room where the ring would later be found but of course wine shop just couldn't know what he was seeing according to the defense this is another instance of obvious guilt the defense is attempting to mask as a coincidence but we don't buy your honor Jordan franks's guilt has become apparent they really think Billy Sheer did it that is their Theory the person who got the role over Jordan Franks he would steal his own ring to frame her it just doesn't make any sense they're perpetuating more coincidence is in their Theory they're throwing spaghetti out the wall and seeing if it will stay but if we take a closer look we realize nothing of what they have said is of any substance Billy share could not have committed that kind no one but Jordan Franks had the same motive opportunity and knowledge because of this I ask that this court find Jordan Franks you'll see a grand theft robbery and battery thank you thank you Council defense would you like to give your closing argument yes your honor I'll be referring to exhibit D during my argument do you have a copy of the exhibit available to you I do thank you may it please the court I was framed that's what Miss Franks told you today your honor that's not just what she told the court that's what she told detective Mavis at the start of her investigation Billy share had left a breadcrumb trail of a staged crime for detective Mavis to follow and the detective took the bait never once considering that Miss Franks might have been telling the truth your honor the prosecution just told you that only miss Franks had the specific motive knowledge and opportunity to commit this crime we know that's not true because we learned today that Billy share had the means the motive and the opportunity to Stage this crime and frame this Franks so let's walk through what happened on the night of June 9th an altercation ensues backstage after the final performance of Macbeth at sea after which Mr share returns to his Cali while there he tells you that he takes off his ring but your honor we know that's not true Ms Franks told you today she didn't see the ring box when she returned to the cabin later that evening so we know that Billy share had to take it with him so let's go through his route as your wine drop told you today it's impossible for someone to walk from deck to or the cabinets to deck eight without walking through deck seven so Billy share walks through deck seven and in doing so goes through the cast dressing room where he puts the ring in there then he walks through the Blue Diamond Cafe on his way to the midnight Lounge throws away the ring box in the trash your honor Billy shares root includes everywhere that evidence was recovered and your honor later that night Billy share returned to his cabin expecting to Simply falsely accuse Miss Franks of stealing his ring but when Miss Franks tried to leave Billy share moved and blocked the exit and the two collided there was no battery but why did he take 15 minutes to call 9-1-1 your honor he had to come up with a story to tell the police and as for motive your honor you heard over and over today of the rocky relationship between Miss Franks and Mr share the prosecution would like you to believe that this relationship only exists in Miss Frank's mind but your honor a relationship is a two-way street so we know that when Mr share got the call on the morning of June 9th telling him that Ms Franks would be following him to New York City he reached his limit he had to do something so all the play had ended the acting certainly hadn't your honor to be clear we didn't have to prove anything today but we have provided the court with a reasonable alternative the unreasonable theory that the prosecution has told you today as the court knows pursuant to Cal from 224 when presented with two reasonable interpretations of circumstantial evidence the court must adopt the interpretation that points towards innocence today the prosecution told me to convict my client of robbery but your honor they can't even connect Billy shares ring to miss Franks remember that the testimony of detective Mavis as to whose costume the ring was founded that was stricken you cannot consider that evidence in your ruling today and as such they have failed to meet their burden they also want you to believe that Miss Frank's took a ring box and threw it away in a trash can and then sat down next to it until the police arrived that's not reasonable and who told detective Mavis that the ring box belonged to Billy share Jordan Franks why do that if you're trying to conceal a robbery Billy share framed Jordan Franks play had ended but the acting stop rebuttal argument from the prosecution that's your honor the defense keeps emphasizing that this crime must have been committed by Billy share and one thing they did get right in their closing statement is that there does need to be a reasonable and plausible Theory alternative in order and there are if there is one that their client can be acquitted but the theory that Billy share committed this crime is simply absolutely outrageous I they keep addressing the possibility yes he could have taken those 15 minutes but what was the motive he had gotten the role over Miss Franks 30 seconds suddenly he just decides that he's so worried that he needs to frame her he steals his own ring I don't understand the motive they're not producing a reasonable or plausible or even structurally coherent Theory to prove that it was Billy share it is simply just outrageous thank you thank you Council rebuttal argument from the defense yes your honor who had the means tuning who had unfettered access to Billy shares ring Billy share and who did you hear from over and over again disliked miss Franks Billy share your honor when Mr share found out that Miss Franks would be following him to New York City as his understudy where they would work together for the foreseeable future he snapped 30 seconds he couldn't take it anymore he knew what he had to do stage the crime frame Miss Franks your honor the play had ended but the acting surely hadn't please find Miss Frank's not guilty on all counts thank you thank you Council so before I enroll students May confer with her attorney teacher coach regarding any trial irregularity so please do so now with the prosecution team like denote any trial irregularities no your honor would the defense team like to note any trial or regularities none from the defense your honor all right at this time the court has deliberated and at this point in time Miss Franks the court has considered the evidence presented I am persuaded by the defense argument in this case and I do find that Miss Franks is not guilty of all charges so that is the Court's ruling in this matter now with respect to this matter at this time I understand that there's going to be a selection of MVPs for opposing teams is that correct yes your honor all right so at this point in time teams you have two minutes to decide which student from the opposing team should receive the MVP certificate and to our attorney scores let me know when you all are ready to proceed okay you ready yes all right so while the attorney scores are still working on calculating their totals and you folks feel free to let me know when you're ready to proceed okay I want to start off and just make some comments here and I want to say that um I got to tell you I'm just going to speak from my heart I don't have any script or anything like that but I'm going to tell you that this was a very remarkable performance on both sides you know I've had an opportunity recently to head over to USF School of Law and work with some law students that were participating in a oral argument oral advocacy competition and I had a chance to see some folks that are already law students that really struggled to answer questions that were posed by the judges that were participating in the competition and these folks are in law school you folks are in high school and I thought that you did an outstanding job in the way that you carried yourself the way that you handle your responsibilities it was absolutely impressive you know over the past couple days I had the benefit of being able to spend some time at the judicial Council in San Francisco where I was attending a a leadership supervising training or conference I had the pleasure of meeting our Chief Justice of the Supreme Court who really inspired us with some comments very inspiring and motivational comments I had the benefit of being a among different seasoned and experienced judges that many of whom have had long outstanding careers have done a great deal of work and had the opportunity to really be inspired by their you know their guidance their counsel their mentoring and then I had a chance this morning I was in San Francisco at the USF School of Law meeting with law students I was asked to meet with about 35 to 40 law students so we were meeting at the law library about 8 A.M and it was truly a pleasure to listen to these students who are motivated that are hungry to get out there and to be lawyers contributing to our system of justice advocating for the community and then I have the benefit of coming in this afternoon and standing be or presiding before you and being treated to an absolutely excellent presentation every day that I wake up I always try to remind myself of a reason to give a sense of gratitude for getting another opportunity to wake up and be alive and to live and no doubt that over the past few days they've been outstanding days and I've been treated to a lot of things that have made me feel very grateful and when I get an opportunity to see our youth getting out there and doing some things that are just remarkable showing a desire to get better hungry to get out there and learn also taking the opportunity to learn how to interact with people who have life experience who are seasoned your teachers your attorneys anybody else that was involved in this process the fact that you are now taken steps to learn and acquire lessons that are being shared and then you are applying those lessons that shows tremendous aptitude and that is remarkable to see in our youth here today and that just shows that the future is very bright and we have people like each and every one of you who are getting ready to get after it to pursue your next level of academic challenges to get your degrees and then ultimately get into the professional career path that you choose to pursue and if you keep on doing what you're doing you know all the hard work that you're putting in right now to get better each and every day to work on your weaknesses and then to continue reinforcing those strengths all of you are going to be tremendous forces in our community doing a lot of good work doing a lot of good work to help a lot of people Propel forward and I thank you for taking the time to do that and for giving me an opportunity to Bear witness to what you've obviously demonstrated here a true Testament to the strength and your desire to get better and to be the best that you can and what you do especially when it comes to the law because that's you know the profession that I really deeply respect the profession that I love that I'm passionate about and I just want to see nothing but good people coming in and allowing our system to Justice to keep running strong and to command the respect of the community I want to say that I don't want to get into a lot of the technical and the specific things that you did that know you're being scored on I'm going to allow Council who's taking the time to be here to talk about those specifics but in general I will comment on some observations that really impress me I mean first of all you know I want to make sure that I always take care of my courtroom work group you know the people that have my back in this courtroom and I gotta say that I might have a conversation with folks in my court to see if there's any way I can get this bailiff to be working for me because I love that no-nonsense serious attitude I mean I don't think that anybody was ever going to think about doing anything that was out of line or along the lines of any improper Court decorum you know I thought that you were impressive I really appreciate the way that you handle yourself and care yourself you were an outstanding bailiff so thank you very much for having our back in here for our time keeper my goodness I don't know how you folks feel but I don't know how I would be able to keep track of all the time and then uh just on an instant have some request that's dropped about a time check and then you got to be precise but I don't think that this gentleman here to my right ever hesitated I mean he was ready to call he was ready to go whenever called upon and he was accurate I didn't hear any objection from anyone here so obviously he was 100 accurate each time so I think that there's a lot of Kudos that we gotta show to this gentleman right here for handling his responsibilities in a very responsible and excellent way so thank you very much for doing that and for a clerk over here oh thank you very much for helping us out thank you very much for being here as a backup also to this gentleman and making sure that we were running smooth I don't think we had any concerns in here and that's because you folks handled your responsibilities well so I just want to make sure that you're properly recognized do we have any courtroom artists all right so you know I know that in Prior occasions you know people don't really say anything about the courtroom artist you know I don't know if we have any ability to be able to display your work but I want to make sure that we get an opportunity to have the folks here in this courtroom see the work product that you generated were you able to generate anything today then why don't you show folks here the final work product very nice outstanding job thank you very much for your work you did a great job and our attorneys oh my goodness let's start with the arguments on the search and seizure motion the young lady from Carmel High School my goodness I thought that you were just outstanding you had a tremendous command of all the different cases you had a command of the facts you weren't repeatedly looking at your notes I mean you knew exactly what this case was about you were able to cite to all the different cases that we talked about you were able to give me some recitation of the facts talk about the Holdings I mean it's evident that you put in a lot of time to prepare but your delivery was fantastic and I thought you did an outstanding job same thing with are formidable oral advocate for more or less you know this is not an easy assignment to have to deal with and like I mentioned you know I it wasn't too long ago that I saw attorney or law school students who were engaged in oral advocacy doing the same thing that you were doing and they were faltering and they couldn't continue broke down couldn't continue but you kept going you kept arguing you kept you know presenting your arguments and relying on the authority that you had studied and obviously you know utilized in support of your arguments and I thought that you did a fantastic job as well because it is not an easy thing to do especially when you get peppered with questions and you get frequently interrupted then you have somebody over here that's shouting times at you and you know that's easy to get your attention really distracted but you know both of you really stayed on task and you know that was quite impressive so I appreciated the quality and caliber of your work and I thought that you did an outstanding job thank you very much for that fantastic presentation by both of you our attorneys I love the fact that you each had your own style you had some of you had your own Little Swagger I mean I love seeing that because that's just you you know you just being yourself you know it's not easy to get in front of a room full of people and then a take on a witness not knowing what to expect sometimes a witness will not give you the response that you're anticipating or expecting sometimes they may refuse to answer they may dance around and I thought that attorneys on the Carmel side attorneys on RLS I did a really good job of trying to co-round the witnesses and make sure that they bring it to the witness's attention that's not the question that I asked will answer the question I love that I love the fact that you were really working hard to maintain control and command of your examination and not letting the witness take control of the examination so I really appreciated that and is it Emma yes your honor outstanding job outstanding job on your direction your cross-examination and also on your closing argument exceptional the way you present yourself you know the way you carry yourself your delivery you know I can easily see you right now appearing before very distinguished judge like judge Panetta whose courtroom we're in just handling business in a real case I mean you look like a lawyer in here and a formidable lawyer so you did a fantastic job I mean each and every one of you same thing with Miss Cho I mean you come in and you're polished you know you did a heck of a job outstanding job and like I said before it's just absolutely impressive to see you both handling your responsibilities in the way you did because you guys were just solid and on rls's side you know Mr Eubanks and you were just delivering with a lot of Thunder huh you were super pumped up right here you were fired up man you were just getting after it but I love the fact that you know you just you were just you and you're being genuine who you were not really trying to be somebody that you're not I mean I can see that that's your personality you know coming out really competitive but it was just natural and I like that I like the fact that you're standing up here and just like every other student you know relying on no notes but just on your own independent command of facts that was absolutely impressive both of you you did a fantastic job too you know there were some instances where you had to adjust based on some responses that you got from Witnesses and you were able to do that on the Fly and it was a seamless transition I mean you guys just had good composure and that was absolutely impressive to see thank you your honor and you're welcome and in terms of our Witnesses man our Witnesses were fantastic the witness Mr Lucky love the way that you were really working hard to make consistent eye contact to really appeal to my passion my sympathy in my emotions you know you did a good job of really making a lot of eye contact and really speaking to me I really appreciate our expert witness on the defense side man once you delivered your testimony I thought that's a done deal right there man I'm persuaded so that's one person right there that definitely had the experience the training education and also the confidence to deliver unequivocally hey this is too big of a gap right here what are we talking about folks huh and you did a heck of a job persuading me so nice job with your particular testimony but all Witnesses you know you've all done such a remarkable job outstanding job again it's a testament to the time that you've put in the preparation and it's absolutely impressive to see that you've done that and I give you a great deal of credit and a lot of kudos for an excellent job I mean you guys are the best of the best you're here for a reason and no matter what anyone says you are the best and brightest here in Monterey County and I appreciate you foreign [Music]