Your Name: Mallory Allen

MODEL LESSON PLAN

______

YOUR NAME: MALLORY ALLEN

LESSON: MOCK TRIAL: OBJECTIONS; CROSS EXAMINATION; CLOSING ARGUMENT.

TIME AND DAY TAUGHT: MODEL LESSON PLAN; designed for 1.5-hour class.

Number of students:Lesson designed for class 15-20 students

Materials required:Objections Handout; Cross Examination Handout; Closing Statement Handout.

GOALS & KNOWLEDGE OBJECTIVES—Studying, and then participating in, stages of the criminal justice process helps students to:
Have a better understanding of the criminal justice process, its rationales and the goals of each stage of the process;
Specifically, students should gain a better understanding of how to effectively cross examine a witness and how to argue law and fact to a jury;
Students will also learn why evidentiary rules are important and how they attempt to keep the justice process as fair as possible; and
Students will better understand the unique roles of the prosecuting attorney and the defense attorney.

SKILL OBJECTIVES—as a result of this lesson, students will be better able to:
Critically examine the criminal trial process;
Compose a closing statement that advocates for either the State or the defendant;
Develop and identify questions thatdraw out the specific testimony to aid their case on cross exam;
Be able to apply the facts of our case to the law in an effective and persuasive manner;
Reintegrate the theme and theory from opening statement into closing statement;
Understand basic evidentiary rules and how to object to evidence during trial; and
Vocalize and appreciate the strengths and weaknesses of opposing arguments.

ATTITUDE OBJECTIVES—as a result of this lesson, students will likely feel as though:
They have a better understanding of the process involved in trying a case;
Feel better equipped and educated to form opinions on important criminal law policies;
Feel as though, on a whole, the criminal justice system is fair to criminal defendants;
The process is not as complex as it may seem at first; and
They are more confident in their preparations for the upcoming mock trial.

CLASSROOM METHODS
Review Opening Statements and Direct Examination
This lesson is Part II of two lesson plans introducing the students to the four aspects of mock trial: opening statements, direct examination, cross examination, closing arguments.
Today, we will discuss Cross Examination and Closing Argument
But first, we are going to talk about objecting during trial.
What are OBJECTIONS? And why do they matter?
Objections are allowed during trial in order to KEEP OUT evidence that is hurtful to your client.
Objections and evidence rules were created to keep the process as fair as possible.
Goals of evidence rules: fair hearing and to keep out any evidence that 1) doesn’t relate to the issue of the case, 2) isn’t reliable or 3) whose value as evidence is totally outweighed by how prejudicial it would be.
Example: you cannot testify to what you heard someone else say. (Hearsay). Why do you think that is important? (Wait for class responses. If no one is getting the idea, tell the class that hearsay objections stop a witness from testifying to something that is probably not very trustworthy. Think of a game of telephone and how quickly the story devolves.)
Attorney can object any time she or he thinks the opposing attorney is violating the rules of evidence. THREE times to object. (Write on Board).
Can object to 1) questions that the other side’s attorney is asking, to 2) answers that a witness is giving, or 3) to exhibits that the other side is attempting to admit into evidence.
Usually don’t object in open or close (not actually evidence!)
How To: stand up; say OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR, _____(evidence rule). Wait, standing, for the ruling. No need to explain yourself, judge may agree with you! If he agrees he will say: “sustained”
Judge will turn to the other attorney who asked the question or offered the exhibit, and that attorney usually will have a chance to explain why the objection should not be accepted ("overruled") by the judge.
There are TONS of evidence rules. In Washington the evidence rules go from ER 101-ER 1008. For our mock trials, we are going to learn 7.
USE HANDOUT (see attachment I)
Rule 1: Leading Questions
A "leading" question is one which suggests the answer desired by the questioner, usually by stating some facts not previously discussed and asking the witness to give a "yes" or a "no" answer.
Example: "Then, you saw Jordan turn to the left in a threatening way?"
Example of an open question: “Please describe Jordan’s demeanor.”
Leading questions may not be asked when questioning one's own witness in direct examination.
Leading questions should be used on cross examination.
If you head a leading question: Objection: "Objection, Your Honor, leading."
Rule 2: Argumentative Questions
Attorneys cannot argue with the witness. Questions cannot be argumentative in tone or manner. Badgering is harassing or asking again and again.
Ex: A Few Good Men you’d have some serious questions to ask then wouldn’t you doctor?
"How do you expect the jury to believe that?"
That is argumentative with the witness.
"Objection. That question is argumentative.”
Rule 3: Speculation
Attorneys cannot ask questions that get witnesses to guess.
Ex: anytime attorney asks witness to answer question based on other person’s state of mind. “What do you think ___ was thinking?”
“Objection. Counsel is asking the witness to speculate.”
Rule 4: Narration (or non-responsive):
Witnesses' answers must respond to the questions. A long story is objectionable. When the witness gives much more information than the question calls for.
Objection: "Objection, Your Honor, narrative."
Rule 5: Relevance
Questions or answers that add nothing to the understanding of the issue in dispute are objectionable.
Questions and answers must relate to the subject matter of the case; this is called "relevance." Those that do not relate to the case are "irrelevant."
Example: "How is your gun business doing financially?”
Objection: "Objection, Your Honor, relevance."
Relevance is a low bar.
Rule 6: Hearsay
With certain exceptions, statements that are made outside of the courtroom are not allowed as evidence if they are offered in court to show that the statements are true.
There are many exceptions to the hearsay rule, but the only two that apply to this trial are:
Admission of Party Opponent: that a witness may repeat a statement made by either party in the case if the statement contains evidence that goes against his or her side; OR
State of Mind: if a person's state of mind at the time of a certain event is important, any statements made about that event at the time the event occurred concerning the speaker's intent, knowledge or belief will be admissible.
Rule 7: Beyond the Scope of the Packet
Questions that ask about, or answers that supply, significant facts not contained in the packet are objectionable. However, minor details regarding a character's role may be asked and added.
Objection: "Objection, Your Honor, this is beyond the scope of the packet."

CROSS EXAMINATION
Show video clip: A Few Good Men explanation: After the defense conducts its direct examination of the defendant, the prosecution gets a chance to cross-examine the witness.
Ask students: does anyone know the difference between direct examination and cross-examination? Who conducts direct exam, and who conducts cross?
Answer: each side gets to directly examine witnesses favorable to his or her case. (The defense will directly examine witnesses favorable to the defense, and cross-examine the prosecution’s witnesses. The prosecution will directly examine witnesses favorable to its case, and cross-examine the defense’s witnesses).
Briefly explain how direct exam differs from cross exam:
On direct, the lawyer wants the witness to “make” the case – provide testimony that pulls together the theory of the case. So the lawyer wants the witness to be the “star” of the testimony. The witness should sound credible, believable, reliable, etc.
On cross, the lawyer wants to discredit the other side’s witness. The lawyer wants to show that the witness’s story is unbelievable, that the witness is biased or that the witness doesn’t really know that much about what happened. You want to askquestions that demand a short answer; yes or no is the best. Things you know they will agree with (because you have looked at their prior testimony).
Explain “ONE QUESTION; ONE FACT” and “signposting”

ACTIVITY: Break class up into pairs and pass out cross exam HANDOUT (see attachment II). Explain the handout and read through the example “idea” and “questions” as a class before starting the worksheet.
After students have questions, have students volunteer to question teacher with cross questions.
Other students comment on the form of the questions; potential objections; friendly critique of one another.
Style of Cross
Go over positioning on direct, keep a distance from your witness; on cross, get close to the witness, and try to position yourself right in front of the jury.
Remember not to ask question that you don’t know already know answer to
Do not asking any open ended questions unless you know answer
If this happened in the activity, talk about why it was a bad idea to ask an open-ended Q

CLOSING ARGUMENT
Matthew McConoughey in A Time to Kill, closing argument: & Order Closing Argument in Murder Trial: Basics
NOT like opening statements
ARGUES the facts that came out during the case and why they win
Use jury instructions to show the jury why according to the instructions the judge gave them, they win.
Prosecution goes first. Defense goes second
Prosecution has an opportunity for “rebuttal”
Almost no objections can be made during closing.
Purpose of Closing
Closing argument is just that, an argument! It is the only time that you really get to argue to the jury. Cannot argue in open, cannot argue with a witness, cannot argue with the judge!
You are telling the jury why, according to all of the evidence that they have heard, YOUR side wins the case.
You do this in several ways…
Use the evidence to your advantage; show them why this evidence makes sense and why THIS evidence does not!
Show them why your witnesses were more factually accurate, saw the scene better, were more credible and why THEIR witnesses were not!
Pull out specific pieces of testimony
After arguing the evidence to the jury, APPLY the jury instructions to the case
What are jury instructions? Anyone remember?
LOOK AT JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN OUR CASE
No need to argue all of them, pick the ones that help you show the jury why the law is on your side
BURDEN: beyond a reasonable doubt (look at jury instructions)
Prosecution: do not forget that this is YOUR burden to prove; if you do not meet it, it doesn’t matter how bad the defense case was
Defense: remember to harp on the burden and remind the jury that they must meet it
Elements of the crime
Prosecution: you must prove all BRD; tell your jury how you did that
Defense: you can say that they didn’t meet any of the elements (although this is probably disingenuous) OR you can pick 1-2 elements and really attack why they failed to meet these

ACTIVITY: Break into two groups: prosecution and defense and brainstorm closing arguments; use HANDOUT (see attachment III)
Form; tone; purpose; theme/theory; how to use instructions
Help students to fill out worksheets and collect when finished.
Ask for any volunteers to share a good argument (based on a jury instruction) why either the defendant or the prosecution wins.