http://glasses-justice.livejournal.com/ (![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
glasses-justice.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
fandomhigh2010-06-10 06:17 am
glasses-justice.livejournal.com) wrote in fandomhigh2010-06-10 06:17 am
Entry tags:
Anatomy of a Trial [Period 4, Class #5, 6-10]
Class was still in the Danger Shop, and would be for the foreseeable future. It made Alex feel like a real prosecutor again. Call it a perk of the job.
"Today, we cross-examine witnesses," Alex said. "It's important that we all understand what that means. You are not Barry Payson. Payson, for those who don't know, was a fictional lawyer, one that liked to pull off dramatic courtroom reveals. He would interview a little old lady about IDing his client on the night in question, then prove the moon wasn't out and the little old lady wasn't wearing her glasses, so her ID is meaningless. Half the time, the little old lady would end up being guilty, and framing his client to boot. It makes for good drama, but that's not what you're doing here today.
"Instead, you're going to raise uncertainty. If a scientific expert is testifying, ask how accurate the tests in question are. Then ask what those numbers mean. If a DNA match is 99% accurate, how many people would match that closely to the sample? Ten? A hundred? A million? How many of those, from a statistical standpoint, would live in the tri-state area?
"If a friend is serving as a character witness, ask how well he really knows the person in question. Was he privy to some of the underhandedness we've discovered? If so, his judgment is iffy, and if not, how well can he really know the defendant? Ask if the friend would ever lie on the defendant's behalf. If no, suggest they aren't all that close, and if so, let that implication stand for itself.
"Every discrepancy matters. If official records differ by so much as two minutes, call attention to that fact. Was one side sloppy? Is there information missing? If you're on the defense and not the prosecution, then jump on any and all police errors available to you. Police officers are human beings, and even the most competent and professional will occasionally misstep. You don't need to suggest a vast police conspiracy to convict your client; it would suffice to hint that the police can't be sure enough that your client is guilty. Work for reasonable doubt.
"In the end, you're going to be suggesting that the other side is not as certain of its arguments as it pretends to be. If someone says 'I think,' ask how sure they are. What if it was earlier, or later? What if it was a different day entirely? You see how it works, I'm sure. So try it out and see how far you get.
"Lastly." She smiled at them. "Next week will be closing arguments, and then I'm open to suggestions for our last week together. If I don't hear a better idea, it'll be a final."
"Today, we cross-examine witnesses," Alex said. "It's important that we all understand what that means. You are not Barry Payson. Payson, for those who don't know, was a fictional lawyer, one that liked to pull off dramatic courtroom reveals. He would interview a little old lady about IDing his client on the night in question, then prove the moon wasn't out and the little old lady wasn't wearing her glasses, so her ID is meaningless. Half the time, the little old lady would end up being guilty, and framing his client to boot. It makes for good drama, but that's not what you're doing here today.
"Instead, you're going to raise uncertainty. If a scientific expert is testifying, ask how accurate the tests in question are. Then ask what those numbers mean. If a DNA match is 99% accurate, how many people would match that closely to the sample? Ten? A hundred? A million? How many of those, from a statistical standpoint, would live in the tri-state area?
"If a friend is serving as a character witness, ask how well he really knows the person in question. Was he privy to some of the underhandedness we've discovered? If so, his judgment is iffy, and if not, how well can he really know the defendant? Ask if the friend would ever lie on the defendant's behalf. If no, suggest they aren't all that close, and if so, let that implication stand for itself.
"Every discrepancy matters. If official records differ by so much as two minutes, call attention to that fact. Was one side sloppy? Is there information missing? If you're on the defense and not the prosecution, then jump on any and all police errors available to you. Police officers are human beings, and even the most competent and professional will occasionally misstep. You don't need to suggest a vast police conspiracy to convict your client; it would suffice to hint that the police can't be sure enough that your client is guilty. Work for reasonable doubt.
"In the end, you're going to be suggesting that the other side is not as certain of its arguments as it pretends to be. If someone says 'I think,' ask how sure they are. What if it was earlier, or later? What if it was a different day entirely? You see how it works, I'm sure. So try it out and see how far you get.
"Lastly." She smiled at them. "Next week will be closing arguments, and then I'm open to suggestions for our last week together. If I don't hear a better idea, it'll be a final."
OOC - ANAT05
HINATA: voir dire (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2468632.html?thread=160285208#t160285208) • discussion (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2476807.html?thread=161289991#t161289991) • opening (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2484400.html?thread=161168048#t161168048) • feedback (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2484400.html?thread=161168304#t161168304) • discussion (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2493268.html?thread=161478996#t161478996)
KARLA: voir dire (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2468632.html?thread=160285464#t160285464) • discussion (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2476807.html?thread=160836103#t160836103) • discussion (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2493268.html?thread=161487956#t161487956) • examination (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2493268.html?thread=161488212#t161488212)
SQUALL: voir dire (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2468632.html?thread=160285720#t160285720) • discussion (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2476807.html?thread=160857863#t160857863) • opening (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2484400.html?thread=161169072#t161169072) • feedback (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2484400.html?thread=161169328#t161169328) • discussion (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2493268.html?thread=161499988#t161499988)
VANCE: voir dire (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2468632.html?thread=160285976#t160285976)
WARREN: voir dire (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2468632.html?thread=160286232#t160286232)
And for the sake of OCD-completeness:
ALEX CABOT: voir dire (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2468632.html?thread=160282136#t160282136) • discussion (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2476807.html?thread=160827911#t160827911) • opening (http://community.livejournal.com/fandomhigh/2484400.html?thread=161166768#t161166768)