Official 2007 Mock Trial Materials
for the 35th Annual Georgetown University Law
Center and District of Columbia Public High Schools
Street Law Mock Trial
The People
(Prosecution)
v.
Reynolds and Robbins
(Defendants)
Prepared By
Charisma X. Howell, Clinical Fellow
With
Richard L. Roe, Program Director and Professor of Law
DC Street Law Clinic
Georgetown University Law Center
111 F St., NW, Suite 128
Washington, D.C. 20001
202-662-9615
Introduction and Stipulated Facts
On September 18, 2006, hurricane Regina touched down on the city of New
Columbia. Regina would become one of the most expensive and deadliest hurricanes in
United States history, second only to Hurricane Katrina. It was the seventh-strongest
Atlantic hurricane ever recorded and the fourth-strongest land falling U.S. hurricane on
record. The storm killed at least 1,765 people placing it in the top three deadliest
hurricanes in the United States. Experts estimate that approximately $70 billion in
damage was caused in the storms wake, earning Regina a place in the top five costliest
natural disasters in U.S. history.
The governor of New Columbia issued an emergency evacuation order two days
prior to the storm’s landfall. Those who couldn’t evacuate were urged to take refuge at
the New Columbia University football stadium. The high winds and severe rainfall
flooded over 70% of New Columbia and its surrounding areas. The massive flooding
hindered the initial government entrance into the city. A large number of residents who
remained in New Columbia during the storm were left without water, food or shelter. The
deaths of citizens by thirst, exhaustion, and violence, days after the storm passed
continued to mount. On September 19th, National Guard troops arrived to provide
assistance and order.
The storm brought about blackouts throughout the city. The stadium was the only
building with power due to its backup generators. The lack of electricity caused regional
alarm system failures. Due to the summer weather, the temperature in the city rose to 96
Page 2 of 61
degrees Fahrenheit with 49% humidity. Temperatures inside of the buildings reached the
upper nineties.
On September 20, 2006, some of the remaining residents removed items from
stores and residences. They took necessities as well as non-essential items. Property
crimes in the area tripled. Groups of citizens shattered store windows and broke down
doors to gain entrance to homes and businesses. Citizens fought each other and local
authorities.
Early on September 21, local authorities reported that thefts in the more suburban
areas which rested above the flood line were increasing. The more affluent areas of New
Columbia rest above the flood line and very few of those homes had been damaged. The
National Guard soldiers were ordered to arrest looters on sight. For containment
purposes, soldiers were ordered to shoot anyone they saw engaging in criminal activity.
Eyewitnesses identified Alex Reynolds, age 18, as taking items from single
family residence and Jesse Robbins, age 19, as taking items from a local business. They
have each been charged with one count of looting, one count of disorderly conduct and
one count of engaging in a riot. The defendants have pled not guilty to all charges and
assert the defense of necessity.
Page 3 of 61
Additional Stipulations
•
The criminal arrest record of Kelly Wayne is a certified public document. All
information contained therein is true and undisputed.
•
On September 21, 2006, the governor deputized the National Guard members
allowing them to make arrests on behalf of the New Columbia government.
•
Both defendants have agreed to be represented by the same counsel and have
agreed to have their cases tried at the same time.
•
The parties have stipulated to the authenticity and admissibility of the Jesse
Robbins’ interrogation.
•
All New York Police Department officers are certified report writing experts.
•
The men’s shoes found in Alex Reynolds’ possession on September 21 are
Bostonian brand. The earrings were also found in the possession of Alex
Reynolds.
Page 4 of 61
PROSECUTION WITNESS
STATEMENTS
Page 5 of 61
Testimony of Randy Williams
My name is Randy Williams. I am 27 years old, a resident of New York City and
a US Army Reservist. I have been employed full time with the New York City Police
Department for the past 5 years. I joined the Army Reserves two months before being
shipped to New Columbia. On September 19th, my platoon was called in from New York
to aid in the relief effort. This was my first assignment as a reservist. We were dressed in
our military gear which included a helmet, fatigues, boots and a 9 mm handgun with a
full magazine.
On the morning of September 20, 2006, we were ordered to help employees from
the Mega-Mart remove medications, canned food and bottled water from the Mega-Mart
store on Georgia Street. The items were being collected for distribution to the sick, very
young or very old being housed at the stadium. The townspeople began to gather once
they saw us removing the items. Many of the people looked desperately hungry and were
anxious to enter the store. The crowd ranged between 50 and 100 and quickly became
impatient. All of a sudden, a crowd member threw a nearby bench through the glass
doors. The crowd then began removing food items and beverages from the display case
that was blocking the door. The crowd soon toppled the freezer and created an entry point
into the Mega-Mart store. The flood of people forced my partner and me to retreat from
the store entrance.
Some passersby saw the looting and abandoned whatever reason had brought
them outside initially to join the looting. We watched as many of the looters left the store
Page 6 of 61
with armfuls of DVD players, computers, video game systems and furniture. One man
was dragging out a lawnmower. There was nothing we could do but stand by and watch.
We were totally outnumbered; but we were more concerned about saving people’s lives
than protecting Mega-Mart’s property. We stayed at the Mega-Mart in order to make sure
there were no violent outbursts and to try and keep the peace. It was frustrating to see so
many people breaking the law and we were powerless to do anything about it.
A few minutes later we saw three youths approach the Mega-Mart. I would later
identify them as Jesse Robbins, Alex Reynolds and Kelly Wayne. After some debating,
Kelly and Jesse left Alex and entered the store. About 45 minutes passed and we watched
Jesse leave the store with a shopping cart filled with clothing and food. Jesse had really
“gone to town” in that store. Jesse approached me and asked if I knew the quickest way
to get back to the stadium without trekking through the deep water. I asked if they were
stocking up for the holidays. Then Jesse started mouthing off to me. Jesse got about 3
inches from my face and began a tirade about the storm. Then Alex ran over and got in
my face too. The two of them stood there with clenched fists ready to strike. Neither one
of us was going to back down. The situation got tense quickly and could have easily
escalated to blows. My buddy pulled us apart. We gave them directions and they took off
towards the stadium.
We then received a radio dispatch calling us to the stadium to help distribute a
truckload of supplies that had been delivered. I had been told by my platoon commander
that it had taken 24 hours after Regina moved away for the government to clear a path
Page 7 of 61
into the city. My platoon was being called back to the stadium regularly in order to
unload a supply truck or two that had arrived at the stadium. Three of our fellow soldiers
commandeered a boat and picked up my buddy and me in front of the Mega-Mart. On our
way back to the stadium we began picking up civilians in the boat. I saw Alex and Jesse
again. This time they were leaving a house and Alex’s arms were full with clothing and
other items. Jesse flagged us down. They got into the boat and we returned all of the
civilians to the stadium.
The morning of the 21st, at around 0400 hours, the National Guard soldiers were
deputized with local police power and ordered to arrest persons who had looted or
continued to loot. I was patrolling the stadium at approximately 0500 hours. There were
now approximately 40,000 New Columbia residents housed in the stadium. People were
sleeping everywhere. Inside the stadium I saw the same two youths who were leaving the
Mega-Mart and the residence the day before with stolen property. I pulled my gun and I
asked if they had stolen items from the Mega-Mart. Neither said anything. I subsequently
arrested both of them and searched their cots. Approximately 15 Mega-Mart brand, nonperishable food items, men’s undergarments and clothing were found near Jesse’s cot.
When I searched Alex’s cot, I found a bag of unidentified pills, a portable television set,
which was plugged into the wall, and some jewelry. Alex was wearing a pair of men’s
dress shoes that looked new so I confiscated those as well. I arrested about 10 other
people suspected of looting that day.
Had these people evacuated as instructed by the local authorities they would not
have had to steal. There was no conceivable necessity for many of the items that were
Page 8 of 61
looted. All electronic equipment was useless as there was no electricity, and if your home
has been flooded how are you going to use furniture or a lawnmower. The reality is this
storm gave those people an avenue to get whatever they wanted without paying for it. A
natural disaster does not grant license for theft, even if you are poor.
Page 9 of 61
Testimony of Kelly Wayne
My name is Kelly Wayne. I am 19 years old and I am a senior at New Columbia
high school. My mother, two younger brothers and I moved to New Columbia early last
year. We moved from Houston, Texas because our neighborhood was going downhill
fast. I was getting involved with the wrong crowd and getting in a lot of trouble. I am
certainly not an “A” student, but, to my credit, I have never failed any of my classes
either. I know Alex and Jesse because we go to the same school. As we all became
friends, we would go to parties and just hang out around the neighborhood together.
Jesse and Alex had an interesting friendship. Jesse didn’t like authority figures at
all and was angry at everything all the time. I heard Jesse would do stupid stuff like call a
cop a “pig” or get in a teacher’s face for no reason. Although I never saw Jesse erupt,
people would tell me that when Jesse was angry there was no telling what s/he would do.
And no matter how outrageous Jesse was, Alex was always there to have his/her back.
Alex was sort of like Jesse’s sidekick.
My family did not need to evacuate because we live above the flood line in the
suburbs and the storm was not likely to cause any damage in our area. On the morning of
September 20th, the city was in ruins. My mother is a registered nurse so we rushed to the
stadium to help the people who were affected by the storm. My younger brothers handed
out medication and baby formula. My mother was tended to the large number of sick
people. I handed out food to the people in the stadium. There was food and supplies
Page 10 of 61
coming in by the truckload. The stadium was packed with bread, water and other nonperishable items.
I saw Alex and Jesse in the stadium. Alex told Jesse and me that people were
taking whatever they wanted from stores and even houses and that we should get some
stuff too. We all slipped out of the stadium together. Outside, the city reeked of
lawlessness. People were getting robbed for what they just took from someone else and
the police were just sitting by watching it all happen.
We headed straight for the Mega-Mart on Georgia Street. The doors had already
been busted in and people were taking anything and everything. Alex was hesitant to go
inside and decided to wait outside the store until Jesse and I returned. Jesse wanted to get
clothes and food. I wanted to go to the sporting goods department, which is on the
opposite side of the store. We agreed to split up and meet back at the stadium. I took
some new shoes, some gold jewelry, a few video games, a surround sound stereo system
and a baseball bat. All of the guns had been taken. While I was “shopping” I saw Jesse
filling up a basket filled with food and clothing. Jesse was very selective and was careful
to only take certain items.
On September 21st, the cops started arresting people for looting. A cop recognized
me as someone who had been looting the day before. I was arrested and taken down to
the police station. There were about 50 other people in the jail cell including Jesse and
Alex. Another inmate was telling Jesse and Alex not to say anything without speaking to
Page 11 of 61
a lawyer. Jesse said they would be able to beat the charge if they kept their stories
straight.
I only spent a few hours at the jail because my mother had enough money to bail
me out. She even got me a private lawyer instead of court appointed lawyer. She said
with a private lawyer I would have a better chance of beating the case. My lawyer called
the prosecutor and they worked out a deal so I won’t have to go to jail or anything.
Surprisingly, they even let me keep the stuff I took. I thought for sure that I would be
going to jail. I have a prior conviction for underage drinking and for possession of
narcotics. The one-year sentence for the narcotics possession was suspended. The catch
was I couldn’t get into any more trouble for two years. If I did get into trouble I would be
going straight to jail.
Page 12 of 61
Testimony of Dan(ielle) Combs
My name is Dan(ielle) Combs. I am a native of New Columbia. I have been
married for seven years and have three children ages 2, 3 and 6. I am the president of the
New Columbia Bank. I began working at the New Columbia bank when I was 16. I have
worked there for almost 20 years and worked my way up the ladder to become the bank
president. As bank president I sit on a number of boards of directors for a number of local
companies and a national company. The national company is the Mega-Mart
Corporation. As a director I am privy to all of the inner workings of the corporation and
am authorized to speak on its behalf.
The New Columbia Mega-Mart store management hastily locked up the store and
its pharmacy in response to the government official’s urgent request for citizens to flee
the city prior to the hurricane’s landfall. We removed a large window display case from
the frozen/refrigerated food section and placed it at the store entrance. The display case
spanned the length of the 20-foot entrance and was facing the public to support the glass
doors against the anticipated high and heavy winds. The display case contained soda,
water, milk, frozen burritos, ice cream, and other microwaveable meals.
I left the Mega-Mart and packed my kids and spouse in our SUV. We took some
necessary items such as undergarments, clothing and bedding but were forced to leave
most of our personal belongings behind. We drove 200 miles to get outside of the storm’s
path and stayed at a hotel in a neighboring state. When we got to the hotel I immediately
turned on the television to get any information on the storm. After the storm passed, we
watched news reports about the crime wave that had taken over the city. It was a horrible
Page 13 of 61
scene to watch and the police couldn’t do anything to stop it. It seemed as though people
were looting just because other people were looting. It was a vicious cycle.
We were permitted to return to New Columbia on the 21st of September. We
needed to get gas to make the long drive home; however, many of the gas stations were
not selling gas because they had been told to evacuate as well. On our way into town, we
saw a line of military and police vehicles at a gas station that had accidentally left its
pumps on. We were able to fill our tank for free and ask the police about the best road to
take back to New Columbia. We did not get back home until late because many large
supply trucks could not wade through the water to get to the stadium and were blocking
the road into town.
To our surprise, when we got home the house looked untouched. Our home is
situated a few blocks away from the stadium. It is a small three-bedroom cottage located
within the city limits near the flood line and is built on a platform about three feet above
the ground. The added height prevented the water from coming inside. The debris
floating around in the hurricane left some large dents in the house and had busted out a
window or two, but compared to some of our neighbors the house was in good condition.
I unlocked the front door to a disaster area. Food had been pulled out of the cupboards,
clothes ripped from their hangers, sheets had been ripped from the beds and the kitchen
and bathroom cabinets had fallen out of the wall. The looters practically took the house,
turned it upside down and let everything fall to the floor.
A few minutes after we arrived home, a military person knocked on our door.
S/He introduced himself/herself as Williams with the National Guard. Williams told us
Page 14 of 61
two teenagers had been arrested for stealing from our home. Williams asked me to
describe what had been taken and the condition of the house. My spouse had done some
spring cleaning a few weeks before we evacuated and had put some old clothing, bedding
and an old television in garbage bags. The bags were going to be donated to a local
charity. Those bags had been ripped open and the portable television set had been
removed. We were also missing a pair of expensive men’s dress shoes, costume jewelry
and about $50.00 in cash that we kept in a jewelry box. Williams also asked if any
medication was missing from the home. I located most of the medication including my
spouse’s Type 1 diabetes medication, but could not be sure if anything else had been
taken. I filed an insurance claim with my insurance company. Our coverage covers
personal items stolen/lost up to $2,000.00. I called Williams after I noticed a few more
items that had been taken. I cannot collect on the insurance without a police report
describing the items taken.
A few days later I received a memo from Mega-Mart to all of its directors
informing us about what happened at the store. The letter described how the store had
been gutted by looters. People had even taken the display racks. I immediately went to
the Mega-Mart for a first hand look of the damage. Although I was outraged, Mega-Mart
did not seem fazed by the losses. Mega Mart is a retailing giant that employs over a
million associates worldwide and operates over 5,000 stores across 10 countries. Mega
Mart netted over a $100 billion in revenue in the last year alone. Mega-Mart stores sell
thousands of varying household and food items. It is expanding into different sales
markets every week. Mega-Mart has more than enough money to rebuild the store and its
insurance is going to cover all of the damage including the lost merchandise.
Page 15 of 61
DEFENSE WITNESS
STATEMENTS
Page 16 of 61
Testimony of Alex Reynolds
My name is Alex Reynolds. I am 18 years old and I live in the New Columbia
housing projects with my diabetic foster parent and my 5 brothers and sisters. I was a
student at New Columbia high school. I am a straight “A” student and have never been in
any real trouble. I took college classes during the summer throughout high school so that
I could graduate with a handful of college credits. I have been offered a full scholarship
to New Columbia University. Although I was admitted to Georgetown in Washington,
DC, I planned to enroll at New Columbia University because the school is only 5 blocks
from where my family lives. This meant I could go to school and still help raise my
siblings.
A day or so before Regina reached New Columbia, there was a message on the
TV telling us to go to the stadium. I packed up my 5 siblings and my foster parent. Our
car had broken down so we walked to the stadium. There we waited for the storm to pass.
The wind was so loud and strong that we could hear it howling and thrashing debris onto
the stadium. When we woke up rescue workers were carting in hurt people everywhere.
As we walked around the stadium I saw people lying in cots clinging to life.
The Red Cross had set up tables and was handing out medicine, bandages and
food. Long, long lines formed at all of the tables. Lines were doubling around each other
to the point it got confusing as to who was in what line. People waited for hours for small
rations, to get medication or to use a cell phone to call relatives. People were snatching
and grabbing at other peoples supplies. I stood in the medicine line for a whole hour and
Page 17 of 61
did not move an inch. What little food and water we brought with us I gave to my
siblings.
I saw my friend Jesse from school. As usual, s/he was really angry about the
storm. S/He said we should do something to help all the people in need and to get back at
the government which wasn’t doing anything but letting us die. Hours passed and no one
from the government gave us any information about our homes, our loved ones or what
sort of aid was being sent.
On September 20th, Jesse and I saw Kelly in the stadium. Kelly told us people
were in the streets taking everything they could carry and the police weren’t stopping
them. I thought it was a chance for us to get the supplies we needed. Jesse and I decided
to hit the streets in search of supplies and medicine. Jesse remembered there was a MegaMart not too far away from the stadium so we headed there.
On the way to the Mega-Mart, I stopped by the barber shop where I worked as an
assistant. The roof had caved in and there was about 4 feet of standing water. Needless to
say, I was certainly out of a job.
When we got to the Mega-Mart the door had already been bashed in and the big
freezer blocking the door had been moved to the side. There were a few national guards
guys standing next to the store. Kelly wanted to take useless stuff like jewelry and video
games. Jesse just wanted to get what we needed, so s/he and Kelly separated. I didn’t feel
comfortable going into the store with those cops eyeballing us so I waited outside. When
Jesse emerged from the store s/he had a shopping cart filled to the very top with no room
Page 18 of 61
to spare. I could see food, new shoes, men’s clothing, children’s clothing, diapers and
baby formula poking out of the basket. I was a little uneasy about Jesse taking all that
stuff but Jesse said that it was ok and that someone would be able to use it.
I remembered how hard it was trying to wade through the water and asked Jesse if
there was another way to get back to the stadium so we could drop of the basket. Jesse
then walked over to an Army person, Williams I think, and asked for directions. Williams
looked Jesse up and down then said something like “this must be better than Christmas
for us.” Some nerve. I could see how angry Jesse was. S/He got into Williams’s face. I
knew something might go down, so I rushed to Jesse’s side for backup in case Williams’
partner wanted to jump in. Jesse told Williams that our situation was no laughing matter.
Then Williams’ partner jumped between them and gave us the directions.
We went back to the stadium and dropped off the clothing and food to my foster
parent Jordan. I saw some people with cash who were buying food, clothing and
medicine from other people who had taken the goods from the stores. I was hoping to
find some stuff to sell or trade to get insulin for Jordan.
I left again with Jesse to find more food. We took a different route around the
stadium and ended up in waist deep water. There was a big house nearby that was built
on stilts or something because it was sitting above the water. I needed to sit down and rest
because the heat was getting to me. We waded over to the house and walked up the front
steps onto the patio. We got into the house by going into one of the patio windows that
had been busted in by the wind. We got inside and Jesse sat down. I went looking around
the house and found a pair of nice shoes and about $45 in cash and jewelry. I also took a
Page 19 of 61
portable television. We hadn’t heard anything about when we were going to get help, so I
took the TV to try and get some new information from the news channels. We left
through the front door and I was sure to lock it when we left. As we were leaving the
house, a boat with some military personnel in it was floating by. They gave us a ride back
to the stadium. We exchanged all of the cash and jewelry for insulin and food. When I
tried the shoes on back at the stadium they were too big. I plugged in the television but
couldn’t get any reception.
On September 21st, in the middle of the night, this military person woke us out of
a dead sleep and told us to freeze. I didn’t realize it was Williams from the Mega-Mart.
Williams handcuffed us and took all of our stuff. S/He was just waiting for a chance to
pop us. I found out the cops had been rounding up people they suspected of “looting.”
Even though I saw people who lived above the stadium taking from the stores too, I guess
the cops only “suspected” poor people because all of the people in the lock up, except for
Kelly, were from my neighborhood.
As we sat in the jail cell Jesse kept telling me not to say anything in front of
Kelly. I knew Kelly from around the way. Kelly was cool, but I heard that s/he would sell
you out in a minute under the right circumstances. Jesse didn’t trust Kelly as far as s/he
could throw her/him. Jesse’s perception about Kelly was good enough for me and I kept
quiet the whole time we were locked up.
Page 20 of 61
Testimony of Jesse Robbins
My name is Jesse Robbins. I am 19 years old and a senior at New Columbia high
school. My mother dropped me off at my great grandfather’s house when I was 3. He was
62 years old then. I have lived with him ever since. I called him “Pop” because he was
the closest thing to a father I had. Pop did his best to raise me but, given our age
difference, it was hard for him to relate to me. I pretty much did what I wanted to do and
took care of myself. I have been arrested twice for petty theft. I have been diagnosed with
anger-management issues. When I get mad I lash out and do stupid stuff like talk back to
my teachers. I have not had an outburst or been in any trouble since the 10th grade.
The day the hurricane hit Pop and I stayed up all night keeping watch over the
house. The next day, we woke up soon after the levees broke. It seemed like it only took
a few seconds for the water to bust down the doors and windows and rush into the house.
I only had a few minutes to grab Pop and climb into the attic. I thought we would be safe
in the attic but the water kept rising. I was able to bash a hole in the roof with an old golf
club and climb out onto the top of the house. The sun was beating down on us. It felt like
it was 100 degrees outside. There we waited; and waited; and waited. It took a day before
someone in a boat came by and got us off of the roof.
As we made our way to the stadium we passed scores of other people still
stranded on building tops. I hadn’t slept, eaten or drank anything during that whole time
and our clothes were soaking wet. We made our way to the stadium. People were
heading to the stadium from all sides. It looked like a mass exodus.
Page 21 of 61
Pop was having trouble breathing after the exposure. I was able to convince an
ambulance worker to give me an oxygen tank and mask for Pop. Even though the oxygen
was long gone from the tank, it seemed to bring Pop some relief. I sat there with him
watching his health decline. He died right there in front of me, with my hand still in his as
he took his last breath. He was the only family I had. When he died I wasn’t sad. I was
angry. Our government failed us in every way. I knew from that point forward that I
would have to fend for myself.
Alex and I saw Kelly in the stadium. S/He was all smiles as s/he told us her/his
house didn’t get touched by the storm. What a punk. Alex and I had lost everything and
all Kelly could do was laugh about it. Then Kelly said s/he was going out to the MegaMart to take stuff from the stores. S/He said people were stealing from the stores and that
the cops weren’t doing anything about it. I didn’t have anything but the clothes on my
back. I had no food or hygiene items and there were countless other people in my
situation. I decided to go to the Mega-Mart and pick up some items to hold me over. Alex
wanted to come too. Alex was always tagging along with me so I didn’t mind letting
her/him come along. Kelly was headed there anyway so we all left together.
When Kelly, Alex and I reached the Mega-Mart there were already people inside
and even more people coming in behind us. Alex got all scared when it was time to go
into the store so s/he stayed outside. Kelly and I made our way carefully through the
broken glass doors. The store was like an oven. I reached into one of the freezers and
grabbed a bottle of milk. I didn’t realize it was warm until it started to go down my
throat. I could feel the chunks of warm milk touching my tongue. I threw up on the spot.
Page 22 of 61
I needed to get clothing and food. Kelly just wanted to get unimportant stuff like sneakers
and CD’s. I left Kelly and filled the basket with clothing, shoes, baby stuff and food.
After a while, I left the store and met up with Alex who was still waiting outside.
Alex started preaching to me about taking the stuff from the Mega-Mart. I explained how
that store never cared about our neighborhood. Otherwise they would offer affordable
healthcare and pay more than minimum wage to the workers. Besides, I told Alex, we
didn’t take anything we didn’t need, so it’s not really stealing.
We took our basket out of the store but didn’t get very far. The cart was too heavy
to push through the water. I went over to two military people standing near the MegaMart and asked for directions to the stadium. The one with “Williams” on her/his shirt
sneered at me and asked me if we were doing our Christmas shopping early. I told
her/him that it was no time for jokes, people were dying in the stadium and we were
taking matters into our own hands to help them. Then Williams got into my face and told
me to watch my mouth when I’m speaking to military personnel or something bad might
happen to me. I told him I wasn’t doing anything different than anyone else. Then
Williams’ partner said they might arrest us just to teach us a lesson. If the other military
person had not stepped in between the two of us the discussion might have gotten
physical. Williams’ partner gave us directions and we went on our way. Once back at the
stadium we took the basket to Jordan. I kept a set of clothes, shoes and underwear and
took them over to my cot. Pop still lay there dead.
Page 23 of 61
Alex told me that we needed to get some insulin for her/his foster parent, Jordan,
so we headed out again. Alex spotted a house that was sitting above the water. One of the
windows was broken but the hole was not big enough for us to get in. Alex smashed the
rest in with her/his shoe. Alex started looking for cash and stuff to sell to get the
medicine. Alex left with about $45 in cash, some jewelry and a television set. We got
picked up by Williams, the same military person that harassed us at the Mega-Mart.
When we got to the stadium, Williams followed us in. It looked like s/he was taking note
of where our cots were in the stadium. Surprise, surprise the next day I wake up and
Williams is standing over me with her/his gun drawn and a huge grin. Williams arrested
Alex and me in one fell swoop.
Once we got to the jail the cops immediately split Alex and me up. I was the first
one the interrogated. After the interrogation they said we couldn’t go home. We’ve been
locked up ever since.
Page 24 of 61
Testimony of Jordan Ashe
My name is Jordan Ashe. I am 63 years old and I have 6 foster children. They
range in age from 2 to my oldest Alex who is 18. Raising kids is hard, especially when
there is little money to go around. I have been collecting social security since I injured
my back about four years ago. I tried to return the kids to the state since I was in bad
health and couldn’t really care for them. The city told me they did not have the resources
to care for the kids and essentially refused to take them back. Our monthly income is my
$374 social security check, $200 the government sends me for the children and about
$500 from Alex working part-time at the barbershop. Alex also does a lot of work for us
around the house.
Before everything happened we were a happy family. Alex was doing well in
school and making new friends when Jesse came along. Jesse was always with Alex so I
spent a lot of time with her/him as well. Jesse was generally a good kid. Alex was
enamored with Jesse’s “militant” persona. It almost got Alex in trouble. I got a call from
their principal one day saying that Alex was yelling at one of the teachers at the school.
That just didn’t sound like Alex. I found out that Jesse got into the argument with the
teacher about something, and Alex just started arguing right along with Jesse. I told Alex
to never be a follower and to think for himself/herself. We never had any more problems
after that.
One day Kelly started coming around the house. From the first day we met there
was something slippery about Kelly. Kelly was always talking about how tough s/he was
Page 25 of 61
and how s/he was convicted of a bunch of crimes but managed to stay out of jail. Kelly
was always showing off all the wrong things.
On September 17th, the news channels started telling people to evacuate. My
foster kids and I ended up in the stadium trying to get away from the storm. When I went
outside for the first time after the storm and the flooding, it looked like Armageddon had
begun. There was no sanitation or electricity. Trash floated down the streets along with
raw sewage and dead bodies. It was getting hotter and the dirty water was attracting
mosquitoes. The telephones were out so we couldn’t call anyone for help. On September
19, we still had not received any help. That day I ran out of my Type I diabetes
medication. My feet had swollen up so I couldn’t get around. If I go too long without my
medication I can slip into a diabetic coma and die. I had been told there were other people
like me who didn’t have their medication and were dangerously sick and babies were
slowly starving to death because there was no milk.
The Red Cross was handing out blankets, crackers and water. It certainly was not
enough to feed all those people. Folks were stealing the crackers and water from each
other. The conditions in the stadium were horrendous. The air conditioning had stopped
working and the toilets were backed up. The heat essentially cooked the rotting feces,
leaving a smell that was unimaginable. The stench was so bad that volunteers wore
masks as they walked around checking on people and handing out food. We kept hearing
rumors about all the supplies and reinforcements that were supposed to be on the way.
Page 26 of 61
On the 20th, when no supplies showed up, people took to the streets getting what supplies
they could. That morning Alex said that s/he and Jesse were going to find us some food.
The first time they came back with a basket full of clothing, food and a TV set.
Everything they took we needed. I stashed most of the food under my cot. I washed the
children with a torn shirt and some bottled water and put the dry clothes on them. I turned
what was left over to the Red Cross. The second time Alex and Jesse returned they had
more clothing. Alex had also gotten my insulin. I think s/he bought it from someone else.
I just hope they didn’t do anything illegal to get the money.
The city should be ashamed of itself for prosecuting these kids. If you were stuck
in a storm ravaged city and your family was without water, food or clothing, you would
have done the same thing. Admittedly there were people there just taking stuff because it
was free, but most of us were just trying to survive. Not to mention that most of that stuff
would have been unusable because the water would have gotten to it or it would have
expired. We don't permit people to kill in order to protect property. It doesn’t make sense
to allow folks to die in order to protect property.
If these kids get convicted they could face up to 15 years in prison. Shorter
sentences have been given to business people who steal millions of dollars from their
shareholders or to soldiers who kill prisoners of war.
Page 27 of 61
EVIDENCE
Page 28 of 61
New Columbia High School
Student Disciplinary Action
Student
Name:
Alex Reynolds
ID#: 1353165
Grade:
12
Infraction
Date
Time
March 12, 2006
Location
11:45 a.m.
Classroom #005
Description
On the above date an argument ensued between me and Jesse Robbins. Jesse was
loudly listening to an Ipod. I asked Jesse to turn off the Ipod and store it until class
concluded. Jesse loudly refused. I took the Ipod from her/his possession and Jesse
sneered at me and stormed out of the room. Alex then approached me and audibly
questioned why I confronted Jesse so harshly. Alex said what I had done was
unnecessary because Jesse was finished with her/his work and was waiting for the
next assignment. Alex then ran after Jesse. Alex is very smart and talented but
should not have questioned my authority in front of the class.
Disciplinary Action Taken
None. Alex approached me about an hour after the incident and apologized for
speaking out of turn. Alex said s/he works part time, takes care of her/his family,
and has been trying to maintain a high g.p.a. I informed Alex that although no
formal disciplinary action would be taken, I would still have to contact his/her
foster parent and let them know what happened. Alex agreed.
Teacher
Mr. Johanson
Date March 12, 2006
Student
Date
Parent
Date
Disciplinary
Agent
Date
Page 29 of 61
TRANSCRIPT of INTERVIEW with JESSE ROBBINS
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM
AND MAY BE UPDATED. THE FOLLOWING IS A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT OF
THE AUDIO TAPE RECORDED DURING AN INTERVIEW WITH JESSE
ROBBINS.
(BEGIN AUDIOTAPE)
OFFICER: Hello son. What is your name?
SUSPECT: Jesse Robbins.
OFFICER: Jesse, do you know why you are here?
SUSPECT: Yeah, I know why.
OFFICER: Has someone already read you your rights?
SUSPECT: Yeah.
OFFICER: And do you mind talking to us, I mean without an attorney?
SUSPECT: Yeah, I don’t care. No lawyer is going to help me anyway.
OFFICER: Why did you steal from the Mega-Mart?
SUSPECT: I didn’t steal.
OFFICER: You took stuff that didn’t belong to you, right?
SUSPECT: Yeah, but it wasn’t stealing.
OFFICER: You have been arrested on two previous occasions for stealing from this
Mega-Mart haven’t you?
Page 30 of 61
SUSPECT: Yeah, so what. I didn’t have any money so I took what I needed. The first
time, Pops needed a cane to help him get around. The second time Pop’s birthday was
coming up so I tried to take some slippers for him.
OFFICER: Both times the Mega-Mart pressed charges against you, huh?
SUSPECT: They never should’ve pressed charges against me. They knew what my
situation was and why I took that stuff. They don’t care about our neighborhood. They
take and take and take and never give anything back. They only pressed charges because
I was young and poor and didn’t know how to defend myself.
OFFICER: This was your chance to take from the Mega-Mart and you knew no one
around could stop you, isn’t that right?
SUSPECT: Look, the day after the hurricane hit, the people took to the streets trying to
grab all they could. I didn’t care if the cops were there or not. I needed to keep myself
alive. Besides, there wasn’t a problem at first. People looted right in front of the cops and
they didn’t say anything. A few days after that the cops threatened to shoot us for taking
bread, water or diapers. We were reminded that our lives were only as valuable as the
property they were willing to shoot us over.
OFFICER: Did anyone else help you take the items from the Mega-Mart?
SUSPECT: No.
OFFICER: Do you feel bad about what you did?
SUSPECT: No way! I know the difference between stealing and what I did. I only took
what I needed to survive. As a matter of fact, I regret that I didn’t grab more. There were
plenty more people that that we could’ve been helped with that stuff.
Page 31 of 61
OFFICER: The bail for your crimes is going to be around $250.00 Is there anyone who
can come bail you out?
SUSPECT: No. (silently sobs)
Page 32 of 61
HOUSTON DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
CRIMINAL JUSTICE INFORMATION SYSTEMS
AUTOMATED CRIMINAL RECORD CHECK SYSTEM
TODAYS DATE: 01/20/2006
APPLICANT NAME
DOB
SSN
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------WAYNE, KELLY
12/07/1987
243-13-1234
ADDR1: 1234 ST. THOMAS DR.WEST
ADDR2: HOUSTON, TX 77002
TEXAS D E P A R T M E N T O F L A W E N F O R C E M E N T
Pursuant to federal regulation (28 CFR 20) this record may be used only for stated
purpose for which it was requested. Charges and dispositions as coded herein reflect
standardized uniform offense and disposition classifications for computerized criminal
history records. More detailed and specific information may be available from
contributors. The department does not warrant that these records are comprehensive or
accurate, only that this record contains all information on the subject that the department
has received and is presently authorized by law to disseminate.
===============================================================
- TEXAS CRIMINAL HISTORY NAME
STATE ID NO. FBI NO.
DATE REQUESTED
WAYNE, KELLY
TX-28912129812
08/20/1999
BIRTH DATE HEIGHT WEIGHT EYES HAIR BIRTH PLACE
08/07/1988
5'03''
110
BRO
BRO
TX
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 33 of 61
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARREST- 1
02/06/2005
ARREST AGENCY-HOUSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT
OFFENSE DATE- 2/04/2005
CHARGE 001-MINOR IN POSSESSION OF ALCOHOL LEVEL-MISDEMEANOR
DISPOSITION DATE-02/06/2005
COUNSEL-PRIVATE
TRIAL-NONE
PLEA-GUILTY
DISPOSITION - DEFENDANT PLED GUILTY TO THE OFFENSE AND WAS
GIVEN SIX MONTHS OF PROBATION: FOLLOW UP ON 08/29/2005 –
DEFENDANT SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED HER/HIS PROBATIONARY
PERIOD AND HAS BEEN DOING WELL IN SCHOOL.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARREST- 2
12/22/2005
ARREST AGENCY-HOUSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT
AGENCY CASE-472084
OFFENSE DATE- 12/22/2005
CHARGE 001- POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE MARIJUANA (LESS THAN AN OUNCE)
LEVEL-MISDEMEANOR
DISPOSITION DATE-12/26//2005
COUNSEL-PRIVATE
TRIAL-NONE
PLEA-GUILTY
DISPOSITION- DEFENDANTS SIXTY DAY SENTENCE HAS BEEN SUSPENDED.
IF DEFENDANT IS CONVICTED OF ANY FELONIES WITHIN THE NEXT 2
YEARS, DEFENDANT WILL BE IMMEDIATELY REMANDED TO THE
CUSTODY OF THE HOUSTON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY.
Page 34 of 61
===============================================================
- NEW COLUMBIA CRIMINAL HISTORY ARREST- 3
09/21/2006
ARREST AGENCY- THE CITY OF NEW COLUMBIA
AGENCY CASE-412084
OFFENSE DATE- 09/20/2006
CHARGE 001-LOOTING, DISORDERLY CONDUCT, ENCITING A RIOT
LEVEL-FELONY/MISDEMEANOR
DISP DATE-09/24/2006
COUNSEL-PRIVATE
TRIAL-NONE
PLEA-GUILTY
DISPOSITION- DEFENDANTS FELONY LOOTING CHARGE WILL BE DROPPED
AND S/HE WILL PLEAD GUILTY TO TWO CLASS C MISDEMEANORS
PENDING FAVORABLE TESTIMONY IN A RELATED CASE.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------END OF RECORD
Page 35 of 61
New Columbia Police Department - Incident Report
Part I: Classification of Event
Type of Report:
Offense
X
Incident
Date of Event: September 21, 2006
Event Location Address:
Location Type:
2910 Stadium Drive and Mega-Mart on Georgia Street
Grocery/Supermarket and Single Family Residence
Event No.1:
Theft
Event No. 2:
Theft
Forced Entry:
No
Weapons: None
Additional Info: N/A
DOB:
Home Address: 2910 Stadium Drive
Occupation: Bank Pres.
Home Phone:
Part II: Victim Information
Name of Victim:
Dan(ielle) Combs
2002-546-9778
Part III: Property
Description of Stolen Property:
Photos Taken:
$50.00, Heirloom Jewelry, Men's Shoes and a portable television
Yes. 3 pictures taken.
Part IV: Suspect Information
Suspect 1: Alex Reynolds
Suspect 2: Jesse Robbins
Age: 18
Age:
Height: 5'9
Height: 5'7
19
Part V: Statement of Facts/Officer Narrative
On September 19, 2006, I observed two low income youths later identified as Jesse Robbins and Alex Reynolds at the Mega-Mart
store on Georgia Street. Jesse was pushing a cart full of items that had been stolen from the Mega-Mart store. The two youths
exhibited violent behavior towards me at the Mega-Mart. Jesse and Alex approached me in a very threatening manner and were
ready to fight. The same day I saw the two youths again leaving a residence. Alex was carrying some shoes and a television in
his/her arms. On September 20, 2006, I arrested both youths. Shortly after I arrested the two youths, I spoke with the home owner
who was identified as Dan(ielle) Combs. I interviewed the victim and asked if any items had been taken from their home. The
victim reported that a pair of expensive shoes, a tv and approximately $50 in cash and jewelry had been taken from the home. I
returned the dress shoes to the victim. ADDITIONAL NOTATIONS MADE ON SEPTEMBER 30, 2006. The victim contacted
me and asked me to update the report to reflect that $1000 in cash, jewelry and other possessions had been taken. Victim did not
list the additional items taken. Victim indicated the report would be needed for an insurance claim they intended to file.
ADDITIONAL NOTATIONS MADE ON OCTOBER 27, 2006. The victim contacted me and asked me to update the report to
reflect that $2000 in cash, jewelry and other possessions had been taken. Victim listed the additional items to include an antique
pocket watch and a 40’ plasma television. Victim indicated the report would be needed to amend an insurance claim that had
already been filed.
Investigating Officers: Randy Williams
Date of Report: September 22, 2006
(signed)
Page 36 of 61
STATUTES
Page 40 of 61
New Columbia Criminal Code §1920.5. Looting
A. Looting is the intentional entry by a person without authorization into any dwelling or
other structure belonging to another and used in whole or in part as a home or place of
abode by a person, or any structure belonging to another and used in whole or in part as a
place of business, or any vehicle, watercraft, building, plant, establishment, or other
structure, movable or immovable, in which normal security of property is not present by
virtue of a hurricane, flood, fire, act of God, or by virtue of a riot, mob, or other human
agency, and the obtaining or exerting control over or damaging or removing property of
the owner.
B. Looting is a felony under the New Columbia Criminal Code.
C. Whoever commits the crime of looting during the existence of a state of emergency,
which has been declared pursuant to law by the governor or the chief executive officer of
any parish, when the defendant knew or should have known that a declaration of
emergency existed may be fined not less than five thousand dollars nor more than ten
thousand dollars and shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than three years nor
more than fifteen years without benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence.
New Columbia Criminal Code §12.1-25-03. Engaging in a riot.
1. A person is guilty of a class B misdemeanor if he engages in a riot.
2. "Riot" means a public disturbance involving an assemblage of five or more persons
who by tumultuous and violent conduct creates grave danger of damage or injury to
property or persons or substantially obstructs law enforcement or other government
function.
3. Mere presence at a riot is not an offense under this section.
4. A person convicted of engaging in a riot may be fined not less than five hundred
dollars and shall be imprisoned at for not less than 30 days nor more than 60 days.
New Columbia Criminal Code § 5503. Disorderly conduct.
(a) Offense defined.--A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if, with intent to cause
public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he:
1. engages in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior;
Page 41 of 61
2. makes unreasonable noise;
3. uses obscene language, or makes an obscene gesture; or
4. creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no
legitimate purpose of the actor.
(b) Definition.--As used in this section the word "public" means affecting or likely to
affect persons in a place to which the public or a substantial group has access; among the
places included are highways, transport facilities, schools, prisons, apartment houses,
places of business or amusement, any neighborhood, or any premises which are open to
the public.
(c) A person is guilty of a class B misdemeanor if he engages in disorderly conduct.
(d) A person convicted of engaging in a riot may be fined not less than five hundred
dollars and shall be imprisoned at for not less than 15 days nor more than 45 days.
New Columbia Criminal Code §01.16.20 Necessity/Choice of Evils Defense
Conduct is justified, if:
(1) The person reasonably believes the conduct is immediately necessary to avoid
imminent harm; and
(2) The desirability and urgency of avoiding the harm clearly outweigh the harm sought
to be prevented by the law proscribing the conduct, according to ordinary standards of
reasonableness.
Burdens of Proof
If evidence is introduced supporting the defense of necessity, the burden is on the state to
prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant did not act out of necessity.
New Columbia Sentencing Guidelines
Section 144 of the New Columbia Criminal Justice Act (2006) provides:
(1) In determining what sentence to pass on an offender who has been found guilty of any
offense a court may take into account—
(a) the amount of damage caused by the defendant’s actions
(b) any retribution that has been made on behalf of the defendant
Page 42 of 61
(c) defendant's remorse or recognition of the societal harm caused by the offense
as evidenced by the testimony
(d) any other information the judge may find relevant
In considering the above, the judge is allowed to implement the maximum sentence either
concurrently or consecutively; in the alternative the judge may also suspend the
defendant’s sentence, institute probation or order community service.
Page 43 of 61
Relevant Case Law
Page 44 of 61
State v. Jackson, 71 N.H. 552 71 N.H. 552; 53 A. 1021 (1902).
In this case, New Hampshire is prosecuting Johnson for child neglect. The defendant took
his minor child from school, believing in good faith that her attendance at and
confinement in school would seriously injure her reason and health. As evidence of this
reasonable belief defendant gave evidence that he informed two members of the school
board before he removed her from the school, and received a physician’s opinion
indicating that his child’s confinement in the school would greatly endanger her life. This
evidence tended to show that the action of the defendant in withdrawing the child from
school was apparently reasonably necessary in defense of the child’s life. It also tended to
show an attempt by the respondent to comply with the law. The court found Jackson not
guilty.
State v. Riddle, 45 N.C. App. 34 (1980)
Two defendants were charged with engaging in a riot during a prison break. Defendants
appealed the convictions on the basis that the assemblage was involuntary and that the
minimum requirement of persons needed to constitute a riot were not present (the state
listed only the two defendants and the statute required an assemblage of three or more
persons). The Court found that while an assemblage of inmates is involuntary, the
involuntariness does not negate the fact of an assemblage. The Court concluded that the
law requires that the State need only show the fact of an assemblage, a group or gathering
of people.
Page 45 of 61
Spakes v. State, 913 S.W.2d 597 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996)
The highest criminal court in Texas allowed the jury to be instructed on the necessity
defense before deliberating the verdict for an inmate whose three cellmates had planned
an escape and threatened to slit his throat if he did not accompany them. The defendant
inmate argued that because of the terribly violent crimes of which his cellmates had been
convicted (one had bragged about chopping his girlfriend up with an ax), he accompanied
them and escaped. Even though he made no attempt to return himself to custody when he
was separated from his cellmates, the court still allowed the defense. The court found,
“So long as a defendant presents evidence that his initial departure from custody was
occasioned by the immediate necessity to avoid imminent harm, he is entitled to an
instruction on the defense of necessity.”
Com. v. Leno, 415 Mass. 835, 616 N.E.2d 453 (Mass. 1993)
After defendants were arrested for exchanging clean syringes and needles for used,
possibly contaminated, ones in an attempt to prevent the spread of AIDS, defendants
were convicted of unauthorized possession of instruments to administer controlled
substances and unlawful distribution of an instrument to administer controlled
substances. Defendants sought review. Defendants did not deny that they violated the
provisions of the statute restricting the possession and distribution of hypodermic
needles; rather, they contended that the judge's refusal to instruct the jury on the defense
of necessity was error. The court held that the prevention of possible future harm did not
excuse violation of the law in anticipation of a potential public benefit. The court held
that defendants were not raising a defense of necessity, but attempting jury nullification.
Page 46 of 61
State v. Noyes, 149 Wis. 2d 401 (1989)
Defendant was charged with drunk driving. She wished to present a necessity defense
under § 939.47, i.e., she was forced to choose between violating the law or allowing
another person to suffer grave physical harm or death. According to the offer of proof,
defendant was a passenger when the driver became unconscious. Defendant was forced to
reach over and grab the steering wheel, brake the car, and drive it off the road. She then
observed that the driver was bleeding from his mouth. She tried unsuccessfully to phone
for help and to flag down other drivers. Believing the driver to be dying, she began
driving to the police station. Police stopped her and charged her with drunk driving. An
examining doctor later concluded that the driver had not been ill, only intoxicated. The
trial court prohibited the necessity defense. On appeal, the court reversed, finding that the
driver's apparent impending death due to illness qualified as a natural physical force
required for application of the statute. The court found further that it could not say as a
matter of law that defendant acted unreasonably and that the issue of the reasonableness
of her actions was for the jury to determine.
United States v. Crown, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7443
Defendant indicated that he was going to assert the defense of necessity against the
charge of illegally reentering the United States following deportation, in violation of the 8
U.S.C.S. § 1326(a), (b)(2). The defense was predicated on the argument that defendant
had HIV and/or AIDS, and that it was necessary for him to reenter the United States
illegally in order to seek treatment for the disease. The Government filed a motion to
Page 47 of 61
preclude defendant from interposing the necessity defense; and from making any
reference to HIV or AIDS at trial. The court found that defendant was not entitled to offer
evidence at trial on the defense of necessity because there were lawful alternatives
available to him other than entering the country illegally, such as applying for reentry or
traveling to another country other in order to seek treatment for HIV and/or AIDS.
Page 48 of 61
2007 MOCK TRIAL
TOURNAMENT RULES
Page 49 of 61
The annual Mock Trial Tournament is governed by the rules set forth below. These rules
are designed to ensure excellence in presentation and fairness in judging all trials.
TEAM PRESENTATIONS
1.
The official mock trial materials, consisting of the Statement of Stipulated Facts,
Witness Statements, Relevant Statutes and Case Law, and Pieces of Evidence,
comprise the sole source of information for testimony. The Stipulated Facts and
any additional stipulations may not be disputed at trial.
2.
Each witness is bound by the facts in the given witness statement. All
participants agree that the witness statements are signed and sworn affidavits.
Witness Statements may not be introduced as evidence, but may be used for
impeachment.
Fair additions which (a) are consistent with facts contained in the witness
affidavits and (b) do not materially give an advantage to the testifying party are
permitted. If a witness is asked a question on cross-examination which is not
dealt with in the witness's statement, the witness may invent an answer favorable
to that witness's position.
Students may read other cases, materials, or articles in preparation for the mock
trial. However, they may only cite the materials given, and they may only
introduce into evidence those documents given in the official mock trial packet.
3.
If a witness testifies in contradiction of a fact in the witness statement during
direct examination, there is no objection for “violating the rules of the mock
trial.” The opposition must show the contradiction on cross-examination through
correct use of the affidavit for impeachment. If a witness testifies in contradiction
of a fact on cross-examination, the cross examining attorney should show the
contradiction through impeachment also. This procedure is spelled out in the
Simplified Rules of Evidence.
4.
If on direct examination witness invents an answer which is likely to affect the
outcome of the trial, the opposition should show this on cross-examination
through correct use of the affidavit for impeachment. This procedure is spelled
out in the Simplified Rules of Evidence. The scorers should consider such
inventions of facts in scoring the witness’ presentation.
5.
Witnesses are not permitted to use notes in testifying during the trial.
6.
All participants are expected to display proper courtroom decorum and collegial
sportsmanlike conduct. The decisions of the judges with regard to rules
challenges and all other decisions are final.
Page 50 of 61
7.
The trial proceedings are governed by the Simplified Rules of Evidence. Other
more complex rules may not be raised in the trial.
8.
During the actual trial, teachers, attorneys, other coaches, affiliated nonparticipating team members, parents and all other observers may not talk to,
signal, or otherwise communicate with or coach their teams. Team members may
communicate with each other during the trial. Instructors from opposing teams
are advised to sit next to one another, if possible, and be reasonable. The purpose
of this rule is to prevent last minute coaching; it is not intended as a device to
disqualify an opposing team.
9.
Neither team may introduce surprise witnesses nor call witnesses from the other
side. All witnesses (three for each side) must take the stand, in whatever order or
sequence determined by the party calling them.
10.
Witnesses will not be excluded from the courtroom during the trial.
11.
All teams in the tournament must consist of from three to eight attorneys, and
three witnesses. Exceptions may be made by the D.C. Street Law Clinic after
consultation.
12.
Only students registered in their high school for the Street Law class as of
February 15, 2007 will be eligible to participate in the Mock Trial Tournament
unless otherwise approved by the Director.
13.
Teams are expected to be present at the Superior Court for the District of
Columbia by 5:30 p.m. the days of the trials. Trials will begin at 6 p.m.
14.
The starting time of any trial will not be delayed for longer than 15 minutes.
Incomplete teams will have to begin without their other members, or with
alternates.
JUDGING
1.
Presiding judges for the mock trials may include Judges and Commissioners of
the District of Columbia, law school faculty, members of the D.C. Bar, other
attorneys, or others approved by the Director.
2.
All judges receive the Guidelines for Judges, Judge’s Score Sheet, the Simplified
Rules of Evidence, and the Mock Trial Packet.
3.
Presiding judges are asked to make a legal decision on the merits of the case, but
this does not affect a team’s score. The decision on team scores is made by a
scoring panel, consisting of two or more scorers selected by the Street Law Staff
Page 51 of 61
and, in some instances, the presiding judge. The criteria for scoring are discussed
in the Guidelines for Scorers and the Score Sheet.
4.
All decisions of the judges are final.
Page 52 of 61
SIMPLIFIED RULES OF
EVIDENCE
Page 53 of 61
To assure each side a fair trial, certain rules have been developed to govern the types of
evidence that may be introduced, as well as the manner in which evidence may be
presented. These rules are called the "rules of evidence." The attorneys and the judge are
responsible for enforcing these rules. Before the judge can apply a rule of evidence, an
attorney must ask the judge to do so. Attorneys do this by making "objections" to the
evidence or procedure employed by the opposing side. When an objection is raised, the
attorney who asked the question that is being challenged will usually be asked by the
judge why the question was not in violation of the rules of evidence.
The rules of evidence used in real trials can be very complicated. A few of the most
important rules of evidence have been adapted for mock trial purposes, and these are
presented below.
Rule 1. Leading Questions:
A "leading" question is one that suggests the answer desired by the questioner, usually by
stating some facts not previously discussed and then asking the witness to give a yes or
no answer.
Example:
"So, Mr. Smith, you took Ms. Jones to a movie that night,
didn't you?"
Leading questions may not be asked on direct or redirect examination. Leading questions
may be used on cross-examination.
Objection:
"Objection, Your Honor, counsel is leading the witness."
Possible Response:
"Your Honor, leading is permissible on cross-examination,"
or "I'll rephrase the question." For example, the question
can be rephrased: "Mr. Smith, where did you go that night?
With whom did you go to the movies?" (This would not
suggest the answer the attorney desires.)
Rule 2. Narration:
Narration occurs when the witness provides more information than the question called
for.
Example:
Question - "What did you do when you reached the front door of
the house?"
Page 54 of 61
Witness - "I opened the door and walked into the kitchen. I was
afraid that he was in the house -- you know, he had been acting
quite strangely the day before."
Witnesses' answers must respond to the questions.
objectionable.
A narrative answer is
Objection: "Objection, Your Honor, the witness is narrating."
Response: "Your Honor, the witness is telling us a complete sequence of events."
Rule 3. Relevance:
Questions and answers must relate to the subject matter of the case; this is called
"relevance." Questions or answers that do not relate to the case are "irrelevant."
Example: (In a traffic accident case) "Mrs. Smith, how many times have you been
married?"
Irrelevant questions or answers are objectionable.
Objection: "Your Honor, this question is irrelevant to this case."
Response: "Your Honor, this series of questions will show that Mrs. Smith's first
husband was killed in an auto accident, and this fact has increased her
mental suffering in this case."
Rule 4. Hearsay:
"Hearsay" is something the witness has heard someone say outside the courtroom. Also,
any written statement made outside the courtroom is hearsay.
Example: "Harry told me that he was going to visit Mr. Brown."
Hearsay evidence is objectionable. However, there are two exceptions to the hearsay
rule for purposes of the mock trial. If an exception applies, the court will allow hearsay
evidence to be introduced. Exception: In a mock trial, hearsay evidence is allowed
when the witness is repeating a statement made directly to the witness by one of the
witnesses in the case. Hearsay is also allowed if one of the witnesses is repeating a
statement made by an individual who is no longer alive.
Note that this exception to the hearsay rule does not extend to witness testimony about
what another person heard a witness say. This is "double hearsay."
Example: Mary, the plaintiff, told me that Harry, the defendant was drunk the night
of the accident.
Objection: "Objection, Your Honor, this is double hearsay."
Page 55 of 61
Response: "Your Honor, since Harry is the defendant, the witness can testify to a
statement he heard Harry make."
For mock trials, other exceptions to the hearsay rule are not used.
Rule 5. Firsthand Knowledge:
Witnesses must have directly seen, heard, or experienced whatever it is they are testifying
about. A lack of firsthand knowledge is objectionable.
Example: "I saw Harry drink two beers that night. I know Harry well enough to
know that two beers usually make him drunk, and he seemed drunk that
night, too."
Objection: "Your Honor, the witness has no firsthand knowledge of Harry's condition
that night."
Response: "The witness is just generally describing her usual and actual experience
with Harry."
Rule 6. Opinions:
Unless a witness is qualified as an expert in the appropriate field, such as medicine or
ballistics, the witness may not give an opinion about matters relating to that field.
Opinions are objectionable unless given by an expert qualified in the appropriate
field.
Example: (Said by a witness who is not a doctor) "The doctor put my cast on wrong.
That's why I have a limp now."
Objection: "Objection, Your Honor, the witness is giving an opinion."
Response: "Your Honor, the witness may answer the question because ordinary
persons can judge whether a cast was put on correctly."
Ruling:
A judge will likely sustain this objection because it may not be within an
ordinary person’s knowledge to know whether an incorrectly placed cast
will cause a limp.
As an exception to this rule, a lay witness may give an opinion based on common
experience.
Example: "It looked to me like Harry was drunk that night. I’ve seen him drunk and
have seen other drunks before.”
Objection: "Objection, Your Honor, the witness is giving an opinion."
Response: "Your Honor, the witness may answer the question because ordinary
persons may judge whether or not a person appeared drunk based on the
witness’ experience."
Page 56 of 61
Rule 7. Opinions on the Ultimate Issue:
Witnesses, including experts, cannot give opinions on the ultimate issue of the case: the
guilt or innocence of the defendant or the liability of the parties. These are matters for
the trier of fact to decide.
Example: "I believe that Mr. Smith was negligent in driving too fast in this case."
Opinions on the ultimate issue in a case are objectionable.
Objection: "Your Honor, the witness is giving an opinion on the ultimate issue – the
negligence of
Mr. Smith."
Response: "The witness is commenting that the driver was speeding. This is not the
ultimate issue in this case."
Rule 8. Additional Rules of Evidence:
1.
Objections during the testimony of a witness must be made only by the direct
examining and cross-examining attorneys for that witness.
2.
Cross-examination is not limited to the scope of direct questioning.
3.
A short redirect examination, limited to no more than two questions, will be
allowed following cross-examination, if an attorney desires. Questions on
redirection are limited to the scope of the cross-examination.
4. If an attorney (on direct or cross-examination) repeatedly asks a witness to discuss
the exact same matter, opposing counsel may object to the question as being
“asked and answered.” It is in the court’s interest to have the trial move along in
a timely manner.
5.
Witnesses must be treated with respect by opposing counsel. If an attorney
continuously, and for no valid trial or evidentiary purpose, takes a disrespectful
tone with the witness, the opposing counsel may object that the questioning
attorney is “badgering the witness.”
Rule 9. Special Procedures:
Procedure 1. Introduction of Documents or Physical Evidence:
Sometimes the parties wish to offer as evidence letters, affidavits, contracts, or other
documents, or even physical evidence such as a murder weapon, broken consumer goods,
etc. Special procedures must be followed before these items can be used in trial.
Page 57 of 61
Step 1: Introducing the Item for Identification
a.
An attorney says to the judge, "Your Honor, I wish to have this (letter, document,
item) marked for identification as (Plaintiff's Exhibit A, Defense Exhibit 1, etc.)."
b. The attorney takes the item to the clerk, who marks it appropriately.
c. The attorney shows the item to the opposing counsel.
d. The attorney shows the item to the witness and says, "Do you recognize this item
marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit A?"
Witness: "Yes."
Attorney: "Can you please identify this item?"
Witness: "This is a letter I wrote to John Doe on September 1." (Or witness gives
other appropriate identification.)
e. The attorney may then proceed to ask the witness questions about the document
or item.
Step 2. Moving the Document or Item into Evidence.
If the attorney wishes the judge or jury to consider the document or item itself as part of
the evidence and not just as testimony about it, the attorney must ask to move the item
into evidence at the end of the witness examination. The attorney proceeds as follows:
a. The attorney says, "Your Honor, I offer this (document/item) into evidence as
Plaintiff's Exhibit A, and ask that the court so admit it."
b. Opposing counsel may look at the evidence and make objections at this time.
c. The judge rules on whether the item may be admitted into evidence.
Procedure 2. Impeachment
On cross-examination, an attorney wants to show that the witness should not be believed.
This is best accomplished through a process called "impeachment," which may use one of
the following tactics: (1) asking questions about prior conduct of the witness that makes
the witness' truthfulness doubtful (e.g., "Isn't it true that you once lost a job because you
falsified expense reports?"); (2) asking about evidence of certain types of criminal
convictions (e.g., "You were convicted of shoplifting, weren't you?"); or (3) showing that
the witness has contradicted a prior statement, particularly one made by the witness in an
affidavit. Witness statements in the Mock Trials Materials are considered to be
affidavits.
In order to impeach the witness by comparing information in the affidavit to the witness'
testimony, attorneys should use this procedure:
Step 1:
Repeat the statement the witness made on direct or cross-examination that
contradicts the affidavit.
Page 58 of 61
Example: "Now, Mrs. Burke, on direct examination you testified that you were out of
town on the night in question, didn't you?" (Witness responds, "Yes.")
Step 2:
Step 3:
Introduce the affidavit for identification, using the procedure described in
Procedure 1.
Ask the witness to read from his or her affidavit the part that contradicts
the statement made on direct examination.
Example: "All right, Mrs. Burke, will you read paragraph three?" (Witness reads, "Harry
and I decided to stay in town and go to the theater.")
Step 4:
Dramatize the conflict in the statements. (Remember, the point of this line
of questioning is to demonstrate the contradiction in the statements, not to
determine whether Mrs. Burke was in town or out of town.)
Example: "So, Mrs. Burke, you testified that you were out of town on the night in
question, didn't you?" "Yes." "Yet, in your affidavit you said you were in town, didn't
you?" "Yes."
Note: For an impeachment for a contradictory prior statement, the point is that because
the witness has made two contradictory statements about a matter, the witness may not be
believable on that matter. The contradiction also may cast doubt on the witness’
truthfulness, generally. Impeachment does NOT disprove a statement; it only casts doubt
on either statement.
Procedure 3. Qualifying an Expert
Only a witness who is qualified as an expert may give an opinion as to scientific,
technical, or other specialized knowledge in the area of his/her expertise. (Note: A lay
witness may give an opinion about something related to one's common experience
(see Rule 6) Experts cannot give opinions on the ultimate issue of the case.
Before an expert gives his/her expert opinion on a matter, the lawyer must first qualify
the expert. There are two steps to qualify an expert. First, the lawyer must lay a
foundation that shows the expert is qualified to testify on issues related to that expert's
field of expertise. To lay a foundation, the lawyer asks the expert to describe factors such
as schooling, professional training, work experience and books he/she has written that
make a person an expert regarding a particular field. Second, once the witness has
testified about his/her qualifications, the lawyer asks the judge to qualify the witness as
an expert in a particular field.
Example: The wife of Harold Hart is suing Dr. Smith and General Hospital for
malpractice. She claims they did not treat Mr. Hart for an obvious heart attack when he
Page 59 of 61
was brought to the hospital. Mrs. Hart's lawyer is examining his expert witness, Dr.
Jones:
Q: Dr. Jones, what is your occupation?
A: I am a heart surgeon. I am Chief of Staff at the Howard University Medical
Center.
Q: What medical school did you attend?
A: I graduated from Georgetown Medical School in 1978.
Q: Where did you do your internship?
A: I did a two-year internship in cardiology at John Hopkins University from 19781980.
Q: Did you afterwards specialize in any particular field of medicine?
A: Yes, I specialized in heart attack treatment and heart surgery.
Q: Have you published any articles or books?
A: I wrote a chapter in a medical text on heart surgery procedures after heart attacks.
Q: Describe the chapter.
A: I set out the steps for identifying heart attacks and doing open heart surgery.
Q: What professional licenses do you have?
A: I am certified by the D.C. Board of Medical Examiners to practice medicine in
D.C.
Attorney #1: Your Honor, I ask that Dr. Jones be qualified as an expert in the field of
medicine.
Judge:
Any objection?
Attorney #2: We object. No foundation has been laid regarding Dr. Jones's ability to
render an opinion as to all fields of medicine.
Judge: Objection sustained. Dr. Jones's expertise
seems to be limited to certain areas
of medicine.
Attorney #1: Thank you, your Honor. We ask that Dr. Jones be qualified as an expert in
the field of heart surgery.
Judge:
Any objections?
Attorney #2: No, your Honor.
Judge:
Let the record reflect that Dr. Jones is qualified to testify as an expert in
the field of heart surgery.
Once qualified, an expert may give opinions relating only to the expert's area of
expertise. That is, an expert cannot give an opinion in an area outside his/her expertise.
Example: (Dr. Jones has been qualified as an expert on heart surgery.)
Q: Dr. Jones, what is your opinion as to Mr. Hart's cause of death?
A: The patient suffered a massive heart attack caused by clogged arteries.
Q: Dr. Jones, in your opinion, is it true as the defense contends that the patient also
suffering from a rare lung disease transmitted through contact with the North
American mongoose as the defense contends?
Page 60 of 61
Objection:
The witness is testifying outside her area of expertise.
Judge:
Sustained. Please confine your opinion to matters related to care and
treatment of the heart.
Q: Dr. Jones, in your opinion, how should the patient's doctors have treated him?
A: They should have recognized that the patient was having a heart attack based on
his chest pains, purple face, difficulty breathing, and numbness in his left arm.
They should have given him the proper medication and treated him in the
emergency room right away.
Q: Who was at fault in this matter?
A:
Dr. Smith and General Hospital were definitely negligent.
Objection:
The witness is testifying to the ultimate issue of the case, which is whether
Dr. Smith and General Hospital are liable for malpractice. That is a
question of fact for the judge (or jury, when the case is tried before a jury)
to decide.
Judge:
Sustained.
Page 61 of 61
Special Thanks to:
Algie Said
Brittany Shumate
Helen Wong
Street Law Staff
Justin Brooks
Norman Schneider
Vincent Forte
Sherry Kaiser
Jake Epstein
Sheetal Khera
Minuteman Press