Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
An Academic Extra-Curricular Activity for High School Students
The Georgia High School Mock Trial Competition is a project of the
Young Lawyers Division of the State Bar of Georgia
104 Marietta Street, NW; Suite 100; Atlanta, GA 30303 404/527-8779
or 800/334-6865 (ext. 779) Fax: 404/527-8717
www.georgiamocktrial.org [email protected]
Facebook: GeorgiaMockTrial Twitter: GA_MockTrial
Michael Nixon, Director/State Mock Trial Coordinator
2
2016 Mock Trial Team Manual TABLE OF CONTENTS
ADA Compliance & Deadline Reminders ............................................................................................................. 5
Honor Roll of Georgia Champions ........................................................................................................................ 6
Prior Georgia Mock Trial Cases ............................................................................................................................ 7
Supporters of the GHSMT Competition ............................................................................................................... 8
YLD High School Mock Trial Committee ............................................................................................................. 10
Competition Rationale and Goals ...................................................................................................................... 12
The 2016 Case Materials
2016 Case Credits.......................................................................................................................................................... 13
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 14
Stipulations ................................................................................................................................................................... 14
Witness Summary & Exhibit Summary ......................................................................................................................... 15
Indictment ..................................................................................................................................................................... 16
Witness Statements ...................................................................................................................................................... 17
Exhibits .......................................................................................................................................................................... 50
Legal Authorities ........................................................................................................................................................... 68
Charge of the Court....................................................................................................................................................... 70
The 2016 Rules
I. Rules of the Competition
A. The Problem ..................................................................................................................................................... 80
B. The Trial ........................................................................................................................................................... 81
C. Judging ............................................................................................................................................................. 88
D. Dispute Settlement .......................................................................................................................................... 91
II. Rules of Procedure
A. Before the Trial ................................................................................................................................................ 93
B. Beginning the Trial ........................................................................................................................................... 93
C. Presenting Evidence .......................................................................................................................................... 93
D. Special Mock Trial Objections ........................................................................................................................... 93
E. Critique .............................................................................................................................................................. 94
III. Georgia High School Mock Trial Competition Rules of Evidence
I. General Provisions ............................................................................................................................................. 94
II. Judicial Notice ................................................................................................................................................... 95
III. Presumptions in Civil Actions and Proceedings ............................................................................................... 95
IV. Relevancy and Its Limits ................................................................................................................................... 95
V. Privileges ........................................................................................................................................................... 96
VI. Witnesses ......................................................................................................................................................... 96
VII. Opinions and Expert Testimony ...................................................................................................................... 98
VIII. Hearsay ........................................................................................................................................................... 98
X. Contents of Writing, Recordings, and Photographs ........................................................................................ 100
XI. Miscellaneous Rules ....................................................................................................................................... 100
Competition Information
Timekeeper Instructions & Time Card Use Chart........................................................................................................ 101
Explanation of the Performance Ratings Used on the Mock Trial Ballot .................................................................... 106
3
All competition forms may be found behind the password protected portion of
the TEAM INFORMATION page of the mock trial website
(www.georgiamocktrial.org)
Copyright © 2015 by the High School Mock Trial Committee of the Young Lawyers Division, State Bar of Georgia. All rights reserved. Permission to duplicate portions of this manual for non-profit educational purposes is hereby granted, provided
acknowledgement is given to the Georgia High School Mock Trial Committee, Young Lawyers Division, State Bar of Georgia.
4
NOTICE OF MOCK TRIAL PROGRAM’S COMPLIANCE WITH
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT REQUIREMENTS
If any team member has a disability and requires special assistance, special services, or printed materials in
alternative formats in order to participate in the Georgia Mock Trial Competition, the Teacher Coach should
contact the Mock Trial State Coordinator at 404/527-8779, 800/334-6865 (ext. 779) or
[email protected] well in advance of the case release date or as soon as the student joins the mock trial
team. There may be some delay in delivery of case materials in an alternative format if a coach does not
inform the Mock Trial office of this request in a timely manner and well in advance of the case release date.
At competition, it is not the intention of the High School Mock Trial Committee to disclose unnecessarily
the special circumstances of any students; however, in some cases, limited disclosure is necessary to assure
competition fairness. In such cases, disclosure will only be made to the extent necessary to assure fairness.
Coaches with questions concerning the existence of any special circumstances should contact the Mock
Trial office well in advance of competition day.
REMINDER OF DUE DATES
Team Member List (includes names of 4-Year Participants) ............................................ January 13, 2015 This form lists all young people on your team, including additional, non-competing members and timekeepers. All
members must report birthdates. If you have new coaches since registration in October, please submit the Supplemental
Team Coach Form. These forms are located under the Forms link in the Team Information section of the website and are
to be sent to the Mock Trial office by the due date.
Trial Squad Roster Form ................................. Competition Date/Each Round (Regional, District & State) This form lists Prosecution/Plaintiff and Defense squads separately, identifying the roles played by competing team
members. It must be prepared according to instructions and duplicated for distribution to opponents and judging
panels in all rounds at competition. This form is located under the Forms link in the Team Information section of the
website.
Code of Ethical Conduct/Team Roster Form ........................ Competition Date (Regional, District & State) All team members and coaches must sign this Code and deliver it to the trial coordinator at the trial site. This form is
located under the Forms link in the Team Information section of the website.
District Champion Paperwork ............................................................................................ March 5, 2016 All required forms for State Finals are due BEFORE NOON on this date. Early submission of these materials is greatly
appreciated. These forms will be provided to the appropriate teams in the Regional Champion at the end of the
regional level of competition.
Attorney Coach CLE Form ................................................................................................ March 15, 2015 All attorney coaches wishing to receive CLE credit for coaching during the 2015 mock trial season must submit this
form to the Mock Trial office. An attorney coach must coach at least 10 hours in order to be eligible for the credit.
Contact the Mock Trial office with any questions. This form is located both under the Forms section on the Team
Information and Volunteer pages of the Mock Trial website.
Outstanding Coach Award Nominations ............................................................................ April 15, 2015 Information about nominating a coach for an Outstanding Coach award may be found on the Mock Trial website on
the Team Information page.
5
Honor Roll of Georgia Champion Mock Trial Teams
1988 – Jonesboro High School, Jonesboro .............................................. Dallas, TX (placement unknown*)
1989 – Brookstone School, Columbus ................................................ Louisville, KY (placement unknown*)
1990 – Brookstone School, Columbus ............................................................. Portland, OR (7th
place—tie)
1991 – South Gwinnett High School, Snellville .................................................. New Orleans, LA (4th
place)
1992 – Brookstone School, Columbus ................................................................... Madison, WI (11th
place)
1993 – Crisp County High School, Cordele ................................................................ Atlanta, GA (9th
place)
1994 – Northwest Whitfield High School, Tunnel Hill .............................................. Chicago, IL (15th
place)
1995 – South Gwinnett High School, Snellville .......................................... Denver, CO National Champion
1996 – Redan High School, Stone Mountain ......................................................... Pittsburgh, PA (4th
place)
1997 – Ware County Magnet School, Manor ........................................................ Nashville, TN (11th
place)
1998 – Clarke Central High School, Athens ..................................................... Albuquerque, NM (6th
place)
1999 – Clarke Central High School, Athens ............................................ St. Louis, MO National Champion
2000 – Henry W. Grady High School, Atlanta ...................................................... Columbia, SC (13th
place)
2001 – Riverdale High School, Riverdale ..................................................................Omaha, NE (13th
place)
2002 – Jonesboro High School, Jonesboro ............................................................. St. Paul, MN (10th
place)
2003 – Jonesboro High School, Jonesboro ...................................................... New Orleans, LA (16th
place)
2004 – Clarke Central High School, Athens ............................................................. Orlando, FL (23rd
place)
2005 – Henry W. Grady High School, Atlanta ...................................................... Charlotte, NC (16th
place)
2006 – Jonesboro High School, Jonesboro .................................................... Oklahoma City, OK (5th
place)
2007 – Jonesboro High School, Jonesboro ................................................... Dallas, TX National Champion
2008 – Jonesboro High School, Jonesboro ..........................................Wilmington, DE National Champion
2009 – Henry W. Grady High School, Atlanta ........................................................... Atlanta, GA (8th
place)
2010 – Henry W. Grady High School, Atlanta ................................................... Philadelphia, PA (3rd
place)
2011 – Henry W. Grady High School, Atlanta ........................................................... Phoenix, AZ (4th
place)
2012 – Henry W. Grady High School, Atlanta ................................................ Albuquerque, NM (2nd
place)
2013 – Middle Georgia Christian Homeschool Association, Macon ................. Indianapolis, IN (35th
place)
2014 – Jonesboro High School, Jonesboro ............................................................ Madison, WI (34th
place)
2015 – Northview High School, Johns Creek ............................................................. Raleigh, NC (2nd
place)
*From 1983 until 1990, only the placement of the top four teams was announced during the national level of competition.
6
Cases Used and Issues Studied in Previous Georgia Mock Trial Seasons
1988 – State v. Bryant ..................................................................... Drug Trafficking (Entrapment Defense)
1989 – Johnson v. Bowen ................................................................................................. DUI (Host Liability)
1990 – State v. Barrett ................................................................... Homicide (Battered Woman Syndrome)
1991 – Hills v. Midway School Board ............................................... Freedom of Speech in a School Setting
1992 – State v. Binder ........................................................................................................... Drug Trafficking
1993 – Alexander v. Cooper, Cook & Troy .......................................... Sexual Harassment in the Workplace
1994 – U.S. v. Remy ........................................................................................... Conspiracy to Import Drugs
1995 – Tenebrous v. Busy Bee Express .................................................................................. Personal Injury
1996 – State v. Foil .......................................................................................................................... Homicide
1997 – Ortega v. Brewster ................................................................................................... Wrongful Death
1998 – State v. Peterson ................................................................... Involuntary Manslaughter and Hazing
1999 – O’Riley v. Happy Daze Daycare Center ...................................................................... Personal Injury
2000 – State v. Brunetti .................................................................................................................. Homicide
2001 – Hamilton v. Sadler ....................................................................................................................... Libel
2002 – State v. Cunningham ..................................................................................... Homicide/Self-Defense
2003 – Schwinn v. Farnsworth ................................................................................ Comparative Negligence
2004 – State v. Finn ........................................................................................................................ Homicide
2005 – Fields v. Register ...................................................................................................... Wrongful Death
2006 – State v. Banks ........................................................................................................... Homicide/Arson
2007 – LaQuinta v. Hill.......................................................................................................... Wrongful Death
2008 – State v. Bryant ..................................................................... Drug Trafficking (Entrapment Defense)
2009 – Sadler v. Hamilton........................................................................................................... Tort/Battery
2010 – State v. Stafford ................................................................................................... Aggravated Assault
2011 – Greenwood v. Durden ........................... 42 USC § 1983 Action (Social Media & Freedom of Speech)
2012 – State v. Capulet .............................................................................................. Homicide/Self Defense
2013 – Cowell v. Roberts .................................................................................................. Negligence/Malice
2014 – State v. Pyke ......................................................................................................................... Homicide
2015 – Stuart v. Garfunkel Property Group ........................................ Negligent Hiring/Negligent Retention
7
Supporters of the
Georgia High School Mock Trial Competition From July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015
We appreciate the generosity of those whose donations make possible the programs
offered by the YLD High School Mock Trial Committee. We welcome supporters and
accept tax-deductible contributions through the State Bar of Georgia Foundation.
Major Grantors
Youn g Law yers D iv is ion of the S tate Bar o f Geo rg ia
Patrons
Products Liability Law Section, State Bar of Georgia
Benefactors
Bay Mediation & Arbitration Services, LLC, Atlanta
Cathey & Strain, PC, Cronelia
Harris Penn Lowry LLP, Atlanta
Hunton & Williams, Richmond, VA
Internap Corporation, Atlanta
James A. Rice, PC, Atlanta
Lance A. Cooper, PC, Marietta
Sponsors
Denise H. Abramow
Barnes & Thornburg, LLP, Indianapolis, IN
The Beltran Firm, Atlanta
Childers, Schlueter & Smith, LLC, Atlanta
Detling Cole, LLC, Marietta
Thea Dietrick
Michael G. Geoffroy
Iron Gate Wealth Management, Johns Creek
Gerald and Judy Jobe
Peter A. Law, PC, Atlanta
Eugene and Amy Lee
Michael and Anne McGlamry
Nancy Minor
Neatworks, Inc., Johns Creek
Regal Pak
Jagannath Rao
Rowe Family Dental Care, LLC, Duluth
Madeleine N. Simmons
Arun and Nacha Vaithi
Friends
Rachel Bailey
Hon. Jane C. Barwick
Edward I. Bauer
Wenona Belton
Kate Brenan
Edmund Claussen
William and Janice Gathers
Nisha A. Goel
8
Robert E. Hall, PC, Roswell
Jennifer Huang
Alyssa Jackson
Amanda S. Jones
Jori Kasher State Farm Insurance, Atlanta
Daniel Mitnick & Associates, PC, Alpharetta
Jeffrey C. Morgan
Samantha L. Nakis
J. Nystrom
Jack and Ellen Rosenberg
John and Juliette Scales
Clarence Scott
Pamela Spalla
In-Kind Donors
Barberitos, Watkinsville
Barro ’s Re tal Ce ter, Athens
Bartow County Bar Association, Cartersville
Chick-fil-a, Cartersville
Du ki ’ Do uts, Oglethorpe Boulevard, Albany
Du ki ’ Do uts, Saxon Road, Watkinsville
Georgia Peanut Commission, Tifton
Christina R. Jenkins, LLC, Cartersville
Kam, Lewis & Ebersbach, Newnan
Terie Latala
Newnan Coweta Bar Association, Newnan
Northview High School, Johns Creek
Publix, Leesburg
Rep. Brad Raffensperger, District 50, Johns Creek
“a ’s Clu #6506, Albany
Turner Broadcasting (Michael Peyton), Atlanta
University of Georgia, School of Law, Athens
Western Circuit Bar Association, Bogart
Za y’s, Athens
9
THE 2015-2016 HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL COMMITTEE Jack Long, YLD President
Jennifer Mock, YLD President-Elect
E. Righton Johnston, HSMTC Chair
Adam Hebbard, HSMTC 1st
Vice Chair
Peyton Bell, HSMTC 2nd
Vice Chair
Consultant Emeritus to the GHSMT Committee
Hon. George H. Carley, Ret.,
Supreme Court of Georgia
Special Consultant to the GHSMT Committee
Hon. Stephen Louis A. Dillard,
Judge, Court of Appeals of Georgia
Ex-Officio
Robert Kauffman
President of the State Bar of Georgia
Pat O’Connor
State Bar of Georgia President-Elect
Patrise M. Perkins-Hooker
State Bar of Georgia Immediate Past President
Sharri Edenfield
Immediate Past Young Lawyers Division President
Past GHSMT
Committee Chairs Warner S. Fox (1987-89)
Elizabeth B. Hodges (1987-89)
Susan B. Devitt (1989-90)
Joseph A. Roseborough (1990-91)
Aimee R. Maxwell (1991-92)
Gregory S. Smith (1992-93)
Lela Smith Bridgers (1993-94)
Cathy Cox Brakefield (1994-95)
Julie D. Culhane (1995-96)
Catherine H. Hicks (1996-97)
H. Suzanne Smith (1997-98)
Frederick N. Sager, Jr. (1998-99)
Roy E. Manoll, III (1999-00)
Jennifer B. Mann (2000-01)
Christine S. Barker (2001-02)
Candace L. Byrd (2002-03)
Robert A. McDonald (2003-04)
Leah E. McEwen (2004-05)
Jason B. Thompson (2005-06)
Tania T. Trumble (2006-07)
“ara A. “ally E a s (2007-08)
William H. Noland (2008-09)
Stacey G. Evans (2009-10)
Ashley M. Palmer (2010-11)
Jon Setzer (2011-12)
Deshala Dixon (2012-13)
Kevin E. Epps (2013-14)
Lee Ann Feeley (2014-15)
10
THE 2015-2016 HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL SUBCOMMITTEES
Regional Coordinators
Melissa Banker
Lauren Mock
Julie Culhane
Kevin Epps
Nicole Golden
Christina Jenkins
Sherri Kelley
Alan Lightcap
Nathan Lock
John Manly
Megan Manly
Roy Manoll
Adrienne Nash
Chris Miranda
Judge Toby Prodgers
Emily Quan
Burke Sherwood
Robert Thomas
Byron Watson
Oron Webb
Subcommittee on the Problem
Judge Michael Barker, Chair
John Ratterree, Vice Chair
Christy Barker
Judge Melodie Clayton
Julie Culhane
Will Davis
Kevin Epps
Lee Ann Feeley
Adam Hebbard
E. Righton Johnson
Beth Jones
Judge Jennifer Mann
Roy Manoll
Jon Setzer
Bonnie Smith
Katie Wood
Subcommittee on Development
(Fundraising)
E. Righton Johnston, Chair
Sally Evans
Adam Hebbard
Betsy Hodges
Aimee Maxwell
Subcommittee on the Rules
Kevin Epps, Chair
Christy Barker
Candace Byrd
Deborah Craytor
Julie Culhane
Will Davis
Deshala Dixon
Kevin Epps
Sally Evans
Lee Ann Feeley
Adam Hebbard
E. Righton Johnston
William Noland
Ashley Palmer
Jon Setzer
Bonnie Smith
Robert Smith
Suzanne Smith
Non-Voting Coach Representatives to the
Rules Subcommittee:
Nathan Gaffney
Carl Gebo
Ken Mauldin
State Finals Planning Board
Hon. Stephen Louis A. Dillard, Special Consultant
Christy Barker
Candace Byrd
Deborah Craytor
Will Davis
Deshala Dixon
Kevin Epps
Sally Evans
Lee Ann Feeley
Adam Hebbard
Catherine Hicks
E. Righton Johnston
Judge Jennifer Mann
Lauren Mock
William Noland
Ashley Palmer
Bonnie Smith
Suzanne Smith
Jon Setzer
Elizabeth Thomas
Katie Wood
Subcommittee on Honors and Awards
Linda Spievack, Chair
Lee Ann Feeley
Kevin Epps
Betsy Hodges
E. Righton Johnson
Special Projects Task Force
Aimee Maxwell, Chair
Julie Culhane
Rhonda Klein
Deshala Dixon
2015 Law Academy Faculty & Staff
Judge John Carbo
Will Davis
Mike Dunham
Kevin Epps
Lee Ann Feeley
Adam Hebbard
E. Righton Johnson
Barry Stewart Mann
Michael Nixon
Megan Pearson
Jon Setzer
Parag Shah
Bonnie Smith
Harsha Sridhar
Craig Harding Memorial Court Artist
Contest
Julie Culhane, Contest Director
11
RATIONALE OF THE
GEORGIA MOCK TRIAL
COMPETITION
The mock trial activity has proven to be an
effective and popular part of a comprehensive, law-
focused program designed to provide young people
with an operational understanding of the law, legal
issues and the judicial process. Part of the appeal of a
mock trial is the fun involved in preparing for, and
participating in, a trial. Mock trials are exciting, but
more importantly, they provide invaluable learning
experiences.
Participation in, and analysis of, mock trials
provides young people with an insider's perspective
from which to learn about courtroom procedures.
Mock trials help students gain a basic
understanding of the legal mechanism through which
society chooses to resolve many of its disputes.
Moreover, while obtaining this knowledge, young
people develop useful questioning, critical thinking,
and oral advocacy skills, as well as significant insight
into the area of law in question.
The mock trial activity also provides an
opportunity to incorporate field experiences and
community resource persons into the educational
process. Visits to local courts will make the activity a
more meaningful learning experience. Inviting judges,
attorneys, and other members of the legal community
to take part in the mock trial will help bridge the gap
between the simulated activity and reality, and also
will provide an opportunity for the resource people to
share their knowledge and experience with young
people. Finally, the mock trial will give participants
practical knowledge about courts and trials which can
be invaluable should they ever be jurors or witnesses
in a real trial or principals in a legal action.
(Taken in part from Update on Law-Related Education, Winter, 1978.
Update is an American Bar Association publication.)
GOALS OF THE
GEORGIA MOCK TRIAL
COMPETITION
Benefits of the mock trial program extend beyond
the re ards of o peti g agai st o e’s peers or winning a round of competition. The impact of the
program is measured by successfully attaining the
following objectives: to further understanding of court
procedures and the legal system; to improve
proficiency in basic skills: listening, speaking, reading,
and reasoning; to promote better communication and
cooperation between the educational and legal
communities; to provide a competitive event in an
academic atmosphere; and to promote cooperation
among young people of various abilities and interests.
Education of young people is the primary goal of
the mock trial program. Healthy competition helps to
achieve this goal. However, teacher coaches are
reminded of their responsibility to keep the
competitive spirit at a reasonable level. The reality of
the adversary system is that one party wins and the
other loses, and coaches should be sure to prepare
their team members to be ready to accept either
outcome in a mature manner. Coaches can help
prepare students for either outcome by placing the
highest value on excellent preparation and
presentation, rather than winning or losing the case.
Participants need to be prepared for the agony of
defeat was well as how to win with class.
Hurt feelings, anger and frustration are not the
objectives of the mock trials. We hope students view
the event as a fun and exciting learning experience.
An admonition to all team members and coaches:
Lighten-up and have a good time, regardless of the
competition's outcome!
12
The 2016 Mock Trial Case authored by the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE PROBLEM
YLD HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL COMMITTEE
STATE BAR OF GEORGIA
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
OF MILTON COUNTY
STATE OF GEORGIA
)
STATE OF GEORGIA, )
)
v. ) CRIMINAL ACTION NO: 2016-MT
)
TALBOT BERRIEN )
)
Defendant. )
)
NOTE: All characters, names, events, places and circumstances in this mock trial case are
fictitious or are used fictitiously. Any resemblance to any person (living or dead), place, thing or
event is purely coincidental.
The Subcommittee on the Problem gratefully acknowledges the team of writers and editors who
produced this original case:
Judge Michael H. Barker, Magistrate Court of Chatham
County, Savannah
John Ratterree, II, Esq., Atlanta
Christy Barker, Es ., Chatha Cou ty Distri t Attor ey’s Office, Savannah
Judge Melodie Clayton, State Court of Cobb County,
Marietta
Will Davis, Esq., Kitchens New Cleghorn, Atlanta
Kevin Epps, Esq., Fortson Bentley & Griffin, Athens
Lee Ann Feeley, Esq., the Office of the DeKalb County
Public Defender, Decatur
E. Righton Johnston, Esq., Balch & Bingham, Atlanta
C. Eliza eth Beth Jones, Esq., Marietta
Roy E. Manoll, III, Esq., Fortson, Bentley & Griffin,
Athens
Judge Jennifer B. Mann, Magistrate Court of Gwinnett
County, Lawrenceville, & the Office of the DeKalb
County Public Defender, Decatur
Jo “etzer, Es ., G i ett Cou ty Distri t Attor ey’s Office, Lawrenceville
Bonnie Smith, Esq., Douglas Cou ty Distri t Attor ey’s Office, Douglasville
Katie Wood, Esq., Atlanta
Michael Nixon, Woodstock
A special acknowledgment goes to Joanna Diehl Angell of Savannah, GA, who painted The Cherokee Rose for the 2009
National High School Mock Trial Championships in Atlanta, GA. The original now resides at John Adams High
School in South Bend, IN, the 2009 NHSMTC Champion.
13
INTRODUCTION
This introduction is of no legal consequence in terms of the trial and is not admissible for impeachment
purposes or for any other purpose.
2009 see s a lo g ti e ago. It’s ee si lo g years si e The Cherokee Rose has been in Georgia. The
last time the painting was in-state, Philip Newton lost his life and Ashley Dougherty lost his/her freedom.
Co i ted of Philip’s death, Ashley as se te ed to 10 years i priso , ith at least 5 to ser e. With Ashley locked up, Tal ot Berrie , Ashley’s deputy at the Ne E hota Museu , o ed o a d has e o e the curator at the George and Sandra Carley Museum of Art in Miltonville. Talbot loves being in charge of such
a large museum and had been looking for the next big thing for the museum. With enough time to let
wounds heal, was it time to bring The Cherokee Rose back to Georgia? Maybe so.
In February of 2014, Ashley is released from prison on probation and finds Talbot at the Carley
Museum. They get together and catch up over lunch and a tour of the museum. Talbot is proud of the
security system at the Carley Museum and speculates that if s/he and Ashley had this set-up in New Echota,
the Rose may never had been stolen, Philip would still be alive, and Ashley would never have gone to
prison. But, with that being in the past, it was time to write a new chapter in both of their lives.
In prison, Ashley keeps up with the goings-on of the art world. After all, s/he was a curator of an art
museum for a long time. Knowing that The Cherokee Rose is coming back out for a public appearance, and a
desire to get revenge on the painting that ruined his/her life, Ashley plots a bit of revenge on the piece.
Ashley gets connected with Sacha Bateman, a rich socialite who likes the thrill of a good art heist. Ashley
sells Bateman on the idea of stealing The Cherokee Rose. Ashley then introduces Bateman to Talbot. After a
meeting and behind-the-scenes tour of the museum while posing as a potential new donor, Bateman signs
off on the heist.
The night of the heist, Talbot lets Bateman into the museum, disarms the security system, and leads
Bateman to The Cherokee Rose. During their movements, the night custodian, Jax Duval, sees the group
walking to the gallery and mentions it to Quito Diego, the museu ’s head of se urity a d o er ight guard that evening. Diego is a le to see the a tio i side the gallery through the useu ’s se urity a eras a d rushes to the gallery to stop the heist. With the painting in hand, Bateman escapes through a back door and
al ost gets a ay, o ly to e aught y Diego i the dri er’s seat of his/her Guzzler “UV. Through his/her investigation, Detective Stu/Sue Gardner uncovers disturbing information that points a
finger at Talbot as being in on the heist. Talbot, backed by Ashley, claims that s/he was duped by the group
a d had othi g to do ith the urglary. Is Ashley’s support of Tal ot pay a k for Tal ot’s support duri g
his/her trial in 2009? Was Talbot really just a patsy in the entire scheme? Or is Talbot selling a forgery to
keep him/herself out of jail?
STIPULATIONS
1. All exhibits included in the problem are authentic and accurate in all respects, and no objections to
the authenticity of the exhibits shall be entertained.
2. Stipulations cannot be contradicted or challenged.
3. The signatures on the witness statements and all other documents are authentic.
4. There are NO costume options permitted as an exception to Rule 20 this season.
5. The Charge of the Court is accurate in all respects; no objections to the charge shall be entertained.
6. Chain of custody for evidence is not in dispute.
7. No demurrer to the indictment shall be allowed.
8. The Introduction provided is of no legal consequence in terms of the trial and is not admissible for
impeachment purposes or for any other purpose.
14
9. Exhibits, 1, 4, 6, 7, 9, and 10 were made at or near the time by — or from information transmitted
by — someone with knowledge, were kept in the course of a regularly conducted activity of a
business, organization, occupation, or calling, making the record was a regular practice of that
activity, and neither the source of information nor the method or circumstances of preparation
indicate a lack of trustworthiness.
10. Exhibits 2 and 3 fairly and accurately depict the item, scene, view, photo, information and/or
geography they purport to depict.
11. The handwriting on Exhibit 5 is that of Talbot Berrien.
12. The handwriting on the top of Exhibit 9(B) is that of Stu/Sue Gardner.
13. Exhibits 7 and 8 are certified copies fro the Clerk’s Offi e of the Milton County Superior Court.
14. Exhibit 10 is a true and accurate copy of the ticket confirmation issued to Talbot Berrien.
15. No usable DNA or fingerprint evidence was recovered from the scene.
16. Sacha Bateman has entered a guilty plea to second degree burglary, conditioned upon truthful
testimony at Talbot Berrien's trial. “e te i g has ee deferred u til the o lusio of Berrie ’s trial. If the o ditio is fulfilled, Bate a ill e se te ed to 5 years’ pro atio u der Georgia's
First Offender Act. Successful completion of probation will result in no criminal conviction on
Bateman's record.
17. Paragraph III of E hi it reads, i part, …the opy of said se te e hi h is atta hed hereto, a d arked E hi it A’, a d spe ifi ally i orporated herei . The referenced o i tio a d se te e ( E hi it A is
pro ided as E hi it 7 i the ase aterials a d ay e treated as E hi it A he usi g E hi it .
WITNESSES The following witnesses are available to be called by the parties. Prosecution witnesses may not testify or be
called on behalf of the Defendant. Defense witnesses may not testify or be called on behalf of the
Prosecution. All witnesses may be female or male. See Rules 3, 5 and 12(f) for more details on witnesses.
For the Prosecution Detective Stu/Sue Gardner
Quito Engle Diego
Sacha Bateman
For the Defense Talbot Berrien
Ashley Dougherty
Jax Duval
EXHIBITS Teams in competition may use the following exhibits. Teams should only print and use exhibits in a black and
white format. They are pre-marked and are to be referred to by number, as follows:
Exhibit Numbers and Title/Descriptions
1. ..... Police Report
2. ..... Map of the Carley Museum of Art*
3. ..... Detail map of the Sandy Carley Gallery*
4. ..... Security System Log
5. ..... Handwritten Instructions for Security
System
6. ...... Agreement for Loan and Appraisal of The
Cherokee Rose
7. ...... Conviction/Sentence of Ashley Dougherty
8. ...... Probation Revocation of Ashley
Dougherty
9. ...... Miranda Forms for Sacha Bateman
10. .... Airline Reservation for Talbot Berrien
*Exhibits 2 and 3 will be provided to teams in a large format at each competition level. Copies of each Exhibit will be
posted on the Team Information page of the website for teams to use at practice. Teams are not to bring their own
large formatted copies of either Exhibit to competition.
15
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MILTON COUNTY
BILL OF INDICTMENT
COUNT ONE: BURGLARY IN THE SECOND DEGREE (O.C.G.A. § 16-7-1 (c))
THE GRAND JURORS selected, chosen and sworn for the County of Milton, to wit:
1. Melissa Banker
2. Lauren Holton
3. George Carley
4. Julie Culhane
5. Will Davis
6. Stephen Dillard
7. Kevin Epps
8. Nicole Golden
9. Christina Jenkins
10. Sherri Kelley
11. Alan Lightcap
12. Nathan Lock
13. John Manly
14. Adrienne Nash
15. Toby Prodgers
16. Emily Quan
17. Burke Sherwood
18. Robert Thomas
19. Byron Watson
20. Orion Webb
21. Sandy Wisenbaker
In the name and behalf of the citizens of Georgia, charge and accuse Talbot Berrien with the offense
of BURGLARY IN THE SECOND DEGREE, for that the said Talbot Berrien, in the County of Milton and
State of Georgia, on or about March 18, 2015, did, without authority and with the intent to commit a
felony or theft therein, remain within an occupied building, contrary to the laws of the State of
Georgia, the good order, peace and dignity thereof.
TRUE Bill Filed in office this 16th
day of June, 2015
________________________ ___________________________
Foreperson (Deputy) Clerk, Superior Court of Milton County, Georgia
Defendant, on October 25, 2015, being in open court, pleads NOT GUILTY
___________________________
Defendant
___________________________
Jack Long, Attorney for Defendant
___________________________
Robert Kauffman, DA, Milton Judicial Circuit
16
STATEMENT OF DETECTIVE STU/SUE GARDNER
1. My name is Stu/Sue Gardner. I grew up in Georgia, and growing up, I was always fascinated 1
with true crime stories, so naturally, after getting my Criminal Justice degree, it was my dream to get 2
a job as an investigator with a specialization in crime scene investigation. I worked for the Georgia 3
Bureau of Investigation (GBI) for five years. While I worked there, they sent me to the National 4
Fore si A ade y (though e eryo e k o s it as the Body Far . I also received training in witness 5
interviewing techniques. 6
7
2. After I left the GBI, I got a job here at the Miltonville Police Department, rapidly rising to the 8
rank of detective. I brought with me all of my experience in processing crime scenes and 9
interviewing witnesses, but I really enjoyed slowing down. Most of all, it was nice to have a little bit 10
of the small town atmosphere with all the amenities of a big city, like the Carley Museum of Art. 11
12
3. Milto ille is a i teresti g to . It’s s all a d an be lost on the map but it has a lot of 13
activity like a big city. Enough to keep the police force busy, for sure. One of the big city pieces is the 14
Carley Museu of Art. You’d e surprised at hat all it’s got i side, thi gs you’d e pe t to fi d i 15
Chicago, Los Angeles, even New York City. Because of its stature in the community and the value of 16
its massive collection, it ranks as o e of the poli e depart e t’s first-response priorities. What this 17
means is that we have established a direct connection to The Carley’s security system and private 18
security personnel, and treat calls from their facility with highest priority. This is the same 19
arrangement departments have with banks, schools, hospitals and other significant entities in our 20
jurisdictions. 21
22
4. The Carley Museum has a top-notch security arrangement, with modern equipment for door 23
and window alarms, motion detectors, glass break monitors, an HD video system integrated with all 24
the other systems to a DVR recording system. All external and internal secure doors are controlled 25
by a card swipe access point. Many exhibits (paintings, cases, etc.) are locally monitored and linked 26
to the central Senefika system through hard wire and Wi-Fi links. All of this is controlled from a 27
central security office as well as a remote control option through a secure smart phone app. In 28
addition, it includes a direct alarm connection to the MPD dispatch. If an alarm is triggered on the 29
museum property, depending on the time of day and status of their operation, it will either sound in 30
the control room (where it has to be acknowledged within a certain time fra e efore goi g li e 31
or go live in the building. The internal delay is usually used while the museum is open to the public 32
and after closing when there is still activity. Once the building is completely shut down for the night, 33
some parts go to an active-live status; this would be for external doors, specific interior spaces and 34
spe ifi pie es (like the pri eless o es . Of ourse, a y typical status can be altered by the 35
security staff through the system to allow movement or other activity outside normal operations. 36
37
5. We do ’t get oti e of the lo al alar s. Ho e er, he their syste goes li e, e are 38
immediately dispatched. At that point, we must respond before they can clear their system. The 39
17
syste does ha e a optio of a a ual go li e override command; it can be triggered either from 40
the control room or the app. This would be akin to the panic button on a home system, sounding the 41
sirens and calling the police at the same time. 42
43
6. We conduct regular testing of their system to make sure everything is in working order. 44
Unfortunately, we have dealt with false alarms from the museum. They recently upgraded their 45
system to the latest version and some of the false alarms can be attributed to the learning curve. 46
However, there have been other times, typically while on the most sensitive overnight setting, when 47
the syste as ’t disar ed properly before disturbing a sensor: someone moved through a secured 48
area’s otio dete tors or ope ed a door that as lo ked and armed for the night. 49
50
7. Fortu ately, e ha e ’t had a y real alls for a a ti e ri i al atte pt. The useu ’s tra k 51
record for honest security threats has been perfect; no thefts, no break-ins, no stowaways sneaking 52
around at night. Except for the one last March. 53
54
8. On 18 March 2015, I was alerted to a 459A call (burglar alarm) at the Carley, so I got there as 55
fast as I could. When I arrived, the uniform officers already had Sacha Bateman in handcuffs in the 56
back of a squad car. I also noticed the object of the heist – The Cherokee Rose – was sitting in the 57
back of Bate a ’s Guzzler. I noticed two people chatting at the bottom of the stairs leading from an 58
open rear door to the museum, one of whom was in a security guard uniform: Quito Diego, the night 59
shift security guard at the museum and Talbot Berrien, the useu ’s urator. This was all on the 60
west side of the museum. 61
62
9. The first thing to do was to secure the scene. If anyone could come and go as they pleased, 63
there might be problems with collecting the evidence. 64
65
10. Next, I tried to process the scene. As you can imagine, processing a crime scene in a museum 66
filled with rare and timeless paintings, sculptures and artifacts can be tricky. Normally, we would 67
dust for fi gerpri ts, ut Berrien told us i o u ertai ter s that e ould ’t ake that u h of 68
a mess in the gallery. As it turns out, Bateman was wearing gloves anyway. We tried to test for some 69
DNA, but with all of the isitors that had ee i a d out of the gallery, e ould ’t fi d a ythi g 70
that we could test. 71
72
11. As I mentioned before, they have video surveillance set up around the museum, so I asked 73
Diego to assist in collecting the recordings from when the painting was reportedly stolen. Diego told 74
me that when s/he checked the monitors after his/her walk-through, the cameras had been turned 75
off, which apparently had stopped the DVR, so there were no recordings. 76
77
12. While CSI tried in vain to come up with fingerprints or DNA, I started gathering evidence the 78
old-fashioned way. Unfortunately, the museum had closed by the time the heist went down, so 79
there were ’t a y patro s to help e out. The first witness I interviewed was Diego. Diego said s/he 80
was by him/herself working the night shift, and the only other person who was supposed to be in the 81
18
exhibit area of the museum was Jax Duval, the custodian supervisor. A second cleaning crew 82
member, Rachel Jackson, had called in sick just before the shift. I confirmed her whereabouts and 83
eliminated her possible involvement. Diego also said that Berrien had access to all areas of the 84
museum, but Diego was usually informed ahead of time when Berrien would be on premises after 85
hours. 86
87
13. Diego said that s/he had just come on for his/her shift, and was just finishing the preliminary 88
evening walk-through. During the evening walk-through, there are ’t supposed to e a y spe ial 89
guests – there was a protocol for these sorts of things. That night, Diego was walking back to the 90
security office and passed Duval when Duval said something about an unscheduled after-hours tour 91
being conducted by Berrien. Diego said that Berrien has violated protocol like this in the past by not 92
properly scheduling after-hours visitors. Diego said s/he has attempted to have discussions with 93
Berrien about this but to no avail. Once Diego learned of the tour, s/he hurried back to the security 94
office and found the monitors to the cameras turned off. As curator, Berrien has access to the 95
security office; Diego assumed Berrien turned off the cameras in an attempt to cover up the tour and 96
not have to get into it with Diego again. I made a note to ask about the cameras being off when I 97
talked to Berrien next. 98
99
14. Once Diego saw the monitors off, s/he said s/he was able to get the gallery surveillance video 100
up and running quickly enough to see Berrien being knocked down and dragged across the floor of 101
one of the galleries on the second floor. S/He attempted to activate the general building alarm and 102
ran to the gallery. Duval, having seen Diego rush by to the 2nd
floor, caught up with Diego outside the 103
main entrance to the gallery. Diego sent Duval to cover the second entrance to the gallery. At the 104
main gallery entrance, Diego realized the building-wide alarm was not sounding and tripped the 105
system live alarm from his/her phone app. Diego then heard an exit door’s lo al alarm sound (a 106
different pitch than the building alarm), confirmed the breach on the app, and went immediately 107
towards that door. Diego saw Berrien at the bottom of the stairs, looking like s/he was trying to give 108
chase after Bateman, who was about 50 yards ahead. However, it looked like s/he was still 109
recovering from a blow to the head and was unsteady. Bateman was in a Guzzler, trying frantically to 110
get the car started but it would not turn over. Diego saw a second figure running through some 111
nearby bushes, but s/he figured the best thing was to apprehend the individual in the car. S/he said 112
Bateman chuckled as Diego neared the car, and surrendered after a it of pai o plia e . Diego’s 113
Fazer as re o ered e t to the Guzzler’s dri er-side door. 114
115
15. Berrien had fully come to by the time I arrived, and s/he appeared to be pretty shaken up. S/He 116
said that after being dragged across the gallery, s/he saw Bateman and a second unidentified 117
individual taking The Cherokee Rose off the wall, and s/he tried to stop them. S/He said no alarms 118
sounded as the painting was unplugged from its security cord, nor did s/he hear any alarms as they 119
left the building. As s/he got through the door, s/he must have slipped and flew headlong down the 120
steps; that’s the last thi g s/he remembers before waking up to the sirens. I asked him/her why the 121
alar had ’t go e off, a d s/he responded that s/he had been complaining ever since s/he arrived at 122
the Carley Museum, that with all the great works they had there, they really needed to upgrade their 123
19
security system. Berrien said they had just done an upgrade, including installing the new app. S/He 124
said s/he did ’t k o that the system would automatically switch to passive-mode when the motion 125
detectors or the monitors were turned off. S/He said, The upgrade i te h ology is great, ut they 126
ha e to let us k o he key thi gs ha ge after a update. When I asked Diego about this, Diego 127
told me that s/he and Berrien went through the same training class about the system and that 128
disarming the entire system required a separate action from disarming individual parts. 129
130
16. I also spoke with Jax Duval, the only other witness in the museum. I got the impression that 131
thi gs ere ’t goi g so s oothly i side of the useu . Duval said that the Diego was pretty rough 132
around the edges and had a hard time getting along with Berrien. However, Duval did say that 133
Berrien seemed strangely nervous the night of the theft. Duval said that the Sandy Carley Gallery, 134
where The Cherokee Rose exhibit was about to open, was having its final set-up before the grand 135
opening the next evening. Ho e er, s/he had ’t gotte to that section of the museum yet in his/her 136
lea i g, so s/he ould ’t attest to the status of the syste o the 2nd floor. 137
138
17. I remember thinking it looked like a one and done – Bateman suckered his/her way through the 139
doors and almost walked back out with the painting. All I had to do was write the report. My 140
resolutio stats ere ’t looki g too good for the year, so I as ready to put this o e i the i 141
column. I as ’t e pe ti g Bate a to add u h to the story si e s/he as aught i the a t. But 142
there as so ethi g aggi g e a out the heist…it al ost see ed too easy, too…s ripted. My 143
Spidey-se se as ti gli g, ut I ould ’t uite put my finger on what was bothering me. In 144
retrospe t, I’ glad I trusted y gut. 145
146
18. Once I finished at the museum, I went to headquarters to interview Bateman. After reading 147
him/her his/her Miranda Rights (you know, like you see on television), s/he grinned and asked for 148
his/her attorney. So I left. I guess there as ’t a ythi g for hi /her to add to the story after all. 149
However, a few hours later, I got word that Bateman was asking for me. I went back and his/her 150
attorney had ’t sho up yet ut Bate a a ted to talk. I had hi /her sig a other Miranda form 151
and s/he asked about a deal. I told him/her I could pass a good ord alo g to the DA’s offi e a out 152
his/her cooperation but I had to hear what s/he had to say first. Bateman opened up right way. And 153
s/he threw Berrien under the bus to boot, lai i g the hole heist as Berrie ’s rai hild. 154
Bateman explained how s/he planned to go to the museum to pose as a rich art collector and donor 155
as part of a private, after-hours tour. Bateman explained another individual, Ashley Dougherty, 156
introduced the idea of the heist and brought Berrien into the group. Dougherty was supposed to be 157
the driver that night but never showed up. Bateman said that Berrien and Dougherty were long-time 158
friends and had a history with this painting. The plan was for Bateman and this other guy (who s/he 159
o ly ide tified as To y a d lai s to ha e o k o ledge of his current whereabouts) were to be 160
driven to the museum by Dougherty. Berrien was going to get them into and through the museum 161
under the cover of this after-hours tour, to give them access to the painting. Bateman said Berrien 162
provided him/her with written instructions on how to deactivate the door alarms through Berrie ’s 163
phone app. Berrien getting hit and dragged was part of the act that Berrien insisted on, to give 164
him/her cover for the cameras. 165
20
166
19. Bateman said that, except for Dougherty not showing up, everything went according to plan. As 167
the museum was closing, Berrien led him/her and Tony up to The Carley Gallery and Berrien was 168
k o ked out a d dragged. Bate a said To y did that part a d as areful ot to really hit Berrie 169
too hard. Bateman put on a pair of cloth gloves to remove the painting and hand it over to Tony. 170
Tony and Bateman were to take the painting and leave through the side exit, which they did, and 171
Berrien would chase them to cover up the heist. Bateman said once s/he and Tony were at the 172
bottom of the stairs, the uildi g’s main alarm sounded and Tony cut and ran through the bushes on 173
the right and was gone i to the ight . Bateman said s/he saw Berrien slip at the top of the stairs 174
and tumble to the bottom; s/he as sure that’s here the real hit to the head happe ed. A ordi g 175
to the plan, Berrien was supposed to keep quiet for a little while to give Bateman time to get 176
him/herself and the painting to Luxembourg. Like the attempted theft of the Fabulous Baseball 177
Diamond, they were seconds away from pulling it off. 178
179
20. Now I had a new story to pursue and a new subject to find. As luck would have it, a few days 180
after interviewing Bateman, Dougherty just showed up at headquarters. I guess s/he felt the need to 181
confess his/her sins. S/He confirmed that s/he was supposed to be the getaway driver, but backed 182
out. Dougherty, I presume because of a new-found conscience, said that s/he had to come forward 183
and give his/her side of the story, including how s/he voluntarily withdrew from the conspiracy. 184
Dougherty also stuck up for Berrien, saying that s/he used Berrien for access to the museum and 185
Berrien had nothing to do with the heist. Dougherty explained how s/he introduced Berrien to 186
Bateman a few weeks prior and they got Berrien to take them on a visit through all of the spaces a 187
week before the heist. Berrien claims s/he thought s/he was courting a new big-money donor. 188
Dougherty said s/he never intended for Berrien to know what was going on, and s/he certai ly did ’t 189
intend for Berrien to get hurt. Afterwards, I had a little chuckle because s/he let it slip that s/he knew 190
Bateman had already confessed; the only reason Dougherty came forward was because s/he knew 191
his/her goose was already cooked and s/he may as ell try to sa e Berrie ’s goose as ell. S/He 192
ertai ly did ’t see to a t to go a k to priso . Too bad his/her probation got revoked. 193
194
21. After looking into Berrien more, I found out s/he booked a trip to Tahiti to leave a few days 195
after the heist; just enough time for Bateman to get away and to sell his/her story. I also found that 196
the loan agreement for The Cherokee Rose was signed right after Dougherty met with Berrien the 197
first time. If Bateman is right, this must have been when Dougherty and Berrien hatched the original 198
pla . It’s also the sa e ti e the trip to Tahiti as ooked. Dougherty then brought in Bateman, got 199
Bateman together with his/her old friend – who had access to The Cherokee Rose – and the plot was 200
afoot. 201
202
22. I went back to check on the surveillance video to see if there was any evidence of interactions 203
between Bateman and Berrien before the theft, but by the time I learned about this, the recordings 204
ere go e. That’s ot u usual; I know a lot of places only have a finite amount of space to keep 205
thi gs like re ordi gs. Cell pho e o pa ies do ’t keep te t essages ery lo g, a d stores do ’t 206
keep sur eilla e re ordi gs ery lo g; they just do ’t ha e the spa e, parti ularly i the days of HD 207
21
videos, etc. Plus, I was looking for video on dates other than when the heist occurred, so there was 208
no reason for the museum to attempt to save anything that far back. The C“I te hs fou d Berrie ’s 209
phone in a corner of the Carley gallery along with a pair of cotton gloves. These are the same types 210
of gloves found in the restoration lab at the museum and the type Berrien and Bateman used during 211
the first after-hours-visit with Dougherty. Bateman was arrested with a pair of gloves on his/her 212
hands; s/he ust ot ha e had ti e to take the off efore getti g i the dri er’s seat. 213
214
23. Berrien and Dougherty tell a compelling story but they just do ’t make sense. How gullible 215
could Berrien really be? Con jobs are great for the movies but real people like this do ’t fall for the . 216
This ould ’t ha e happe ed ithout so eo e o the i side helpi g the out. With o ly three 217
people in the building at the time, and proof that Berrien was the one who disabled the system, 218
Berrien is the key for making this all work. 219
220
Signed, 221
222
__________________________ 223
Stu/Sue Gardner 224
225
SIGNED AND SWORN to me at 4:45 PM, March 23, 2015. 226
227
______________________________ 228
C.M. McCormack, Notary Public 229
230
231
232
WITNESS ADDENDUM 233
I have reviewed this statement, previously made by me, and I have nothing of significance to add at 234
this time. The material facts are true and correct. 235
236
Signed, 237
238
__________________________ 239
Stu/Sue Gardner 240
241
SIGNED AND SWORN to me before 8:00 a.m. on the day of this round of the 2016 Georgia High 242
School Mock Trial Competition. 243
244
______________________________ 245
C.M. McCormack, Notary Public 246
22
STATEMENT OF QUITO ENGLE DIEGO
1. My name is Quito Engle Diego. I have worked as a security guard at the Carley Museum of Art 1
on and off for the past 10 years. 2
3
2. At first, I only worked part-time while I was a student at the Carley Institute of Art and Interior 4
Desig , hi h is asso iated ith the useu . I those days, I’d fill i for a day shift here, or a 5
overnight shift there—whatever was needed if one of the regular crew was on vacation or was 6
taking sick leave. As an art student, these shifts were in some respects an exercise in serenity, being 7
amongst great beauty and being able to spend hours analyzing each brush stroke. 8
9
3. Of course, it would never do to get too hypnotized by the great masters. Stay in one place too 10
long, even in my youth, I’d get stiff and wind up moving from one gallery to the next like a walking 11
tree. Better to strike a yoga pose periodically to stretch the muscles a little. A d, y day, there’s the 12
ever present need to stay wary of even the friendliest of visitors. That toddler in the stroller may 13
look cute to his mom, but to me, he is the potential for projectile vomit just waiting to devalue the 14
Jackson Pollack. We’ e see hat a 12 year old kid a do to a illio dollar pai ti g; he you trip, 15
please do ’t use the pai ti g to break your fall! Porpora would appreciate it. 16
17
4. By ight, there’s ore of a danger of being tricked he you’re i there pra ti ally y yourself. 18
I learned a lot about that when I was away in Boston at the School of the Museum of Fine Arts, 19
earning my Master of Fine Arts degree. It had been over 20 years since the guard let a couple of 20
thieves posing as police officers into the Isabella Gardner Museum in the middle of the night, but 21
people were still talking about it and still looking for the missing masterpieces, which include 22
paintings by Rembrandt, Vermeer and Degas. 23
24
5. After completing my MFA, I came back to Miltonville, hoping to teach at the Carley Institute 25
and establish myself as the artist known as QED. “o far, ho e er, all I’ e ee a le to get is a gig as 26
an adjunct professor. When you consider all the hours put into course prep, teaching, meeting with 27
students, and grading, the pay is probably less than minimum wage. And the sales of QED paintings 28
have been kind of hit or miss, depending on the gallery shows in which they are placed. 29
30
6. So to pay the rent, I’ a k doi g security again at the Carley Museum—now as a full-time gig, 31
working the shift that spans the twilight period (when the museum is closed to the public, but there 32
are still various employees in the building finishing up their work activities and getting the place 33
ready for the next day) and overnight when the museum is completely closed to all but security 34
personnel. 35
36
7. When you think about it, security is the most important aspect to preser i g a useu ’s 37
assets, hi h are far ore alua le tha hat’s o tai ed i a y a k i the ity. And while the 38
vision of helicopters hovering over the building, with rappelling commandos descending through 39
23
broken skylights might make for great drama in a caper movie, it’s ot a particularly likely scenario 40
for a museum heist. More probable is a thief entering as an ordinary admission-paying visitor, and 41
finding a place to hide before closing time. Then, after hours, perhaps in collusion with a dishonest 42
employee, the hideaway thief grabs a valuable item or two and makes a getaway through an 43
emergency exit. 44
45
8. So, from a security standpoint, the museum has three operating modes—1) when it is open to 46
the public, with most alarms turned off except for some particularly valuable or controversial 47
individual objects, also usually roped off with stanchions, and various exhibit cases that remain 48
armed; 2) a twilight period, when a few guards are present, most perimeter alarms active and most 49
interior alarms are off, but activity is occurring—staff is working in the galleries after the public has 50
left, the custodial crew is cleaning and turning over the spaces for the next day, designers are 51
measuring for the next show, and, on very rare occasions, special VIPs—particularly potential high-52
end donors—get ehi d the s e es tours fro useu offi ials; and 3) overnight, when it is 53
closed to everyone, with all the perimeter and interior alarms activated and the building essentially 54
vacant except for security. 55
56
9. That kind of tour is what I observed one afternoon about a year or so ago, on March 25, 2014, 57
just as I was coming in to start my shift. Talbot Berrien was giving Ashley Dougherty a tour of the 58
galleries, even going behind the scenes to the lab and the security control room. At that poi t I’d 59
never met Dougherty in person, but I knew about the history of Berrien and Dougherty in 2008 from 60
my days as an art student. 61
62
10. As a matter of fact, I believe they were talking about The Cherokee Rose when I came upon 63
them that afternoon. Dougherty as sayi g so ethi g to the effe t of: As u h trou le as that 64
pai ti g e er aused e, it ould e great to ha e it i y ha ds agai . At that poi t, it looked like 65
Berrien was in the process of showing Dougherty all the bells a d histles o the Carley’s se urity 66
system, which is not typical for VIP behind the scenes tours. However, I figured it related to their 67
roles in the events that led to the esta lish e t of a useu se urity proto ol alled the E hota 68
Rule, hi h requires that all artworks are properly secured, even while they are in out-of-sight, out-69
of-mind areas. 70
71
11. When I came into the room, Berrien and Dougherty immediately ceased their conversation. I 72
thought maybe Berrien was put out with me for interrupting, so I apologized for disturbing them. 73
Berrien very briskly introduced me to Dougherty, calling him/her an old colleague from the New 74
E hota days. A d I guess e ause I’ i se urity, Berrie prattled o to Dougherty a out ho u h 75
more advanced security is at the Carley Museum, compared to New Echota. Normally, it would have 76
struck me as a breach of protocol to give away so many security system details, but despite 77
Dougherty’s re e t i ar eratio , I figured it was inside baseball talk amongst museum 78
professionals. Plus, Berrien and Dougherty have a long personal and professional history, so I figured 79
it would be okay. 80
81
24
12. I started having some doubts about that approximately a week later, when I found out third-82
hand that Berrien had actually made arrangements to bring The Cherokee Rose back to Georgia for 83
an exhibit at the Carley. Because museum security is integral to every stage of the planning for an 84
exhibit of a piece like The Cherokee Rose, it seemed very odd to me to find out about it only after the 85
fact. I’ supposed to e kept i the loop o thi gs like that. Needless to say, I was not happy. 86
87
13. I did ’t see Dougherty agai u til Mar h 5, 2015, he s/he showed up again at the Carley, not 88
only with Berrien, but also with Sacha Bateman, that poser whose photos are always in the society 89
pages of the Miltonville Gazette—toasting with champagne at fundraising galas to raise money for 90
Ebola research, that kind of thing. It’s ot u usual for Berrie to lead e titled ri h people ho ight 91
be convinced to underwrite a new exhibit on a private tour. But I’d e er efore see Berrien 92
showing off aspects of the security system to a potential donor. What I saw reminded me of the visit 93
a year earlier with Dougherty. 94
95
14. I spotted them about 4:30 p.m., just as I was beginning my shift. I was in the security control 96
room, where the cameras all throughout the museum are monitored. Suddenly an alarm went off –97
one of the ones that sound when a painting is removed from its mount. That triggered the monitor 98
to shift to the camera trained on that painting. I saw Berrien demonstrating to Dougherty and 99
Bateman how the alarm can be turned off with a phone app, which s/he did and then reset the 100
alarm. The way our system is set up, when a local alarm sounds, like when a painting is removed 101
from its mount, a door is opened, or a display case is breached, the alarm sounds in the security 102
o trol roo a d o the pho e app. If e do ’t a k o ledge the alar ithi a ertai ti efra e, 103
it then trips the general alarm in the building and contacts the police department directly. When the 104
tour with Dougherty and Bateman continued into the security control room, I confronted Berrien 105
about tripping the painting alarm without letting me know first. I know it was impolite to have it out 106
in front of guests, especially potential donors. However, I needed him/her to understand the 107
seriousness of the breach of protocol and policy. I told him/her that it just about gave me a heart 108
attack when I heard that alarm go off. Plus, creating a false alarm like that subverts the entire system 109
and takes away the focus from real threats. Berrien hissed at me under his/her breath that if I had a 110
problem, I should bring it up privately, and not in front of potential donors. I found it very disturbing 111
that Berrien was giving away so much information about our security protocols. With Dougherty, it 112
was one thing. With Bateman, it was completely different. 113
114
15. That was particularly apparent after what happened on Wednesday March 18, 2015. What is 115
the saying about fool me once, fool me twice ? 116
117
16. As I mentioned before, in the evening there is a security walk-through when tests are 118
conducted prior to the final closing of the building and setting of the alarms. In this walk-through, all 119
potential hiding places must be examined, and detectors must be checked because they can be 120
defeated by dishonest employees putting something in front of them or by misaiming the detectors. 121
122
25
17. I had just finished my walk-through when I came out of the Mallory Gallery where the 123
custodian, Jax Duval, was mopping. Whe I said, Hi, to Du al, s/he responded, Hi, Mr./Ms. Diego. I 124
see Mr./Ms. Berrien is on another nighttime tour with one of those people. I responded, What do 125
you ea ? What people? Duval explained, “/He just alked y ith the really nicely dressed one 126
gentleman/lady from a couple of weeks ago, you know, when you got upset about the painting 127
alarm. They just headed that way a minute ago, poi ti g up the stairs to the second floor. S/He 128
continued, Mr./Ms. Berrien was talking about the new The Cherokee Rose exhibit and something 129
about getting out of town. I wish s/he would put these visits on the schedule so I know to go back 130
through to ake sure it’s all i order. 131
132
18. Berrien knows what time the walk-through is conducted, and that s/he is not to have any 133
special VIP visitors in the building during the walk-through, and certainly not after the time the 134
museum is completely closed to all but security and cleaning personnel. I know Berrien has security 135
override clearance, so s/he can go into any gallery or door after it has been armed for the night, but 136
it certainly defeats the purpose of the security sweeps to contaminate cleared spaces with a visitor 137
like Bateman. At this poi t, the hairs o the a k of y e k stood up a d this did ’t feel right. 138
139
19. I ran to the security control room, planning to find them on the monitors as they headed for 140
the Sandy Carley Gallery, where The Cherokee Rose exhibit was about to open. My thinking at that 141
point was to watch them from there and see when they left, so I could go back and re-secure the 142
gallery. A d, I did ’t trust Bate a . I a ted to see what this fool was up to. 143
144
20. But when I got to the room and looked at those monitors, I realized the cameras for the 145
walkway and the gallery had been turned off. After I flipped the control to turn them back on, I could 146
see what appeared to be Berrien being knocked down and dragged to the corner of the gallery by a 147
third perso I did ’t re og ize. 148
149
21. Rather than calling 911, I hit the manual building alarm button, knowing it would automatically 150
dispatch the Miltonville Police, and ran out of the room heading to the gallery, not realizing that the 151
general alarm had been disabled. That dawned on me as I got to the top of the stairs near the gallery 152
a d realized the alar as ’t sou di g in the building. Berrien must have disabled the general alarm 153
when s/he turned off the motion detectors in the gallery and the cameras along their way. S/He 154
knows all about the new Senefika system and its functions. S/He knows how the app works, too. We 155
were in the same training together when the app-controlled system was installed. I do ’t elie e for 156
one second that taking the system down was an accident. 157
158
22. As I neared the Carley Gallery entrance at the top of the stairs, I stopped to check my phone 159
app to see hy the alar as ’t sou di g. By this ti e Du al, ho had seen me running, caught up 160
with me and asked what was going on. I quietly told Duval what I saw and told him/her to carefully 161
sneak around through the other galleries to watch for them and make sure they do ’t come out 162
through the Dillard entrance. I did ’t know what Duval was going to do if s/he ran into them leaving 163
but I figured s/he could slow them down enough for the police to get here. 164
26
165
23. As soon as Duval took off, I reset the system. A minute later, I heard yelling from inside the 166
gallery and heard an emergency exit door alarm sound. I did ’t a k o ledge it (so it would trip the 167
general alarm) and headed that direction through the gallery. The alarm sounded as I got to the 168
middle of the gallery. No one was in the gallery and The Cherokee Rose was gone. I ran into the 169
Dillard Gallery and the emergency exit door on the back wall, which leads to outdoor steps, was just 170
closing as I got to it; its alarm was squealing loudly. I ran through the door and saw Bateman running 171
across the parking lot with The Cherokee Rose in-hand, towards his/her Guzzler, about 50 yards 172
away. 173
174
24. Berrien was lying on his/her side at the bottom of the steps, looking bruised and woozy, but 175
still conscious enough to shout that s/he had been running after the thieves, who obviously had 176
escaped through that door, but s/he had tripped down the stairs. I also noticed that there was a 177
thrashing sound in the bushes at the building foundation, like something was crashing through them, 178
trying to get away. 179
180
25. I raced down the steps past Berrien. I did ’t a t to aste time stopping to check on him/her 181
because I was heading toward Bateman, and drawing out my Fazer. I did ’t ha e ti e to look 182
through the bushes for the someone else since I had Bateman in my sights red handed with The 183
Cherokee Rose. I got to the Guzzler just as Bateman got in the front seat and aimed my Fazer, which I 184
deployed to stun him/her. I held him/her for the police, who showed up about a minute later with 185
lights and sirens blazing. As the first officer squealed to a stop behind the Guzzler, I looked back 186
towards the stairs and saw Duval sitting with Berrien on the steps. Berrien was still a bit woozy and 187
almost looked like s/he was about to cry. Du al asked e if I sa Berrie ’s pho e a y here ut I 188
e er did. I do ’t thi k Bate a had it o hi ut s/he ould ha e tossed it i the ushes o the ay 189
to the car. 190
191
26. Looking back, I now suspect that Berrien disarmed the security system on purpose. How else 192
could they have gotten that far into the building, unhooked the painting, and left out the back door 193
without anyone being the wiser? Had it not been for Duval seeing them heading towards the gallery, 194
we never would have known anything was wrong until The Cherokee Rose was already gone and 195
Berrien was on a beach in Tahiti. It’s the only thing that makes sense. You know what they say about 196
museum security? Ninety percent of all thefts are inside jobs. Berrien was the inside connection for 197
this one. I’ convinced Berrien is guilty. 198
199
Signed, 200
__________________________ 201
Quito Diego 202
203
SIGNED AND SWORN to me at 10:15 AM, March 23, 2015. 204
205
______________________________ 206
Quito Diego
27
C.M. McCormack, Notary Public 207
208
209
210
WITNESS ADDENDUM 211
I have reviewed this statement, previously made by me, and I have nothing of significance to add at 212
this time. The material facts are true and correct. 213
214
Signed, 215
216
__________________________ 217
Quito Diego 218
219
SIGNED AND SWORN to me before 8:00 a.m. on the day of this round of the 2016 Georgia High 220
School Mock Trial Competition. 221
222
______________________________ 223
C.M. McCormack, Notary Public 224
Quito Diego
28
STATEMENT OF SACHA BATEMAN
1. I live in the 25th
floor penthouse condo at 17 Highbrow Street in Buckhead, which I keep at 68 1
degrees Fahrenheit and 30% humidity year-round, per art gallery specifications. My name is Sacha 2
Bateman. I'm 27 years old. I believe in taking care of myself with a balanced diet and rigorous 3
exercise routine. Every morning I exercise for one hour, then take a shower for 12 minutes, including 4
full-body exfoliating and moisturizing. For breakfast, I have two poached quail eggs with truffle 5
butter melted with champagne steam and one cup of Kopi Luwak coffee, the kind that has passed 6
through the system of a cat-type creature to remove the offee’s usto a y bitterness. At least that 7
was before – o I’ a aiti g se te i g e ause I elie ed that Ashle Doughe t a d Tal ot 8
Berrien knew what they were doing. What a farce! 9
10
2. I was born with a platinum spoon in my mouth. Prestigious schools, organic food, only the 11
finest dentistry, monogrammed everything – no expense was spared on my education and 12
up i gi g. If I as ette at feeli g hu a e otio s, it’s possi le I might feel guilt or regret about 13
the way I turned out. My family told us we could be anything we wanted to be; my sister chose 14
s ie tist a d she’s in Africa researching Ebola. I chose crook. Get i he e ou fit i , as the sa i g 15
goes, though I always considered myself more of an unofficial diplomat. 16
17
3. Power and privilege begets power and privilege; it’s a self-created and self-sustaining cycle. 18
That’s h I as att a ted to a t i the fi st pla e. It’s deeper than all that, and has its own meaning. 19
Value, like everything else, is largely a social construct. The e’s o i t i si alue i ate ial thi gs, 20
but those things are assigned value in society. Knowledge is assigned value, also, and everyone 21
k o s k o ledge is po e . Take e, I’ a st ateg o sulta t. What does that e e ea ? It 22
means I bring home wheelbarrows full of money and I know the right people. But it does ’t ea 23
anything. Not the way art does. 24
25
4. You need someone like me in your corner if you want to play the long game in art heists. I 26
mean, look at the Scream stooges or those poor boys in the Boston fiasco hose othe ight’ve 27
burned irreplaceable artwork in her oven! Good thieves, but lousy usi ess e . The e is ’t a market 28
for stolen art if ou do ’t k o hat ou’ e doi g. Fortunately, the e’s a seedy underbelly of society 29
with a massive infrastructure of its own. I just happen to have been its CFO. That’s h Doughe t 30
came to me. 31
32
5. As you can imagine, being filthy rich gets tedious and boring, so when Dougherty rang as I was 33
stepping out of my saltwater pool, I thought, why not entertain the idea of a minor art-napping? 34
Doughe t ’s pla sou ded si ple e ough – scope out the place while posing as a potential patron of 35
the arts, and if the stars align, use our inside man to help with disabling the security and pulling off 36
the heist. I as ’t fa ilia ith The Cherokee Rose at first but the more I looked into its pedigree and 37
the history behind the subject, the more I fell in love with it. At first, I was bouncing back and forth 38
between what to do with it once I had it: sell it on the market or keep it for my own collection? I 39
29
could get a pretty silver dollar for it if I played it right, especially on the European market; they love 40
American historical pieces over there. I could decide that at a later time; I had to focus on getting it 41
first. Doughe t ould e the a t e pe t, aki g su e the pai ti g as eal ( ho did ’t hea a out 42
that recent unpleasantness in 2008?), and helping with the fencing of the piece afterwards. Berrien 43
was our inside connection, although I do admit I was a bit uneasy when I was told we needed to 44
assault Berrien before we left. I figured we would just lock Berrien in a broom closet, but I guess 45
Berrien wanted plausible deniability. 46
47
6. Dougherty arranged a lunch meeting with Berrien and me for March 5, 2015. Over platters of 48
lobster and steamed oysters, Dougherty described his/her plan and our respective roles in it just like 49
s/he did when we first met. Be ie s iled a d odded…I ould ’t uite tell ho a e up ith this 50
idea first, as it looked like Berrien was just along for the ride, but who cared? It was a good plan, and 51
they were both heavily invested (with sweat equity, of course). I drove my brand new Guzzler, in 52
keeping with my assumed role, and also made sure to mention my upcoming trip to Luxembourg to 53
round out my jet-setting persona. Berrien offered that s/he also had a trip planned soon after the 54
exhibit opening, presumably also to lay low after everything went down. I recommended the Hilton 55
Bora Bora Nui Resort and Spa. Their overwater bungalows are superb and the spa has the 56
phenomenal Nehe Nehe treatment, which is pe fe t fo hiski g a a all of life’s st esses. 57
58
7. We took a nice, thorough tour of all the security precautions (and ways around them) in the 59
useu efo e stoppi g at Be ie ’s offi e to go over some paperwork. Berrien slipped me notes on 60
the finer points of breaching the useu ’s se u it so I ould fa ilia ize self efo e the ig da . 61
This was also around the time I met Diego, the intrepid security guard, whose toes apparently felt 62
stepped on by our little jaunt. Diego started berating Berrien about setting off an alarm on a picture 63
during the tour. Berrien took care of it right away on his/her phone app (very nifty!) but Diego was 64
put off that Be ie did ’t gi e p ope oti e to the security staff. Despite the uncomfortable 65
e ha ge, I felt ette a out Be ie ’s a ilit to ha dle the se u it dogs during the heist. 66
67
8. The next week, I met with Dougherty one final time before the lift. S/he was feeling the typical 68
anxiety amateurs experie e he the fi d the sel es a out to e te the ig leagues. I ould’ e 69
stated the obvious, which is that there is one way in and one way out of this criminal enterprise, and 70
the way out does not involve two eeks’ oti e and a cupcake going-away party. But, I went for the 71
softer approach. I assuaged her/his concerns and misgivings, convincing her/him that a lot of the 72
stress was simply coming from her/his history with Berrien. We went back to trouble-shooting and 73
discussing details of the heist, so it seemed we were still in business. 74
75
9. And what do you know? Dougherty was a no-show the day of the heist. Tiny, my associate and I 76
shrugged our shoulders and figured we could handle this caper all by ourselves. With our man/lady 77
Berrien inside, we were good to go. All Dougherty was going to do during the heist was drive the car, 78
so no loss. Until the end, of course. 79
80
30
10. We met Berrien at the front door of the museum at 7:00 the evening of the heist and went 81
straight to his/her office. S/He complimented me on my new Guzzler G6X. Berrien said s/he had 82
already cleared the path to the Rose’s gallery. I liked the initiative. Berrien was cool as a shantung 83
suhyo cross as we started off, going past the research library and restoration labs towards the 84
gallery. As we started, we went over the plan again and s/he detailed her/his plan to sneak me and 85
Tiny past all the security features and right to The Cherokee Rose. When we got to the part about 86
him/her getting knocked on the head for the cameras, s/he told me not to hit him/her too hard. 87
Then, Berrien yammered on and on about the Rose’s history while merrily double-checking monitors, 88
security codes, and the alarms throughout the museum from his/her phone. I made sure that 89
everything was in order so I ould ’t i d up o tape a he e a d s/he said do ’t o . No o e 90
k o s ou’ e he e. S/He told me s/he took my recommendation on the Hilton and was flying out on 91
Sunday. I said I thought it was a good idea, to get out of the States for a while. S/He got curious 92
a out ho I as goi g to get the pai ti g out of the ou t . I did ’t a t to get i to that ith 93
hi /he ; I like to o pa t e talize thi gs a d that as ’t i Be ie ’s o pa t e t. I ha ged the 94
subject until we got to the gallery. 95
96
11. Once we got to the Rose, Berrien slipped on cotton gloves and carefully removed the painting 97
from the hooks. It is a breathtakingly beautiful work of art; I know how delicate original works can be 98
and was glad we had the gloves. I e e e aski g, A e ou su e e o ’t e see ? I do ’t a t 99
this getti g out. Be ie assu ed e that o o e ould k o e had ee the e. S/He again asked 100
how I was going to get it out of the country. I did ’t a s e e ause, f a kl , the less s/he k o s 101
about the inner workings of my side of things, the better. 102
103
12. Once the painting was down, Berrien started acting dodgy. At first I thought s/he got cold feet 104
about the next act of the play, that it was about the anticipation of having to use a little force to 105
make her/his story more believable. Well, Berrien got what s/he wanted; s/he’s ot pa t of ou crew 106
so we couldn’t fully trust him/her with the escape and it would look good on tape. Berrien said s/he 107
had a g a d pla fo afte e left ut e e told e a out it. I as ’t all that concerned as long as 108
the ala as ’t aised fo a fe hou s afte e had left. That ould gi e e ti e to get to the 109
airport and loaded before anyone knew to look for me. I was set to leave this little backwater place 110
behind and start a long stay in Luxembourg, outside of any American reach. 111
112
13. Once Berrien was braced for the hit, Tiny clocked her/him on the back of the head and dragged 113
him/her to the corner of the gallery to get her/him out of the way of my Prada shoes. It may have 114
been a bit harder than I promised, ut Be ie ’s useful ess as almost up. I gloved up and used the 115
handwritten notes Berrien had given me to disable the painting’s se u it tag and confirm the door 116
alarms were off. We quickly unplugged the painting, hustled out the back entrance of the gallery, 117
through the exit door and out to my car. The building alarms sounded when we were half way down 118
the outside steps. Tiny panicked and hurdled the hedge to our right and disappeared into the night, 119
leaving me on my own. Aside from Berrien, I had both this twit and Dougherty bailing on me. You 120
a ’t keep good help these days. As I got to my Guzzler, I could hear Diego yelling for me to stop 121
from across the parking lot. I was able to toss The Rose in the back seat and get in, as Diego got to 122
31
my door with his Faser. Apparently, these P adas e e ’t ade fo u i g. With Diego sitti g o 123
my back for the real cops to show up, I realized how much I was missing Dougherty behind the 124
wheel. Alas, here I am. With Tiny running at the first sign of trouble, I assume the police have had no 125
luck in his apprehension. Pity. 126
127
14. I was nabbed, collared, busted – but there is no way I was going down by myself. True, I was 128
not very forthcoming the first time I was questioned, but I was weighing my options at the time. I 129
did ’t get he e I a i life aki g i p ude t de isio s. When I then summoned the detective 130
and asked what my cooperation would be worth, s/he seemed very grateful. I think the detective 131
knew there was more to this case than just me, but ould ’t uite fit the pie es togethe on his/her 132
own. I told him/her the whole sordid story, giving him/her everything s/he needed to link Dougherty 133
and Berrien to this heist. While I was the one doing the dirty work, it was a collaborative effort. In 134
return, I got the sweetest deal I could get considering the circumstances. Premised, of course, on my 135
truthful testimony. I even told them everything I know about my associate, which was only his name. 136
I’ su e it’s ot eall Tiny ; that ould e i o i . Ma e it’s Tony, or Timmy, or something like 137
that. Whatever. Everything else about that oaf escapes me. He must still be running through the 138
woods like a deer in hunting season. 139
140
15. I do fi d it hu o ous that Doughe t is ’t ei g ha ged, at least ot di e tly. I heard his/her 141
probation was revoked, and s/he is back in prison for the remainder of his/her original sentence. 142
Fitting for a person of his/her caliber. 143
144
16. The truth, the WHOLE truth, and nothing but the truth is what I agreed to tell. It’s like Hunter S. 145
Tho pso said, [T]he shark ethic prevails-eat the wounded. In a closed society where everybody's 146
guilt , the o l i e is getti g aught. I a o ld of thie es, the o l fi al si is stupidit . I hate to 147
say it, but Berrien is no Mensa member. Be ie ’s unwavering commitment to his/her plausi le 148
de ia ilit theo is a solid effo t, ut the thi g a out plausi le de ia ilit is that it only works for 149
those in power. Berrien has no power over me, leaving me free to supply the needed information—150
the truth—to pat h the holes i the “tate’s e ide e i e ha ge fo le ie fo self. 151
Luxembourg awaits. It’s just usi ess. 152
153
Signed, 154
155
__________________________ 156
Sacha Bateman 157
158
SIGNED AND SWORN to me at 12:12 PM, March 25, 2015. 159
160
______________________________ 161
C.M. McCormack, Notary Public 162
163
164
Sacha Bateman
32
165
WITNESS ADDENDUM 166
I have reviewed this statement, previously made by me, and I have nothing of significance to add at 167
this time. The material facts are true and correct. 168
169
Signed, 170
171
__________________________ 172
Sacha Bateman 173
174
SIGNED AND SWORN to me before 8:00 a.m. on the day of this round of the 2016 Georgia High 175
School Mock Trial Competition. 176
177
______________________________ 178
C.M. McCormack, Notary Public 179
Sacha Bateman
33
STATEMENT OF TALBOT BERRIEN
1. My name is Talbot Berrien, I am 43 years old, and I am –well, I used to be– curator of the George 1
and Sandra Carley Museum of Art. I have to believe all this is a case of bad karma –bad luck, bad 2
judgment in having anything to do with Ashley Dougherty again – bad something! After following 3
Ashley to New Echota – ay e it’s The Cherokee Rose that’s ursed, like Ki g Tut’s to – I found 4
myself square in the middle of the Philip Newton manslaughter. Ashley went away for that one, and 5
my career took a detour, as well. I have good credentials from SCAD, and experience in Ft. Worth, 6
Minneapolis, the Telfair in Savannah, and the High in Atlanta, but they do ’t see to ou t u h 7
these days, do they? I as glad to e offered the urator’s jo ; as useu fou ders, the Carleys’ 8
aestheti tastes ha e ee supre ely appeali g, a d it’s a s all, i stitutio al je el. I’d hoped to 9
make it a larger one. 10
11
2. Maybe it was Newton’s death that’s ursed –that ould e iro i , ould ’t it? Pier e Tatt all 12
Appling is a fine artist (I ought to know), but it was the pu li ity (should I say s a dal? ) surrounding 13
that episode that really made the picture a draw, and it was the audience-drawing potential which 14
drew me (pun intended, I guess) back to that painting. I was under a lot of pressure to get 15
attendance up, and I guess I just went back to a well I knew…like allowing Ashley back. 16
17
3. With a lot of persuasion from me, The Cherokee Rose was loaned to the Carley for a special 18
exhibit: signed-off on March 31, 2014 (so you see that it was in the works well before Ashley showed 19
up in my life again. I just a ’t fi d that doggone letter to Raven Feather!); scheduled to open on 20
March 19, 2015. Security is always an issue with loans, and the Carley has five-level, state-of-the-art 21
technology, linked into our local police. It is called the Senefika System. I’ parti ularly proud of the 22
phone app which lets us tailor coverage, off and on, to just what we need to access, without 23
exposing the rest to danger. As curator, I have a complete over-ride, as does the security staff on-24
site. It’s also helpful to ha e two levels of human monitoring, one on-site, one removed (while the 25
off-site cross- he ks the rest are patrolli g, ot just relyi g o gallery ideos , ut e do ’t ha e a 26
budget for two staffs, so we must rely on technology and (we hope) on watch-personnel more 27
careful than Diego. 28
29
4. With The Cherokee Rose o ered y a poly ar o ate pa el to pre e t a ti ists fro 30
destroying the work by throwing something, not just trying to steal it, the glass-break alar s o ’t 31
work there: wrong frequency. The glass-break alar s also do ’t ork here glass i do s ha e 32
been replaced by radiation-filtering plastic to prevent sun damage. Instead, we rely on security 33
attachments on the back of paintings, trained cameras linked to a DVR, and motion and infrared 34
sensors at night. However, I do ’t tell do ors or e hi itors thi gs like that, a d e do ’t pu li ize 35
such flaws and measures generally. Besides, with our redundancy of technology and human 36
connection, e’re safe e ough…I thought. 37
38
5. When Ashley Dougherty approached me again, March 25, 2014, perhaps I was too receptive. It 39
34
was perfect timing, though, as I was getting heat from the Museum Board to pull another rabbit out 40
of my hat. Ashley re-appeared – perhaps attra ted y e s that y ra it as to e the pu li re-41
surfacing of The Cherokee Rose after seven years – with news of a possible coup (for me): a 42
connection to some potential benefactors. Who could say no? On March 5, 2015, Dougherty and 43
Bateman came to a lunch sch ooze, the a k to the gallery for the i side s oop of ho the 44
Carley works. We got back about 4:30; enough time not to be in the way of security, yet see 45
e erythi g ithout a outside audie e reathi g do our e ks. They’d already seen the public 46
displays and (I supposed) they knew our growing reputation, so this was really about stroking the 47
guests with special attention. With The Cherokee Rose about to go on exhibit again – still in the lab, 48
in fact – the ti i g ould ’t ha e been better; everybody wanted a first-look and I had it. 49
50
6. No, there is absolutely no truth to allegations I knew or was involved with what those crooks 51
ere pla i g. I’d ee u der pressure, ut I’d perfor ed – the exhibit itself was proof of that – and 52
I’d ade the pai ti g too fa ous to e easily salea le...at least i the ope . I’ a i ti yself, I tell 53
you! They obviously swiped the Senefika instructions from my desk while we were going over the 54
paper ork for Bate a ’s prospe ti e do atio ; I ertai ly did ’t gi e it to the . I’ still re o eri g 55
from that horrible, horrible experience they inflicted! 56
57
7. Back when I knew The Cherokee Rose loan was going to work – when I saw how terrific my 58
triumph would be – I ega li i g up the a atio I k e I’d eed a d deser e after su h a her ulea 59
effort. While the bungalows of Tahiti may have been a stretch on the budget, I had been saving for 60
this moment for a year. Ironically, now I need the time off to recuperate from this ordeal (and all the 61
gossip)! 62
63
8. We met in my office, since the museum was closing for the day, to give my guests a basic 64
i trodu tio i to hat they’d e seei g of ehi d-the-scenes operations. I offered a libation, to put 65
them more at ease, but they de li ed or hose tea. (I ish I had. While e’d ee talki g, the Carley 66
had closed. We got started. 67
68
9. I’d take the after-hours party past our research library, then through the restoration labs. Since 69
this was all off-the-record (it makes visitors feel trusted, flattered, it keeps Board members from 70
horning-i , I had ’t ee a le to orga ize a y sho -and-tell ith the restorers, so the la as 71
luttered... ut so e Cherokee Trail of Tears artifa ts I’d gathered to flesh out the history of the 72
display– a d that should’ e ee e ough! Right there in the lab, with proper gloves available, I took 73
the liberty of allowing my guests to handle a few of the items. Jax Duval would be starting at the 74
other end of the museum and (per schedule) the night-watchman was on-rounds, so I used Senefika 75
to check our path to the Sandy Carley Gallery to show the preparations for the exhibit. I was ready to 76
show off the best of our security: the Wi-Fi unit attached to the back of the paintings themselves. 77
That should impress potential donors with both our sophistication (for an art institution of our size) 78
and our commitment. It also gave me an excuse to ask them to help remove the painting from its 79
hooks. (Our restorers would brain me for letting a civilian touch the pai ti g, ut I’ e lear ed that 80
35
hands-on contact with a prominent piece of art emotionally binds donors like nothing else.) While 81
e ere ’t a le to see The Cherokee Rose itself, I chose a lovely Bissolo piece of the Madonna to 82
show the security unit. After this, the deal ould e sealed. I’d stuffed so e e tra sets of glo es i to 83
my jacket for just this moment. I explained the Wi-Fi alert and how the immediate system around 84
the exhibits themselves works, and how the silent alarm goes to our control center and phone app. I 85
demonstrated how we can instantly react to an alarm from the app so as to not constantly tie us to 86
the control center – a nice luxury for busy days. 87
88
10. At the end of the tour, I introduced them to Diego – another layer of donor ingratiation, letting 89
Bateman meet more of the staff personally – and (quite improperly) Diego chose to vent his/her 90
rese t e t that I’d sho off our toys ithout setti g it all up ith hi /her first. I as (a little 91
more discreet reprimanding him/her for doing that in front of guests. 92
93
11. Wednesday, March 18th
2015 (after a ery tiri g “t. Patri k’s Day pri ate party y o e of our 94
Irish-A eri a patro s a d a routi e o a d perfor a e for a urator , I’d arra ged another 95
off-the-books tour for Bateman and an associate I’d e er et efore, now that The Cherokee Rose 96
was in situ. It was around 7:00 pm, and the cleaners were working elsewhere; Diego had completed 97
his/her first losi g s eep, so e ere ’t to e othered as e o ed o . I met them at the front 98
entrance and walked them back to the security room to arrange the system for our visit. Bateman 99
as aki g a pho e all ( ay e to Ashley, ho’d failed to sho , so o ody as looki g o er y 100
shoulder as I punched my security code and adjusted the system, turning off the motion detector in 101
the gallery and the cameras along the way. We ere ’t goi g outside that ight, so I did ’t tou h the 102
e ter al doors’ alar s. 103
104
12. I ould just i agi e the e arrass e t of tryi g to e plai if e’d set off the alar s e ause 105
some well-meaning staff cut peripherals back on as we walked, so I shepherded my party directly 106
towards the painting itself, moving up the ramp to the second floor. This would also allow me to re-107
arm The Cherokee Rose and the gallery as soon as possible after I’d fi ished y tour. (A d the , si e 108
I’d also ut the o itor a eras i the o trol roo s, o o e ould e er k o ... . There as a 109
i side joke to the ig ore pass ord with the authorities – the first ti e e’d tried out The Carley’s 110
new security my dog galloped ahead into the motion zone and right through the electronic curtain 111
along the wall, sending the alarm to the police; so Rags sig ified to the dispatcher that everything 112
was okay– ut it ould ’t e fu y to use it. 113
114
13. Motion detectors flickered along our path, ut o ly the orki g light, ot se d. As we 115
walked through the grand entrance hall, I ui kly ga e the talk (agai a out Appli g a d the 116
pai ti g’s history (alo g ith y key part i it. I reassured him/her that everything was set for our 117
private tour and that no one would know of his/her presence that night nor his/her involvement 118
with the exhibit until we opened Friday evening. I told Sacha I had taken his/her advice on booking 119
my stay at the Hilton in Tahiti and was very much looking forward to jetting off Sunday morning. 120
S/He said that it would k o k y so ks off a d I replied I hope it does ’t hit e too hard! We 121
36
both had a chuckle. I had noticed Sacha had arrived in a brand new Guzzler and I asked him/her 122
about it. S/He said it was a going away present for him/herself as s/he was planning a long stay in 123
Luxembourg starting the next week. I had never heard of anyone taking their vehicle with them on 124
such a trip and asked how the logistics of such a venture worked, but s/he did ’t see too kee o 125
giving any details. No bother; the moment had arrived. 126
127
14. My visitors had seen the gallery in construction, so I planned on moving right to the chief 128
attraction on the far wall. I was confident the finished gallery would knock Bateman’s silk sto ki gs 129
off and told him/her so; a clever turn if I do say. As we were steps from the painting itself, I was 130
stunned (literally) when the associate hit me from behind just as I was reaching… 131
132
15. I was not wholly unconscious, but I was halfway in a stupefied frame of mind as I felt myself 133
being dragged. Once I got the stars from my head, I could see they somehow had the painting in the 134
middle of our herringbone planks. To say I panicked would be to say da Vinci sketched. I was 135
horrified but helpless. It would be challenging to recover from a second scandal with that picture 136
(worse if it were damaged), but it might be impossible to recover from the robbers. In front of me, I 137
saw their set jaws and cold eyes (so different from the intelligent and re epti e e pressio s they’d 138
worn admiring my work at the Carley). In my imagination, I saw Philip Newton laughing at me. 139
140
16. The thieves hustled me out of the way, depositing me in the corner of the gallery. I heard noises 141
receding, apparently exiting out the door on the other side of the gallery, but no alarm. Why? I 142
thought of my smart phone, to sound the still quiet alarm, but one of them must also be a 143
pi kpo ket; they’d see e use the app, a d I’d ee too u h i sho k at the ro ery to re e er 144
when I’d lost y pho e. O ly later did I realize that Bate a as all-too-adept at using my phone; 145
o ly as y head leared (a d the dete ti e prodded y e ory , did I pie e together ho they’d 146
pilfered my handwritten notes for Senefika. 147
148
17. As I (finally) resurfaced e tally fro the loudy pool i to hi h they’d ludgeo ed e, pa i 149
supplied the resol e that physi al ourage had ’t efore. I raced through the gallery, where the 150
middle of the floor was empty, towards the back entrance of the Gallery. I did ’t k o I as 151
following their (I guess, logically obvious) escape path when I ran through this second gallery door 152
and square into Jax Duval. I was chasing my painting. 153
154
18. I a ’t elie e I lost it agai ! I sta ered – or something like that – then asked Jax, Did you 155
see the go through here? I as sho ked. I a ’t elie e this! 156
157
19. Ja said s/he did ’t see the ru y here s/he as lyi g i ait. I turned (I think) and rushed 158
through the exit door which (I think) had closed after Sacha Bateman absconded with my Rose; I 159
then heard the deeper thrum of the ight syste ’s electronic klaxon which told me its silent twin 160
was finally su o i g lo al o sta les. “o eo e ust’ e re-armed the system from back in the 161
monitoring center, or else Diego saw something specific on surveillance cameras. Any of those 162
37
possibilities was fine with me as long as my painting, and my reputation, were being pursued. 163
164
20. As I got to the top of the concrete stairs outdoors, I saw my painting disappearing into the cargo 165
port of Bate a ’s Guzzler. It may have only been 100 yards away but it felt like 100 miles! I started 166
for them, but slipped...or stumbled...or staggered...and saw a waterfall, in reverse, of concrete steps 167
whizzing past my head. Still conscious (somehow) at the bottom, I was woozy. As Duval arrived a 168
second time to help me up, I saw Diego interdicting Bateman. I was too beaten up to feel real relief, I 169
suppose, ut I re e er re arki g o ho lose e’d o e to disaster (agai , o ly to e dra 170
back from the brink. 171
172
21. It stuns me to think the police suspect me (of all persons) with being in league with the robbers. 173
I have no idea – no connection – where the gloves on the ground came from (unless they were left 174
over from our exercise in the laboratory). The painti g as i pla e for the e hi itio , e ere ’t 175
goi g to ha dle it agai ; I did ’t ri g a y ore glo es to the gallery, just as I did ’t ri g y pho e 176
outside. I did ’t ha e it after I as ha ked i the oggi . This has rui ed e (agai , a su essful 177
theft ould’ e depri ed e of the pai ti g I ade fa ous...a d of y glory. Who etter tha I to 178
k o ho futile the pai ti g’s sale ould’ e ee had the poli e ot orralled the thie es i ti e 179
(for which I salute them). Those crooks are just trying to involve me to gain negotiating leverage for 180
themselves. Our watchman is trying to cover him/herself for running late on rounds by testifying 181
agai st e. (“taff fre ue tly has it i for the oss, do ’t they? At least Ashley Dougherty had the 182
decency to acknowledge my innocence. That’s all; I’ a i ti here. 183
184
Signed, 185
186
__________________________ 187
Talbot Berrien 188
189
SIGNED AND SWORN to me at 2:35 PM, March 30, 2015. 190
191
______________________________ 192
C.M. McCormack, Notary Public 193
194
195
196
38
WITNESS ADDENDUM 197
I have reviewed this statement, previously made by me, and I have nothing of significance to add at 198
this time. The material facts are true and correct. 199
200
Signed, 201
202
__________________________ 203
Talbot Berrien 204
205
SIGNED AND SWORN to me before 8:00 a.m. on the day of this round of the 2016 Georgia High 206
School Mock Trial Competition. 207
208
______________________________ 209
C.M. McCormack, Notary Public 210
39
STATEMENT OF ASHLEY DOUGHERTY
1. My name is Ashley Dougherty, and I am 40 years old. Ever since I was a small child, I have been 1
interested in art, particularly Native American artwork. When I was a child growing up in Albany, 2
Georgia, we lived along the Kinchafoonee Creek, and to this day, it is easy to find shards of Native 3
American pottery and flint arrowheads along the banks of the creek. Further, like so many whose 4
roots go back generations in Georgia, I claim some Native American ancestry myself. I attended the 5
University of Georgia where I received a Bachelor's degree in History, a Master's degree in Museum 6
Studies, and a Ph.D. in Art History. While in Athens, I also interned at the Georgia Museum of Art, 7
which is located on the campus of the University of Georgia. After college, I continued my studies in 8
London and served as an assistant curator of the North and Central American collection at the British 9
Museum for approximately four years. 10
11
2. After four years in England, I returned home and accepted the position of curator of the fine 12
arts collection at the Telfair Museum of Art in Savannah, Georgia. It was at the Telfair Museum that I 13
first became acquainted with Talbot Berrien. Not only was Talbot a competent and highly qualified 14
assistant, but I considered Talbot to be a close friend as well as a colleague. After resigning from the 15
Telfair, I accepted the position of curator at the New Echota Museum of Art in New Echota, Georgia. 16
Fortunately, I was also able to hire Talbot away from the Telfair to be my assistant curator at New 17
Echota. 18
19
3. Although the New Echota Museum was small, under my leadership, I was determined to make 20
it one of the best small museums in the whole world. That's why the "Trail of Tears" exhibit Talbot 21
and I were planning in 2008 was so important. This exhibit would mark the 170th Anniversary of the 22
removal and display Native American artwork and artifacts, as well as paintings depicting the 1838 23
forced relocation of the Cherokee people from their lands in the southeastern United States to the 24
Indian Territory west of the Mississippi River. Obviously, however, no exhibit on the subject would 25
be complete, even doable, without the fabled painting, or should I say, the cursed painting, The 26
Cherokee Rose. Painted in 1935 by Pierce Tattnall Appling, one of Dorothy Dunn's most talented 27
protégés, The Cherokee Rose tells the legend of that flower, and Talbot and I had to have it as the 28
thematic center of our exhibition. The only problem was that nobody had seen The Cherokee Rose 29
for almost fifty years. It seems that mystery, misery, and misfortune have always followed the 30
painting. It's like the Hope Diamond. 31
32
4. Fortunately, or maybe unfortunately in retrospect, Talbot traced The Cherokee Rose to a 33
private collector named Raven Feather, a wealthy oil heir/heiress from Tulsa, Oklahoma. Talbot 34
persuaded Mr./Mrs. Feather to loan The Cherokee Rose to the New Echota Museum, but only if the 35
Museum insurance policy would cover any loss. Of course, a painting that has not been exhibited 36
publicly for such a long time is bound to have dozens of unsubstantiated rumors swirling around it. I 37
assigned the task of verifying the painting's authenticity to Philip Newton, another assistant curator 38
at the New Echota Museum and a highly talented, yet temperamental artist in his own right. When 39
40
Newton refused to certify the authenticity of the painting, quite unreasonably in my opinion, I had 40
no choice but to terminate Newton's employment. First, Newton threatened me, then The Cherokee 41
Rose disappeared, but was conveniently "found" by Newton in his garage. Thanks to a botched 42
police investigation, Newton was never charged with the crime, and then he broke into my office 43
one evening and tried to strangle me. As I fought off Newton, he thrust his right hand into his jacket 44
pocket reaching for what I assumed was a hand gun. To protect myself, I reached into a drawer and 45
grabbed an antique .45-caliber Colt revolver and fired blindly twice in Philip's direction. When the 46
smoke cleared, Philip was dead. In a miscarriage of justice, I, the victim, was convicted of voluntary 47
manslaughter on May 9, 2009 by an overzealous prosecutor after the jury deadlocked on murder 48
charges in my first trial. I was sentenced to 10 years, 5 to serve, 5 on probation. 49
50
5. Five years in jail for a crime that I did ’t commit. Jail is not a place where culture and education 51
are appreciated. And all because of that painting, that cursed painting. However, even in prison I 52
kept up with developments in the art world. I also met some "acquaintances" of Sacha Bateman, and 53
I learned there was a dirty underworld for stolen art. 54
55
6. Fortunately, Talbot was not too tainted by my scandal, and he/she got the job as the curator at 56
The Carley Museum of Art. In February 2014, I was released from prison on probation, and I caught 57
up with Talbot in late March 2014, after hearing a rumor that The Carley Museum was considering 58
displaying The Cherokee Rose. I was a bit surprised Talbot wanted to get involved with that wretched 59
piece of art again, but I figured s/he knew what s/he was doing. I met Talbot at The Carley, and 60
he/she showed me around the galleries, the lab and the security room. 61
62
7. Talbot also showed me all of the new security features at The Carley which we didn't have in 63
New Echota. I have to admit that I was impressed, especially with the security tags on the high-value 64
pieces and the integration of the entire system on a secure app. I even commented to Talbot that "if 65
we'd had these security features in 2008, The Cherokee Rose would've been safe." In reality, it would 66
have been impossible. I mean, the iPhone had only been out for a year and the idea of doing 67
something like this from your phone was still with the Jetsons. 68
69
8. My comment about the security was also a clever segue into the other purpose of my visit: to 70
learn if and when The Cherokee Rose would be at The Carley. Talbot took the bait, and sighed, 71
"Wouldn't it be great to have it here again?" And then, Talbot, thinking he/she was letting me in on a 72
little secret, told me that he/she was working on bringing The Cherokee Rose to The Carley and 73
expected a contract in about a week. I told Talbot that "even though that painting had caused me 74
considerable trouble, it would be great to have it in my hands again." Talbot also introduced me to 75
Security Officer Quito Diego on my visit, who you could tell was no Benedict Cumberbatch. 76
77
9. Initially, I confess I was interested in getting revenge on that painting for ruining my life. I never 78
wanted to hurt Talbot, but I am ashamed to say that I used Talbot to gain access. I knew it was 79
o g, ut I as ’t thi ki g lea at that poi t. I then contacted Sacha Bateman, whom I knew was 80
highly connected to the underworld of art. Bateman wanted me to be his/her art expert both on 81
41
legitimate and not so legitimate acquisitions. Bateman was already interested in stealing The 82
Cherokee Rose and was keen to add my knowledge and insight about the painting to the plans for 83
the heist. After Bateman had the painting in his/her hands, I was to authenticate it to make sure we 84
e e ’t dealing with a fake. The Rose would be worth a fortune on the black market. His/Her buyers 85
ould ’t app e iate pa i g an for Appling knock off. Plus, having The Cherokee Rose at The Carley 86
would make the heist easier if we used Talbot for access. At no time did I suggest that Talbot was 87
complicit in this nefarious scheme; I only said I had a connection at the Carley (I may have dropped 88
Tal ot’s a e once pressed), and that things would go smoothly. And looking back, it apparently did, 89
until the end. Talbot really put it all on the line when s/he testified on my behalf in 2009, and I was 90
starting to feel guilty about him/her taking all of that on for me. However, it is amazing how revenge 91
and money can soothe those pangs of guilt. 92
93
10. With Bateman posing as a potential new donor, I arranged for Bateman and me to meet Talbot, 94
first for lunch, and then for an after-hours tour of The Carley on March 5, 2015, so Talbot could 95
schmooze Bateman. Bate a a ted to eet Tal ot a d i te ie him/her for him/herself, 96
before committing to the plan. Talbot took Bateman and me on a guided tour of The Carley and 97
showed us the lab and all of the security methods in place to protect The Cherokee Rose. In the lab, 98
Talbot showed us some pottery and an Army rifle; s/he gave us gloves to protect the pieces. Again, 99
Talbot was never part of the plan, just a way to get Bateman in the door. Initially, Bateman wanted 100
me to drive the getaway car, but I refused because I did not want to risk being seen by Talbot and 101
hurting our relationship. I did agree to verify The Cherokee Rose once Bateman and his/her men had 102
gotten away with it. However, Bateman was insistent about me driving for some reason, and I 103
agreed. 104
105
11. After having some time to rest with the plan and seeing what this may do to Talbot, I told 106
Bateman that I would not go through with it. This was a week before the heist, on March 10. I did 107
not want to do this to Talbot, and, more importantly, I did not want to risk going back to jail in case 108
we got caught. Been there, done that, have the record. It was a sound plan, but you know what 109
Steinbeck said about the best laid plans. Bateman was no mouse and responded by saying, "No one 110
quits on me. You work for me until I sa ou do 't. 111
112
12. Well, given that not so subtle threat, I couldn't come right out and say "I quit," but I quickly 113
backed out and laid low, confident that without me driving the car or my expertise to verify the 114
authenticity of The Cherokee Rose, Bateman would abandon the plans to steal the painting. 115
Unfortunately, since I had already laid the groundwork by introducing Bateman to Talbot and, 116
essentially handing Bateman the keys to the castle, Bateman went through with it anyway. S/He 117
ought so e thi k e k alo g fo the heist ho uit as ell. I do ’t thi k Bateman gave him the 118
permission to quit either, ut I do ’t see hi getti g ha ged ith a thi g. 119
120
13. I k o it’s ei g asked h I e e sou ded the ala a out hat as goi g to happen. I 121
as ’t s a ed of Bate a ’s th eat a d as ’t o ied a out it lo i g a k o e. I just never felt 122
it was necessary to give any forewarning about the plan to Talbot or to the police since, without my 123
42
verification, there would be no heist. Without the wheel man and the expert eye, I was certain the 124
whole plan was a bust. I should have at least warned Talbot about Bateman, but I was hoping it 125
ould e e happe a d I ould ’t ha e to e plai pla ed et a al to f ie d. 126
127
14. As we now know, despite my backing out, Bateman went through with it. When I heard 128
Bateman was arrested at the scene, I felt relieved. Then, later on, I heard that Talbot was arrested as 129
well. M guilt o su ed e…I had to o e fo a d a d tell the t uth. “/He as ’t pa t of this. 130
Talbot got caught up in this whole stupid plan because of me. I had to do what I could to get him/her 131
out of this. I owed it to Talbot. 132
133
15. I was about to call the Miltonville Police to come forward when the detective called me before I 134
had a chance to call. I told the detective exactly what I have told you here. Although the prosecutor 135
has ’t ha ged me with anything, I was served with a petition to revoke my probation. Consumed 136
with guilt, I consented to a full revocation, a d I’ a k i jail. It’s what I deserve from dragging 137
Talbot into this mess. 138
139
16. I've come forward to tell you the truth, that Talbot Berrien had nothing to do with this. This 140
whole thing is the work of Bateman and his/her henchman. Talbot Berrien is completely innocent, I 141
tell you! This whole thing is insane! I hope Talbot can see that and forgive me. 142
143
Signed, 144
145
__________________________ 146
Ashley Dougherty 147
148
SIGNED AND SWORN to me at 11:40 AM, March 30, 2015. 149
150
______________________________ 151
C.M. McCormack, Notary Public 152
153
154
155
WITNESS ADDENDUM 156
I have reviewed this statement, previously made by me, and I have nothing of significance to add at 157
this time. The material facts are true and correct. 158
159
Signed, 160
161
__________________________ 162
Ashley Dougherty 163
164
43
SIGNED AND SWORN to me before 8:00 a.m. on the day of this round of the 2016 Georgia High 165
School Mock Trial Competition. 166
167
______________________________ 168
C.M. McCormack, Notary Public 169
44
STATEMENT OF JAX DUVAL
1. My name is Jax Duval. I was born and raised in Miltonville. I am 26 years old and have been 1
working at The Carley Museum since I was 18. Over the years, I have worked my way up to night 2
shift cleaning crew supervisor. There is a lot of turnover with the cleaning crew because most people 3
do ’t see this as a fore er jo . I enjoy the job because it allows me plenty of time during the day for 4
my dog training business. I am known around town as a dog whisperer and really love working with 5
all dogs, but I am now specializing in training service dogs for the blind and for children with 6
diabetes. I take pride in doing an excellent job at the museum and have always been extremely 7
careful when cleaning near the art exhibits. Sometimes the new cre e ers do ’t take the jo 8
seriously and are a little sloppy when cleaning. Since I have seniority and the most experience, I 9
always clean the 2nd
floor where all the special and more expensive exhibits are housed. I really 10
enjoy the job because the museum is quiet and peaceful during the evenings. I just put in my ear 11
buds, listen to a little jazz, and get started on my evening routine. Also my job is the kind of job that 12
you do ’t take ho e ith you. Once the museum is cleaned up and secured for the night, that is it - 13
no mess no stress-except, of course, for the night The Cherokee Rose was stolen. 14
15
2. I am a low key, really easygoing person, and get along well with everyone at the museum, 16
including Quito Diego, the night security guard, and Talbot Berrien, the museum curator. Quito is 17
pretty rough around the edges, you know, the kind of person who seems to rub everyone the wrong 18
way on purpose. Quito has that security guard mentality – sort of like a frustrated police academy 19
reject who is not allowed to carry a loaded gun. But like me, Quito is very conscientious and is really 20
dedicated to keeping the museum and its contents safe. I guess that is why we get along – Quito 21
knows I care about the museum as much as s/he does. Plus, we typically work the same overnight 22
shifts and we tend to encounter the same frustrations with the job. 23
24
3. Talbot Berrien has been the museum curator since 2009. Like I said, he and I have always 25
gotten along since s/he came in. Talbot has always been extremely thankful for how I handled the 26
cleaning crew; s/he always said we do a professional job. Talbot liked to run a spotless museum and 27
hated things being out of place. Talbot knew I could be counted on for making sure the cleaning job 28
was done right the first time. In this way, Talbot, Quito and I are on the same page. We are proud of 29
the museum and our work reflects on us personally. Talbot has worked non-stop since taking the 30
urator’s positio . Every so often, we would chat about where we would go if we ever had the time 31
to take a vacation. Talbot always wanted to go to Tahiti, but it is so expensive! Talbot has been 32
saving for that trip for years. About a year ago, Talbot told me that s/he finally saved up enough and 33
was going to treat him/herself in March of 2015. I think that conversation was a few weeks before I 34
heard about The Cherokee Rose exhibit coming to the Carley. 35
36
4. Of course, everyone has gripes about the job. The late hours were tough for me to get used to 37
at the beginning. Sometimes, Talbot would o plai that s/he did ’t get paid e ough for all the 38
work s/he had to do around the museum. Everyone gripes but I just keep my head down and focus 39
45
on doing the best job I can. O e thi g this did for e as that I’ e ee a le to e i the k o 40
without bei g i the loop. Whe I’ orki g, I usually ha e y ear uds i ; people do ’t usually 41
pay atte tio to so eo e he it looks like they’re tu ed out to hat’s goi g o arou d the . I like 42
this because it helps me focus and helps pass the time. What no one in the museum realized is that 43
most of the time the music volume is so low I can still hear what people are saying around me. I 44
guess I’ a it of a s oop arou d here, ut I like k o i g hat’s goi g o si e ho the useu 45
goes, so goes my job. 46
47
5. The Carley has strict rules about private tours, especially when a tour is scheduled during 48
evening hours when the museum is closed. The rules state that all private tours have to be booked at 49
least one week in advance, logged in on the museum calendar, and security and cleaning had to be 50
notified when the tour was booked. This policy is designed to make sure security did not activate the 51
security system prior to the private tour and to make sure that the cleaning crew did not arrive until 52
after the tour was gone, to avoid duplication of lea i g efforts a d to stay out of e eryo e’s ay. 53
This policy made sure The Carley were not embarrassed by alarms sounding during a tour and kept 54
patrons safe from accidents such as slipping on freshly polished floors. We work hard for that shine; 55
they do ’t all that le el of glea useu uality for othi g! 56
57
6. For the most part Talbot was a stickler for following all the museum rules too. But sometimes 58
Talbot would come in late at night to work and turn off the system in the areas around his/her office 59
and then forget to turn them back on when s/he left. This really bothered Quito; s/he would get 60
really mad and mouth off to everyone about how careless Talbot was. Sometimes, Quito would 61
publicly rip Talbot a new one in front of all of us about being sloppy and unprofessional. I mean, 62
yeah, Quito’s right, ut there’s etter ays of ha dli g it. Sometimes, it got personal and they 63
definitely did ’t get alo g after a fe of those o ersatio s. 64
65
7. About a week before The Cherokee Rose fiasco, Quito confronted Talbot about sounding 66
a other pai ti g’s alarm while showing a potential donor how security on the paintings worked. 67
Apparently, Talbot had not given Quito any warning that s/he was testing the alarm system and it 68
scared the mess out of Quito. I ould ’t a t to ha e to lea that up! Once again, Quito called 69
Talbot out about not following proper museum safety protocol but this time, it was in front of a 70
potential donor. Talbot was furious about Quito’s ra t and embarrassing him/her (and maybe the 71
museum) in front of esteemed guests, but there was really nothing s/he could do about it because 72
Talbot is not Quito’s oss. Another hit in the relationship. 73
74
8. I guess the final straw for Quito was the night of the attempted theft, Wednesday, March 18, 75
2015. It started out as an ordinary night. I got to work, double checked the private tour calendar to 76
make sure no one was scheduled (none were), got my cleaning supplies out of the closet, put in my 77
earbuds, turned on the jazz, and started to head to the 2nd
floor. Before I could get in my groove, 78
Rachel, my 1st
floor crew person called in sick. It was too late to call someone in to cover the shift, so 79
I headed back down and started cleaning the 1st
floor spaces myself. It would make for a later night, 80
ut that’s okay. I like what I do. 81
46
82
9. On my way to get started on the atrium outside the Mallory Gallery, I noticed Talbot was in and 83
out of his/her office. S/He had been swamped with The Cherokee Rose exhibit about to open and 84
seemed really worked up, almost nervous. We had a chance to chat, and Talbot told me that s/he 85
was very close to securing a very prominent patron for the museum. S/he frequently referred to 86
ourti g patro s as La Gra de Da se, a d ith the Tahiti trip o i g up s/he as a ious to lose 87
the deal before his/her departure. About 15 minutes later, I noticed Talbot with some people 88
walking up the ramp to the 2nd
floor where the Sandy Carley Gallery, where The Cherokee Rose 89
exhibit is. This was really strange because nothing was scheduled. I took my ear buds out as I walked 90
towards the Barker Atrium. As I was moving, I overheard Talbot talking about the gallery. I have to 91
admit that the ceilings in the entrance atrium are very high and cavernous and sometimes things get 92
distorted and are very echo-y, so you a ’t always distinguish exactly what is being said. 93
94
10. However, I could clearly see that one of the people with Talbot that night was Sacha Bateman. I 95
did ’t get a good look at the other perso , but I can say for sure that Bateman was there. Someone 96
told me it was Bateman with Talbot when Quito went off on him/her a week earlier. I remember 97
thinking that the embarrass e t of the re uke as ’t ad e ough for Bate a to a el his/her 98
donation. Bate a has a disti t style, al ays dressed to the 9’s a d al ays eari g e pe si e 99
Prada shoes. That night was no different – guess Bateman dresses like a runway model even when 100
stealing a painting. I heard someone say, Get ready e’re goi g to k o k your so ks off . Then 101
someone laughed and said, Just do ’t hit e too hard. Like his/her dress, Bate a ’s oi e is also 102
very distinctive. Then Bateman said, Are you sure e’re ot goi g to e see ? I do ’t a t this 103
getti g out. Talbot replied, Do ’t orry a out it; o o e’s goi g to k o e’re here. Talbot then 104
said, I’ set to get out of to right after all this goes do . They said a few more things I ould ’t 105
quite catch and then Talbot said, “o ho do you pla o getti g it out of the ou try? right as they 106
rounded the corner to the gallery entrance. 107
108
11. As I was going back to my floor buffer, Quito walked by, heading to the security office from 109
his/her rounds. Quito said hi and I replied, Hey Quito. I see Talbot is on another nighttime tour 110
ith those people agai . Quito said, What do you ea ? What people? I told Quito, Talbot just 111
walked by with the same gentleman/lady from a couple of weeks ago, the really nicely dressed one. 112
I did ’t a t to e tio the pu li fight they had. They just headed that way a minute ago a d 113
pointed up towards the Sandy Carley Gallery. Talbot was talking about the new Cherokee Rose 114
exhibit and then something about getting out of town’. Maybe about his/her trip to Tahiti? I hate it 115
when s/he does this. I wish s/he would put these visits down on the schedule so I know to go back 116
through to ake sure it’s all i order. 117
118
12. Quito’s fa e tur ed eet red a d s/he turned and ran straight to the security office. I did ’t 119
know what happened! I dropped the buffer handle and ran after Quito to make sure s/he was okay. 120
Quito ran back out of the control room and was heading to the stairs. I asked, What’s goi g o ? 121
Quito told me Talbot had just gotten knocked down and dragged off by someone in the group with 122
Bateman, and then Quito ran off. I ran into the control room and looked at the monitor. Sure 123
47
enough, Talbot was slumped on the floor back up against the wall. Talbot as ’t o i g, but I did 124
see some little jerky movements of his/her legs – you know, kinda like when someone is having a 125
seizure. Bate a ’s frie d as sta di g a k y Bate a a d the pai ti g, holdi g hat looked like a 126
gun on Talbot. 127
128
13. After seeing all this, I ran and caught up with Quito at the entrance to the Carley Gallery. Quito 129
was crouched down a few feet from the gallery e tra e so s/he ould ’t e see , looki g at his/her 130
phone. S/He put his/her finger to his/her lips to tell me to be quiet and leaned over and whispered in 131
my ear to sneak around to the Dillard Gallery’s e tra e, to ake sure they did ’t ru out that ay. 132
“/He told e to ake sure I as ’t see a d just keep a eye out o that e d of the gallery. I quickly 133
moved off as quietly as I could; I did ’t a t to o e too fast a d ake a oise. I had to go through 134
the other galleries to cross through the Sculpture Loft to get in the Dillard Gallery. As I hustled 135
through the Loft, I could see Quito still outside the Carley Gallery working on his/her phone. 136
137
14. Just as I got there to the entrance of the Dillard Gallery and ducked around the back corner, the 138
uildi g’s ai alarm went off. If I as ’t a ake earlier, I sure as he k as o ! Not seeing anyone 139
come out of the gallery into the Loft, I hustled into the gallery and moved towards the Carley Gallery. 140
I saw Talbot stumble out of the Carley Gallery into Dillard and s/he says, I a ’t elie e e did it 141
again. The s/he shakes his/her head a d oti es e sta di g there shocked. S/He gets his/her 142
o sho ked look a d says, You…you a ’t e here – you should ’t see this! I a ’t elie e I lost it 143
again. Did you see the go through here? I a ’t elie e this! I told him/her that no one ran past 144
me this way so Talbot turns, shuffled across the gallery to the exit door, pushed it open and ran 145
outside. The door’s alarm did not sound when Talbot ra through it, though I do ’t k o if it ould 146
with the main alarm sounding. 147
148
15. A second later, I saw Quito sprint by and out the exit door. By the time I made it out the door 149
behind Quito, I saw Talbot crumpled up at the bottom of the stairs and Quito was almost at 150
Bate a ’s Guzzler door, yelling at him/her and pointing his/her Fazer. I did ’t see a yo e else out 151
there, including the guy who was dragging Talbot across the gallery floor. I ran down the steps to 152
help Talbot up and s/he says, Al ost got a ay ith it. S/He looked so embarrassed and ashamed. I 153
felt bad for Talbot. It seems like they used him/her to get to the painting. This was supposed to be 154
su h a shi i g o e t for hi /her a d the useu ; o it looks like it’s all for othi g. 155
156
16. Talbot and I waited together until the police arrived. Later, Talbot asked me if I had seen 157
his/her pho e out there ut I did ’t. One of the CSI ladies later said a phone and gloves were found 158
i the Carley Gallery a d if I k e if they had ee there earlier i the day. I told her I had ’t gotte 159
to that gallery yet o y rou ds so I as ’t sure. “he sho ed it to e i a ag a d it looks like 160
Talbot’s pho e. 161
162
17. Once the police got a handle on everything, I gave my statement to the Investigator then was 163
sent home for the night so the forensics team could gather evidence from the area around the 164
48
missing The Cherokee Rose painting. The museum was shut down for the next day, so I guess it was 165
okay y floors did ’t get a ed that ight. 166
167
Signed, 168
169
__________________________ 170
Jax Duval 171
172
SIGNED AND SWORN to me at 9:15 AM, April 1, 2015. 173
174
______________________________ 175
C.M. McCormack, Notary Public 176
177
178
179
WITNESS ADDENDUM 180
I have reviewed this statement, previously made by me, and I have nothing of significance to add at 181
this time. The material facts are true and correct. 182
183
Signed, 184
185
__________________________ 186
Jax Duval 187
188
SIGNED AND SWORN to me before 8:00 a.m. on the day of this round of the 2016 Georgia High 189
School Mock Trial Competition. 190
191
______________________________ 192
C.M. McCormack, Notary Public 193
Jax
Jax
49
MILTONVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT
INCIDENT REPORT
CASE NUMBER: 15-518035 DATE OF REPORT: 23 March 2015 TIME: 9:25
ORIGINAL REPORT SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT
DATE OF OCCURRENCE: 18 March 2015
TIME OF OCCURRENCE: 19:27
DOW: Sun Mon Tues Wed Thur Fri Sat Unk
INCIDENT LOCATION: George and Sandra Carley Museum of Art, 1961 Athena Avenue, Miltonville, GA 30195
COMMON/BUSINESS NAME:
BEAT:
MAPR:
DISTRICT: ALCOHOL: YES NO UNK DRUG: YES NO UNK
CASE STATUS: cleared by arrest exceptionally cleared unfounded inactive pending arrest pending inv. results informational only administratively cleared
DATE: 21 March 2015
ATTEMPTED/COMMITTED: Committed Accessory After Accessory Before Aid/Abet Assault To Attempt to Conspiracy To Facilitation Of Solicitation To Threat To Unfounded
ATTACK REASON: Assault Theft Menace Concerned Citizen Mental
WEAPON TYPE: Firearm Knife/Cutting Instrument Hands/Fists/Feet, etc. Other Weapon
# ENTERED: 2 STRUCTURE OCCUPANCY: 3 at time of entry
EVIDENCE OBTAINED: YES NO UNK
LOCATION TYPE:
JUVENILE DISPOSITION: Handled w/in Dept. Referred to Juvenile Court Referred to Welfare Agency Referred to Other Police Referred to Adult Court
UCR DISPOSITION: Cleared by Arrest – Adult Cleared by Arrest - JUV Exceptionally Cleared – Adult Exception Cleared – JUV Unfounded Active
EX CLEARED TYPE: Extradition Declined Arrest on Primary Offense Death of Offender Vict/Witn Refused Cooperate Prosecution Declined Juvenile/No Custody
THEFT BY COMPUTER? YES NO UNK
FORCED ENTRY? YES NO UNK
DATE CLEARED: 21 March 2015 # ARRESTED: 2
DRUG ACTIVITY: N/A Buy Deliver Use Distribute Manufacture Produce Cultivate Possess Smuggle Sell Traffic Other
DRUG TYPE: N/A Amphetamine Barbiturate Cocaine Heroin Hallucinogen Marijuana Opium/Derivative Paraphernalia Synthetic
QUANTITY: UNITS: Gram Milligram Kilogram Ounce Pound Ton Liter Milliliter Dose
VALUE
$________________
VICTIM/OFFENDER RELATIONSHIP: Employee
ASSAULT/HOMICIDE CIRCUMSTANCES: Refer to narrative
CHILDREN WERE… Involved Present N/A Both
OFFICER ACTION: Arrest Family Violence Arrest Other Offence Summons Separation Unfounded Referred to Social
PRIOR COURT ORDERS: YES NO UNK
ALCOHOL USED BY: Aggressor Victim Both Used Neither Used
DRUGS USED BY: Aggressor Victim Both Used Neither Used
PREVIOUS COMPLAINTS: None One-Five Six-Ten More than 10 Unknown
SERVICES: Advised Not Advised
AGGRESSOR IDENTIFIED BY: Physical Evidence Testimonial Both
EXHIBIT 1
50
CASE NUMBER: 15-518035 DATE OF REPORT: 23 March 2015 TIME: 9:25
ORIGINAL REPORT SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT
BRIEF DESCRIPTION:
On 03/18/15, I was dispatched to the Carley Museum on a 459A (burglar alarm). When I first arrived, the uniform officers had
Sacha Bateman in handcuffs in the back of a patrol car. A Guzzler with license plate JWS2006 registered to Bateman was
parked outside the museum. In the back, I could see, in plain view, The Cherokee Rose. I learned that Bateman was involved in
the theft of this painting. I saw Talbot Berrien, the curator, and Quito Diego, the night shift security guard at the bottom of the
stairs to the rear door of the museum. That rear door was open. The uniform officers had already secured the scene inside the
museum.
As the lead investigator for this case, I was responsible for delegating certain duties. I had someone with our Crime Scene Unit
help try to obtain fingerprints and DNA from the museum gallery where the painting was stolen. We weren’t able to obtain any fingerprints because I learned that the culprits were wearing gloves. There was no DNA that we could use; too many visitors
and employees had been through the area that day to be able to find anything that we could compare to known samples.
I interviewed the people on scene. I talked to Diego first. S/He said that s/he was by him/herself working the night shift. S/He
said that he was just finishing his evening walk-through, and even though there aren’t supposed to be guests at that time, s/he
heard from Jax Duval that Berrien was breaking protocol and giving an improperly scheduled after-hours tour. Diego went to
the security room to see what was going on and found that the surveillance cameras had been turned off. S/He speculated that Berrien did it to cover up the tour because it wouldn’t be his/her first infraction.
Berrien was still shaken up when I talked to him/her. S/He said he saw Bateman and an unidentified individual move across
the gallery to the Cherokee Rose exhibit. According to him/her, there they took it off the wall and s/he tried to stop them. S/He
said no alarms went off.
The only other witness in the museum was Duval. Duval was the custodian. S/He said that everything was normal in the
gallery where The Cherokee Rose was displayed, even though s/he hadn’t gotten to that part of the museum. He/she said that
Berrien seemed a little nervous that evening when he saw him.
After I finished at the museum, I went back to headquarters, where Bateman was in custody. S/He was in Interview Room 1. I
set up the audio/video equipment to record the interview. I went into the interview room, and I advised Bateman of his/her
Miranda Rights, reading from my Miranda card that I keep on my person. Bateman asked for an attorney.
A few hours later, I got word that Bateman was asking for me. We hadn’t finished all the paperwork, so s/he hadn’t been transported to the jail yet. I advised him/her of his/her Miranda Rights again, and I had him/her sign another form. S/He told
me that Berrien came up with the idea for the heist. S/He said that Berrien wanted him/her to pose as a rich art donor, and along with Ashley Dougherty, they would be able to take the painting. Bateman also said this other guy named Tony helped the night of the heist. Bateman walked me through how Berrien had showed him/her how to disable the alarms using an app
on his/her phone. S/He said that everything went according to plan that night, except Dougherty didn’t show up. The part about Berrien chasing them and getting knocked out was even part of Berrien’s elaborate scheme to make it look like Berrien wasn’t involved.
I also interviewed Dougherty when s/he came to headquarters. S/He wasn’t under arrest at that time, so I didn’t read him/her Miranda. S/He also said that Berrien concocted the whole plan, and s/he was supposed to be the getaway driver. However,
Dougherty said that s/he decided not to go along at the last minute after getting cold feet. I ran his/her criminal history and
learned that s/he had already been convicted of voluntary manslaughter stemming from an incident involving The Cherokee
Rose.
After learning this information, I went back to review the surveillance videos, but I was not able to obtain any. I did learn
during my investigation that Berrien had booked a trip to Tahiti that was scheduled to start just a few days after the heist.
Based upon this information, I took out a warrant for Berrien’s arrest for conspiracy to commit theft.
This case is closed by arrest. ATTACHMENTS:
Persons Property Offenses Narrative
GCIC ENTRY Warrant Vehicle Article Boat Gun
REPORTING OFFICER:
BADGE: 4733
DATE: 23 March 2015
SUPERVISOR:
BADGE: 88522
DATE: 23 March 2015
DATA ENTRY:
BADGE: DATE:
SGardner
Nick Barker
51
Restoration Labs & Storage
The Art and Architecture
of Miltonville
Mallory Gallery
The George Café
The Museum Store
Craig Harding
Community Art
Studio & Classroom
Ratterree Hall
Entrance Plaza
Administrative
Offices
Security
Barker Atrium
Ex
hib
it 2
Level One
Emergency Exit
Secure Door
i
The George and Sandra
CARLEY Museum of Art
52
Kirby Farnsworth Sculpture Loft
Photographs
Wood-Culhane Portrait Gallery
Manoll B. Epps Special Collections
Gallery
Art of the American South Sandra Carley Special
Exhibitions Gallery
Dillard Gallery
Reception Space Level Two
(Loft has rail open to atrium.)
53
Display
Case
Bench
The Cherokee Rose
Sa
nd
ra C
arle
y G
alle
ry
Dilla
rd G
alle
ry
Re
cep
tion
Sp
ace
Ca
me
ras
QD
Pa
intin
gs
EXHIBIT 3
54
Senefika Security Log
THU, 05-Mar-15
16:00 CLOCK_IN QDIEGO
16:30 SEC_OFF DOOR TBERRIEN
16:33 VIS_BADGE CHECK_IN TBERRIEN Ashley Dougherty
16:33 VIS_BADGE CHECK_IN TBERRIEN Sacha Bateman
16:40 LAB_1 DOOR TBERRIEN CARD
16:42 LAB_1 DOOR JCULHANE CARD
16:48 LAB_2 DOOR TBERRIEN CARD
16:57 CLOCK_IN JDUVAL
17:05 CLOCK_OUT SEPPS
17:05 CLOCK_OUT BSMITH
17:05 CLOCK_OUT JSETZER
17:07 CLOCK_IN RJACKSON
17:15 PERIM_DOORS ACTIVE QDIEGO SEC_OFF
17:20 CASE_A12 INACTIVE JCULHANE LOCAL
17:28 TAG_125 BREACH
17:28 TAG_125 ANSWER TBERRIEN APP
17:29 SEC_OFF DOOR QDIEGO CARD
17:33 CASE_A12 ACTIVE JCULHANE LOCAL
17:46 ADMIN DOOR TBERRIEN CARD
17:49 SEC_OFF DOOR TBERRIEN CARD
17:52 VIS_BADGE CHECK_OUT TBERRIEN Sacha Bateman
17:54 DOOR_1A INACTIVE TBERRIEN CARD
17:54 DOOR_1A ACTIVE TBERRIEN CARD
17:56 ADMIN DOOR TBERRIEN CARD
18:12 SEC_OFF DOOR TBERRIEN CARD
18:13 VIS_BADGE CHECK_OUT TBERRIEN Ashley Dougherty
18:20 DOOR_3 INACTIVE TBERRIEN CARD
18:35 GAL_2_MOTION ACTIVE QDIEGO SEC_OFF
19:04 GAL_4_MOTION ACTIVE QDIEGO SEC_OFF
19:46 GAL_1_MOTION ACTIVE QDIEGO APP
19:50 DOOR_3 INACTIVE RJACKSON CARD
19:53 DOOR_3 ACTIVE RJACKSON CARD
21:13 GAL_3_MOTION ACTIVE QDIEGO SEC_OFF
21:16 GAL_5_MOTION ACTIVE QDIEGO SEC_OFF
21:17 GAL_6_MOTION ACTIVE QDIEGO SEC_OFF
23:18 CLOCK_OUT RJACKSON
23:20 CLOCK_OUT JDUVAL
23:21 DOOR_3 INACTIVE JDUVAL CARD
23:30 ALL_ARM ACTIVE QDIEGO APP
EXHIBIT 4
55
Senefika Security Log
WED, 18-Mar-15
16:55 CLOCK_IN JDUVAL
17:04 CLOCK_OUT SEPPS
17:05 CLOCK_OUT BSMITH
17:05 CLOCK_OUT JSETZER
17:18 PERIM_DOORS ACTIVE QDIEGO SEC_OFF
17:24 LAB_1 DOOR JCULHANE CARD
17:48 TAG_119 ACTIVE JCULHANE LOCAL
17:49 TAG_103 ACTIVE JCULHANE LOCAL
17:51 TAG_99 ACTIVE KWOOD LOCAL
17:52 TAG_96 ACTIVE KWOOD LOCAL
17:54 TAG_100 ACTIVE JCULHANE LOCAL
17:54 TAG_103 INACTIVE JCULHANE LOCAL
17:55 TAG_122 ACTIVE KWOOD LOCAL
17:56 CASE_C2 ACTIVE JCULHANE LOCAL
17:58 TAG_103 ACTIVE JCULHANE LOCAL
18:30 GAL_2_MOTION ACTIVE QDIEGO APP
19:02 DOOR_1A INACTIVE TBERRIEN CARD
19:02 DOOR_1A ACTIVE TBERRIEN CARD
19:04 SEC_OFF DOOR TBERRIEN CARD
19:07 GAL_2_MOTION INACTIVE TBERRIEN SEC_OFF
19:08 INT_CAMERAS INACTIVE TBERRIEN SEC_OFF
19:20 SEC_OFF DOOR QDIEGO CARD
19:20 INT_CAMERAS ACTIVE QDIEGO SEC_OFF
19:20 MASTER_ALARM ACTIVE QDIEGO SEC_OFF FAILED
19:23 TAG_103 INACTIVE TBERRIEN APP
19:23 PERIM_DOORS INACTIVE TBERRIEN APP
19:24 SYSTEM_RESET QDIEGO APP
19:25 DOOR_9 BREACH
19:26 MASTER_ALARM ACTIVE SYSTEM
19:26 MPD_DISPATCH SYSTEM
19:37 MASTER_ALARM ANSWER QDIEGO APP
19:49 ALL_ALARM INACTIVE QDIEGO APP
20:14 SEC_OFF DOOR QDIEGO CARD
20:40 ADMIN DOOR TBERRIEN CARD
21:49 CLOCK_OUT JDUVAL
22:34 PERIM_DOORS ACTIVE QDIEGO SEC_OFF
22:36 ALL_ALARM ACTIVE QDIEGO SEC_OFF
56
EXHIBIT 5
57
LOAN AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement") between the GEORGE AND SANDRA CARLEY MUSEUM OF ART, a non-profit Georgia Corporation ("Museum") and RAVEN FEATHER, an individual residing in Tulsa, Oklahoma ("Feather") is entered into for the purpose of documenting the condition of the loan of a fine art painting known as THE CHEROKEE ROSE ("painting" or "art work").
The painting is currently owned by Feather, who warrants that s/he has the legal right to loan the painting to Museum for the purposes and term described and upon the conditions set forth. No intellectual property rights exist in other persons inhibiting the reproduction of the painting.
Museum is planning an exhibition of fine art in which it wishes to exhibit the painting, during the period from March 19, 2015 until October 31, 2015, inclusive. To facilitate arrangement of the exhibit, Museum will take possession of the painting on March 4, 2015. Museum acknowledges the authority of Talbot Berrien, its curator, to execute this Agreement and enter into the obligations below on its behalf.
IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual covenants set forth in this Agreement, Feather agrees to loan and Museum agrees to receive and protect the painting during the above-mentioned exhibition. I. The painting will be removed, under the supervision and at the expense of Museum from its location at Feather Oil Company in Tulsa, OK, and will be properly packed for shipping. Transportation to the exhibit, unpackaging, storage before exhibition, storage after exhibition, repackaging after exhibition, transportation back to Feather Oil Company, Tulsa, OK and re-installation will be under the supervision and at the expense of Museum. II. The painting is to be installed, by Museum, as the centerpiece of the Exhibition. The Cherokee Rose will be hung and lighted as the initial work seen as attendees enter the exhibition space, separated from the access-way by security barriers placed no less than four feet (4') from the wall. Guards will be in attendance, in the exhibition itself, at all times that the exhibition is open to the public, and the painting itself will be alarmed –integrated into the alarm system of the museum– with local police available within fifteen (15) minutes driving time of the museum.
III. Museum shall be in control of the wall colors and other surroundings of the installed painting. The description of The Cherokee Rose for the exhibition program, tour materials (both written and audio) and publicity (both print and video) is to be developed by Museum. Museum shall have the right to reproduce the painting on the exhibition program, show posters (for display in the museum), souvenir tickets, and local publicity materials. Any reproductions for sale through the museum shop are to be licensed through a separate agreement. An exhibition companion book is not contemplated.
IV. No restoration, repair or re-framing of the painting is to be done, and the painting will be installed in the exhibition in its current condition as of its last inspection by Museum's
The George and Sandra
CARLEY Museum of Art
EXHIBIT 6
58
assistant curator prior to the execution of this Agreement. Any change of condition after the signing of this Agreement and before Museum has taken possession shall be grounds to terminate this Agreement at the election of Museum. V. Museum agrees to value the painting, for the limited purposes of this Agreement (and not as an appraisal for any other purposes) at the value of TWENTY MILLION DOLLARS ($20,000,000.00), and to insure the painting for this amount (on its own behalf and by adding the painting to Museum's overall insurance coverage) in the event of loss (by reason of theft, misdirection or total destruction of the painting) during the period the painting is in the custody of Museum: from receipt, during transport, storage and exhibition, until return and reinstallation in Tulsa, OK.
[a] "Total Destruction" shall mean the destruction of the painting in its totality, the partial destruction of the painting to such extent that its unique value is substantially lost, and/or the damage of the painting such that it cannot be restored or repaired to its previous condition.
[b] "Theft" shall mean the taking away of the painting, during any period when custody resides in Museum, by any person (other than the lawful owner or his/her agents), with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the full enjoyment of the painting (absolutely or on condition that a ransom is not paid). Museum, working in concert with law enforcement authorities, will make its best efforts to secure the return of the painting in good condition. A "theft", for insurance purposes, shall be presumed if the painting cannot be recovered within thirty (30) days of its disappearance or fifteen (15) days of its known theft, if sooner.
[c] "Misdirection" shall mean any action or failure by Museum, its agents, employees or delegates, which shall cause the painting's location to be unknown or unaccounted for a period of thirty (30) days.
[d] Raven Feather agrees, in the event of theft or misdirection, to cooperate with Museum, its agents and all relevant law enforcement authorities to secure the return of the painting in good condition. Museum shall have permission to disclose to its agents and law enforcement authorities all information disclosed to it or in its possession regarding the painting, its provenance and its condition. The owner also gives permission for Museum to have repair and restoration work done, in the event of damage, before a value for insurance payment purposes is assessed.
[e] In the event that compensation is paid to the owner by reason of loss, owner transfers and subrogates to Museum and/or its insurer all compensated claims which owner may have or could bring against third persons, up to the full amount of compensation paid the owner, plus costs.
VI. This Agreement shall be construed under the Laws of the State of Georgia. This Agreement may be modified or amended, but only in writing. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts each of which shall be effective as an original and all of which together comprise this Agreement. _____________________ RAVEN FEATHER Date
GEORGE AND SANDRA CARLEY MUSEUM OF ART By: ____________________________ Talbot Berrien Authorized Representative Date
R.F
59
APPRAISAL Date of Appraisal: March 15, 2014 Property of:
Mr. & Ms. Raven C. Feather Feather Oil Company 95 West 6th Street Tulsa, OK 74103
Description:
An oil painting, on canvas w/ three minor repairs (believed to be late 1940s) and one small over-painting in lower left corner (believed to be original to painting or painted soon thereafter and in style of artist); no dealers’ or auction house stamps; the painting depicts a Cherokee Rose plant growing among rocks alongside a rustic trail of early 19th Century appearance; rear-ground shows procession of persons in Native American dress of 1820s-1830s Southeastern Cherokee style; brushwork, perspective, palate and subject matter is identified (based upon research into other, accredited work of artist) as that of Pierce Tattnall Appling (Am. artist, 1880-1971), no signature, and specifics of painting match descriptions of work by that artist entitled The Cherokee Rose, which this work is believed to be.
Valuation:
This appraisal is prepared in connection with a loan agreement for the exhibition of fine art, and is not intended for use for valuations in connection with auctions, gifts, estate taxes, charitable donations, PRIVATE property insurance or purposes other than its chief purpose.
Total Appraised Value: $20,000,000
By: __________________________
Lee Ann Feeley Appraiser
Member, Appraisers Association of America Member, International Society of Appraisers
The George and Sandra
CARLEY Museum of Art
60
SC-6.3 Final Disposition Felony Sentence With Probation Page 1 of 2
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MILTON COUNTY, STATE OF GEORGIA
STATE OF GEORGIA versus Clerk to complete if incomplete:
ASHLEY DOUGHERTY
OTN(s): 551255487339
CRIMINAL ACTION #: DOB: 7/19/76
Ga. ID#: 0632549965
2009-NMT
MARCH TERM
Final Disposition:
FELONY
PLEA: VERDICT:
Negotiated Non-negotiated Jury Non-jury
The Court enters the following judgment:
The Defendant is adjudged guilty for the above-stated offense(s); the Court sentences the Defendant
to confinement in the County Jail, with the period of confinement to be computed as provided by law.
SENTENCE SUMMARY
The Defendant is sentenced for a total of _TEN (10) YEARS_, with the first _5_ to be served in confinement and the remainder to be served on probation; or to be served on probation.
The Defendant is to receive credit for time served in custody: from _***_; or as determined by
the custodian.
1. The above sentence may be served on probation provided the Defendant shall comply with the Conditions of Probation imposed by the Court as part of this sentence.
2. Upon service of 5 YEARS , the remainder of the sentence may be served on probation; PROVIDED, that the Defendant shall comply with the Conditions of Probation imposed by the Court as part of this sentence.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF PROBATION
The Defendant is subject to arrest for any violation of probation. If probation is revoked, the Court may order incarceration. The Defendant shall comply with the following Special Conditions of Probation: 1) Do not violate the criminal laws of any governmental unit and be of general good behavior. 2) Avoid injurious and vicious habits, especially alcoholic intoxication and narcotics and other dangerous drugs unless lawfully prescribed. 3) Avoid persons or places of disreputable or harmful character. 4) Report to the Probation Officer as directed and permit the Probation Officer to visit you at home or elsewhere. 5) Work faithfully at suitable employment insofar as may be possible. 6) Do not change your place of abode, move outside the jurisdiction of the Court, or leave Georgia without permission of the Probation Officer. If
Count; CTN;
Warrant #
Charge (as indicted or accused &
code section)
Disposition (Guilty, Guilty-Alford, Guilty-
Lesser Included & code section, Not Guilty, Nolo, Nol Pros, Dead Docket)
Sentence High &
Aggravated Fine
Concurrent/ Consecutive,
Merged Suspended
1 001
08w56147
MURDER (O.C.G.A. § 16-5-1 (a))
GUILTY – LESSER INCLUDED VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER (OCGA § 16-5-2 (a))
10 Years
EXHIBIT 7
61
State of Georgia v. ASHLEY DOUGHERTY Criminal Action #2009-NMT SC-6.3 Final Disposition Felony Sentence With Probation Page 2 of 2
permitted to move or travel to another state, you agree to waive extradition from any jurisdiction where you may be found and not contest any effort by any jurisdiction to return you to this State. 7) Support your legal dependents to the best of your ability. 8) When directed, in the discretion of the Probation Officer: (a) submit to evaluations and testing relating to rehabilitation and participate in and successfully complete rehabilitative programming; (b) wear a device capable of tracking location by means including electronic surveillance or global positioning satellite systems; (c) complete a residential or nonresidential program for substance abuse or mental health treatment; and/or (d) agree to the imposition of graduated sanctions as defined by law. 9) Make restitution as ordered by the Court.
OTHER CONDITIONS OF PROBATION
The Defendant is advised that violation of any Condition of Probation may subject the Defendant to a revocation of probation and the Court may require the Defendant to serve up to the balance of the sentence in confinement. The Defendant shall comply with all other Conditions of Probation as follows:
The Defendant shall report to the Probation Office as directed by Probation.
________________, Attorney at Law, represented the Defendant by:
employment; or appointment.
SO ORDERED this 29th day of May, 2009.
___________________________________________ Honorable George Carley, Judge Milton County Superior Court
Prosecutor: ________________________ _
Court reporter: ________________________ _
HABEAS CORPUS NOTICE
Should the defendant seek to challenge this legal proceeding, a Petition for Habeas Corpus must be filed: within four (4) years for a Felony conviction; within twelve (12) months for a Misdemeanor conviction; within 180 days for a Misdemeanor Traffic conviction; from the date the sentence becomes final. The defendant has been so advised.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I have read the terms of this sentence or had them read and explained to me. If all or any part of this sentence is probated I certify that I understand the meaning of the order of probation and the conditions of probation. I understand that violation of a special condition of probation could result in revocation of all time remaining on the period of probation. ______________________________________ Defendant
________________________________, 20_______ Date
Jeff Smith
62
PETITION FOR MODIFICATION / REVOCATION OF PROBATION
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS / PROBATION DIVISION
THE STATE OF GEORGIA DOCKET NUMBER CR 2009NMT
Vs. March TERM 2015
Ashley Dougherty SUPERIOR COURT OF MILTON COUNTY
Now comes Natalie Seger, Probation Officer II in the name of and on behalf of the State of Georgia
and brings this action against Ashley Daugherty hereinafter called the defendant, and shows
I
That the defendant entered a plea of guilty to or was convicted of the offense (s) of Voluntary
Manslaughter.
II
That this court did sentence the Defendant to serve as follows: Adjudicated guilty on May 29, 2009
and sentenced to Ten (10) years imprisonment. Toll Time Began/Ended Dates: April 1, 2008/April 1,
2018
III
That this Court, by proper order, however, permitted the Defendant to serve said sentence on
probation, the terms and conditions of which are fully set forth in the copy of said sentence which is
attached hereto, and marked "Exhibit A", and specifically incorporated herein.
IV
That the defendant has violated the terms and conditions of probation in the following particulars:
Condition #3: In that, the Defendant failed to avoid persons or places of disreputable or harmful
character by involving him/herself in an attempted burglary.
V
WHEREFORE, the State of Georgia prays that the citation for modification / revocation of probation
be served on the Defendant and that the Defendant be directed to appear before this court on a day to
be fixed by the Court and at that time to show cause why probation should not be modified or
revoked.
This 26th day of March, 2015 _____________________________________________
PROBATION OFFICER II
MILTON CIRCUIT
Having read and considered the foregoing petition, it is hereby ordered that the Defendant be served with
a copy of same and that the Defendant show cause before the presiding Judge on the 7th day of April,
2015 at 1 p.m. at the Milton County courthouse in Miltonville, Georgia why said probation should not be
modified/revoked.
This 26th day of March, 2015. The Honorable
Judge
Superior Court Milton Circuit
EXHIBIT 8
Natalie Seger
63
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing petition upon the defendant in person (or by
registered mail).
This 26th day of March, 2015 _____________________________________________
PROBATION OFFICER II
MILTON CIRCUIT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I hereby acknowledge service of the foregoing petition and that I am aware that I may employ legal
representation at said hearing or be represented otherwise as the Court may direct.
This 26th day of March, 2015 _____________________________________________
(Defendant)
Whereas pursuant to notice given to the defendant, a full hearing was conducted by the Court on the date
aforesaid in accordance with O.C.G.A. 42-8-38 and the Court has adjudicated that the terms and conditions
of probation had been violated by being a party to the crime of burglary in the second degree in Milton
County on or about 5 March 2015 through 18 March 2015, and Defendant has knowingly, intelligently and
voluntarily consented to the revocation of probation in full,
NOW, THEREFORE, it is ordered and adjudged that the probation provisions in said original sentence be:
__X_ Revoked in full in accordance with O.C.G.A. 42-8-38 and the defendant is required to serve the
balance of the originally imposed sentence in State Penal System.
So ordered, this the 14th day of April, 2015.
_________________________________________________
Judge
Milton Superior Court
Natalie Seger
64
Miltonville Police Department 104 Main Street ♦ Miltonville, GA 30195
CHIEF OF POLICE
Eric Lassard
ASSISTANT CHIEF OF POLICE
Ted/Teddi Exley
YOUR RIGHTS
Name: _________________________________ Place: _________________________________
DOB: ________________________ Date: ________________________
Time: ________________________
We are informing you that we are ________________________and ________________________, police officers of
the Miltonville Police Department. Before we ask you any questions, you must know and understand your legal
rights; therefore, we warn and advise you:
_____ You have the right to remain silent.
_____ Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.
_____ You have the right to an attorney.
_____ If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you before any questioning if you wish one.
_____ You can decide at any time from this moment on to terminate the interview and exercise these rights.
Do you understand each of these rights I have explained to you? Yes ___ No ___
Having these rights in mind, do you wish to talk to us now? Yes ___ No ___
Signed: ___________________________________________
Witnessed: _________________________________________
Witnessed: _________________________________________
EXHIBIT 9(A)
Stu/Sue Gardner
Stu/Sue Gardner
5/16/88
Miltonville PD
3/18/15
23:10
Sacha Bateman
SB
SB
X
X
Sacha Bateman
65
Miltonville Police Department 104 Main Street ♦ Miltonville, GA 30195
CHIEF OF POLICE
Eric Lassard
ASSISTANT CHIEF OF POLICE
Ted/Teddi Exley
YOUR RIGHTS
Name: _________________________________ Place: _________________________________
DOB: ________________________ Date: ________________________
Time: ________________________
We are informing you that we are ________________________and ________________________, police officers of
the Miltonville Police Department. Before we ask you any questions, you must know and understand your legal
rights; therefore, we warn and advise you:
_____ You have the right to remain silent.
_____ Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.
_____ You have the right to an attorney.
_____ If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you before any questioning if you wish one.
_____ You can decide at any time from this moment on to terminate the interview and exercise these rights.
Do you understand each of these rights I have explained to you? Yes ___ No ___
Having these rights in mind, do you wish to talk to us now? Yes ___ No ___
Signed: ___________________________________________
Witnessed: _________________________________________
Witnessed: _________________________________________
EXHIBIT 9(B)
Stu/Sue Gardner
Stu/ Sue Gardner
3/19/15
Sacha Bateman
SB
SB
X
66
*Flight 7173 Operated by TAHITI AIR *Flight 77 Operated by ENGLISH AIRWAYS
Flight Receipt
Ticket #: 0062387678723
Place of Issue: Alpha.com
Issue Date: 26MAR14
Expiration Date: 26MAR15
METHOD OF PAYMENT
VI************8779 $4,043.69 USD
CHARGES
Air Transportation Charges
Base Fare $3,768.00 USD
Taxes, Fees and Charges $275.69 USD
TICKET AMOUNT $4,043.69 USD
This ticket is non-refundable unless the original ticket was issued at a fully refundable fare. Some fares may not allow changes. If allowed,
any change to your itinerary may require payment of a change fee and increased fare. Failure to appear for any flight without notice to Alpha
will result in cancellation of your remaining reservation.
Sun, 22MAR DEPART ARRIVE
ALPHA 2437
FIRST CLASS (A)
ATLANTA
11:10am
LOS ANGELES
12:51pm
ALPHA 7173*
FIRST CLASS (S)
LOS ANGELES
4:30pm
PAPEETE
10:55pm
Sun, 5APR DEPART ARRIVE
ALPHA 77*
FIRST CLASS (B)
PAPEETE
8:40am
LOS ANGELES
6:45pm
ALPHA 2662
FIRST CLASS (S)
LOS ANGELES
10:45pm
ATLANTA
5:50am
Passenger Info
NAME
TALBOT BERRIEN
AirMiles #*******104
FLIGHT
ALPHA 2437
ALPHA 7173
ALPHA 77
ALPHA 2662
SEAT
3A
4C
4E
2B
ALPHA Hello, TALBOT B AirMiles # *******104 >
Your Trip Confirmation #: LNTS4S MANAGE MY TRIP >
α© EXHIBIT 10
67
Legal Authorities
Statutes
OCGA § 16-7-1 (c) – Burglary
(c) A person commits the offense of burglary in the second degree when, without authority and with
the intent to commit a felony or theft therein, he or she enters or remains within an occupied,
unoccupied, or vacant buildi g [or] stru ture… A person who commits the offense of burglary in
the second degree shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by
imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years.
OCGA § 16-2-20 – When a person is a party to a crime
(a) Every person concerned in the commission of a crime is a party thereto and may be charged with
and convicted of commission of the crime.
(b) A person is concerned in the commission of a crime only if he:
(1) Directly commits the crime;
(2) Intentionally causes some other person to commit the crime under such circumstances that
the other person is not guilty of any crime either in fact or because of legal incapacity;
(3) Intentionally aids or abets in the commission of the crime; or
(4) Intentionally advises, encourages, hires, counsels, or procures another to commit the crime.
Case Law
The following excerpts are from Case Law concerning the legal issues raised in this mock trial case. Only portions of
the opinions are provided, and only those portions may be used in the course of the trial. Citations and internal
quotation marks are omitted in the excerpts of the cases that follow.
At common law burglary was defined as the breaking and entering of a dwelling house at night with the
intent to commit a felony inside that dwelling. Although all modern statutes enlarge the scope of the
crime, essentially they vary around this definition. Consistent with the early common law, Georgia's pre-
1968 statutory law required a breaking and entering to establish the crime of burglary. In 1968, the
criminal code was amended and Georgia did away with the breaking requirement such that proof of a
forced entry was no longer a required element of burglary. More specifically, the statutory language
was changed to require that the e try e without authority, coupled, of course, with the intent to
commit a felony or theft within the dwelling or building of another.
Until the instant appeal, this Court had never considered whether consent to enter which is procured by
fraud, de eit or tri kery o stitutes e try ithout authority’ as o te plated y OCGA § 16-7-1. Other
jurisdictions which, like Georgia, have done away with the requirement of an actual breaking and
adopted similar language requiring entry to be without authority have determined that consent to enter
that is given based on a fraud or deceit perpetrated by the defendant is an unauthorized entry for the
purposes of a burglary charge. The approach of these jurisdictions is consistent with the common law
theory of o stru ti e reaki g where entry in the dwelling is gained by fraud or threat of force rather
than gained by actual force.
Like the jurisdictions cited above, we see no meaningful difference between gaining entry by force and
gaining consent to enter by artifice.
68
The purpose of the burglary statute is to protect against the specific dangers posed by entry into secured
premises of intruders bent on crime. The intruder who breaches the barrier with a lie or deception, by
pretending to deliver a package or to read a meter, is no less dangerous than his more stealthy cohorts,
and nothing in the statute suggests an intent to exempt him from liability. The evolution of Georgia's
statutory law concerning burglary has been to broaden rather than restrict the parameters within which
it may be applied.
State v. Newton, 294 Ga. 767 (2014)
The intent necessary for commission of burglary, however, need not be formed at the precise moment of
entry, but can be formed thereafter while the perpetrator is remaining on the premises.
Williams v. State, 268 Ga. App. 384 (2004)
While an individual's presence when a crime is committed will not be sufficient, in and of itself, to convict
that individual as a party to the crime, if the individual is present and assists in the commission of the
crime or shares in the criminal intent of the actual perpetrator of the crime, the individual may be
convicted as a party to the crime. Further, criminal intent may be inferred from conduct before, during,
and after the commission of the crime.
Joyner v. State, 280 Ga. 37 (2005)
A criminal conspiracy is a partnership in crime, and there is in each conspiracy a joint or mutual agency for
the prosecution of a common plan. Thus, if two or more persons enter into a conspiracy, any act done
by any of them pursuant to the agreement is, in contemplation of law, the act of each of them and they
are jointly responsible therefor. This means that everything said, written, or done by any of the
conspirators in execution or furtherance of the common purpose is deemed to have been said, done, or
written by each of them. And this joint responsibility extends not only to what is done by any of the
conspirators pursuant to the original agreement but also to collateral acts incident to and growing out
of the original purpose, so long as they are a natural and probable consequence of the conspiracy.
Everritt v. State, 277 Ga. 457 (2003)
The existence of a conspiracy may be established by direct proof, or by inference, as a deduction from
acts and conduct, which discloses a common design on their part to act together for the
accomplishment of the unlawful purpose. In other words, the existence of the common design or
purpose between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act may be shown by either direct or
circumstantial evidence.
Chappell v. State, 209 Ga. 701 (1953)
69
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MILTON COUNTY
STATE OF GEORGIA
)
STATE OF GEORGIA, )
)
v. ) CRIMINAL ACTION NO: 2016-MT
)
TABLBOT BERRIEN )
)
Defendant. )
THE CHARGE OF THE COURT Pre-Trial Charge
Ladies and gentlemen, you have been sworn and empaneled, and you are about to try a criminal case, entitled
the State of Georgia v. Talbot Berrien.
The defendant has been indicted by the Grand Jury of Milton County in an indictment accusing the defendant of
burglary in the second degree.
To this indictment that I have just read to you, the defendant has pled not guilty and denies each and every
allegation therein. This is what forms the issue that you have been selected, sworn, and empaneled to try.
Before we begin the trial, I am going to give you some preliminary instructions on fundamental principles of
criminal law. I will also instruct you on the role of the Judge, the jury, and the lawyers and give you an overview of
the trial procedure. Many of you may have never served on a jury before. It is therefore necessary that these
instructions be given so that you have a general understanding of procedure in a criminal trial, what will be
expected of you, and how you are to conduct yourself during the trial.
The defendant is charged in the indictment with a crime that is a violation of a certain law of the State of Georgia.
I want to emphasize to you that the indictment, including all of the counts therein, and the plea of not guilty are the
legal procedures by which the criminal charge is brought against the defendant. The charges and plea of not guilty
are not evidence of guilt, and you should not consider them as evidence or implication of guilt of any crime
whatsoever. This defendant is presumed to be innocent until he/she is proven guilty. The defendant enters upon
the trial of the case with a presumption of innocence in his/her favor, and this presumption remains with the
defendant until it is overcome by the State with evidence that is sufficient to convince you beyond a reasonable
doubt that the defendant is guilty of the crime or crimes charged.
No person shall be convicted of any crime unless and until each element of the crime is proven beyond a
reasonable doubt. The burden of proof rests upon the State to prove every material allegation of the indictment
and every essential element of the crime(s) charged beyond a reasonable doubt. However, the State is not required
to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt or to a mathematical certainty.
A reasonable doubt means just what it says. It is a doubt of a fair-minded, impartial juror honestly seeking the
truth. It is a doubt based upon common sense and reason. It does not mean a vague or arbitrary doubt, but it is a
doubt for which a reason can be given arising from a consideration of the evidence or lack of evidence, a conflict in
the evidence, or any combination of these. There is no burden of proof upon the defendant whatsoever, and the
burden never shifts to the defendant to prove his innocence.
If, after giving consideration to all of the facts and circumstances of this case, your minds are wavering, unsettled,
or unsatisfied, then that is a doubt of the law, and you should acquit the defendant. But if no doubt exists in your
minds about the guilt of the accused, then you will be authorized to convict the defendant. If the State fails to
prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, it would be your duty to acquit the defendant.
Under our system, it is my duty as the trial Judge to determine the law that applies to this case and to instruct
you, the jury, on the specific rules of law that you must apply to the facts in arriving at a verdict. I am giving you
70
some of those instructions now. I will give you more detailed instructions after the evidence has been presented
and the lawyers have made their closing arguments.
During the trial, I may be called upon to rule on motions or objections to evidence. Nothing I say in making these
rulings or at any time during the trial is evidence and should not be considered as an indication that I have any
leaning in this case whatsoever. My only interest in this case is to see that it is fairly tried according to the laws and
the constitution of the State of Georgia and the constitution of the United States.
As expected, the lawyers serve as advocates for their clients and are duty-bound to represent their clients to the
best of their ability. The lawyers also serve as officers of this Court, and as such are bound to follow applicable laws,
trial procedure, and rules of evidence during the trial. If at any time the lawyers believe that any law, procedure, or
rule of evidence is being violated, they may make motions regarding the conduct of the trial or objections to the
admission of evidence. In making these motions or objections, the lawyers are simply seeking to fulfill their duties
to their clients and to the Court. Sometimes, these motions or objections may require the Court to consider outside
your presence the questions raised, and you will be excused to the jury room. We will try to minimize the number
and length of these interruptions and ask for your patience in this regard.
Ladies and gentlemen, trial procedure in a criminal trial is generally as follows: first, the attorneys for both sides
have the opportunity to make what is called an opening statement. This opening statement is not evidence.
Remember that what the lawyers say is not evidence but is a preview or an outline of what they expect the
evidence to be.
Following the opening statements, the evidence will be presented. Evidence can be in the form of testimony
given by witnesses or physical evidence that will be labeled with exhibit numbers for identification.
After the presentation of all of the evidence, the attorneys have the opportunity to make what is called a closing
argument, or summation. At this time, the attorneys may suggest which laws are applicable and how they should
be considered in light of the evidence and point out to you certain parts of the evidence that they think are
favorable to their position. The goal of a closing argument is to persuade you to decide the case in their favor.
Following the closing arguments, I will charge you more specifically on the law that applies to this case. I will then
ask you to retire to the jury room to deliberate and reach your verdict.
The jury has a very important role. It is your duty to determine the facts of the case and to apply the law to those
facts. I will instruct you on the laws that apply to this case, but you must determine the facts from the evidence.
Evidence, by definition, is the means by which any fact in issue is established or disproved. Evidence consists of
two things: testimony and exhibits. Testimony is the testimony that you will hear under oath from those who take
the witness stand. Exhibits are those documents, photographs, or other physical evidence that are admitted into
evidence.
Ladies and gentlemen, the object of this trial is to discover the truth. During the trial, the admission of evidence
will be governed by certain rules of evidence. Those rules were drafted with one prominent purpose in mind, and
that purpose is the discovery of truth. Consequently, the rules of evidence seek to assure that only the best and
highest evidence is admitted for your consideration.
During the trial, the attorneys have a right to object to the admission of evidence if they believe its admission
would violate a rule of evidence. I will admit or exclude the evidence according to those rules. If I overrule an
objection, this means that you are allowed to consider the evidence being offered. On the other hand, if I sustain an
objection, this means you may not consider the evidence being offered. You should consider only that testimony
and only those exhibits that are admitted, and you should draw no inferences and make no assumptions about the
evidence objected to if the objection was sustained. In the event that you hear or see inadmissible evidence before
an objection can be made and ruled upon, if the objection is sustained, I will instruct you to disregard it, and you
should disregard that evidence entirely in your deliberations and in arriving at your verdict.
You, the jury, must determine the credibility and believability of the witnesses. It is for you to determine which
witness or witnesses you will believe and which witness or witnesses you will not believe, if there are some whom
you do not believe. In determining the credibility or believability of witnesses, you may consider all of the facts and
circumstances of the case, the manner in which witnesses testify, their intelligence, their interest or lack of interest
in the case, their means and opportunity for knowing the facts about which they testify, the nature of the facts
about which they testify, the probability or improbability of their testimony, and the occurrences about which they
testify. You may also consider their personal credibility insofar as it may appear to you from the trial of the case.
As the fact finder, it is your duty to believe the witnesses whom you think are most believable. It is for you alone
71
to determine what testimony you will believe and what testimony you will not believe.
Ladies and gentlemen, it is important that you pay close attention to the evidence as it is presented during the
trial. If at any time you are unable to hear or see any evidence being presented or if you are suffering from any
discomfort that diverts your attention, please feel free to inform me, and I will do whatever is necessary to assure
that you are able to hear and see the evidence being presented and give it your undivided attention. If you are in
need of a recess at any time, please raise your hand and I will recognize you. It is vitally important that you are as
comfortable as possible so that you can focus on the evidence being presented.
It is important that you view this evidence with an open mind at all times and reach no final conclusions until the
trial is over. Do not jump to conclusions before all of the evidence is presented. Also, remember that during the
course of this trial, it would be improper for you to discuss this case with anyone or to allow anyone to discuss the
case with you or in your presence or hearing. This applies even to discussions among yourselves in the jury room or
elsewhere before actual deliberations begin.
I instruct you, ladies and gentlemen, that you must decide this case for yourself solely on the testimony you hear
from the witness stand and the exhibits admitted into evidence.
You may not visit any scenes depicted by the evidence. You may not utilize any books or documents not in
evidence during your deliberations. You may not read or listen to any accounts of the trial that might appear in the
news media. You may not discuss this case with anyone other than your fellow jurors during deliberations.
That concludes my preliminary instructions, and we are now ready for the lawyers to give their opening
statements.
* * * * *
Post-Trial Charge
Indictment/Accusation
You are considering the case of the State of Georgia v. Talbot Berrien. The grand jury has indicted the defendant
with the offense of burglary in the second degree.
Issue and Plea Of Not Guilty
The defendant has entered a plea of not guilty to this indictment. The indictment and the plea form the issue
that you are to decide.
Neither the indictment nor the plea of not guilty should be considered as evidence.
Presumption of Innocence; Burden of Proof; Reasonable Doubt
The defendant is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. The defendant enters upon the trial of the case
with a presumption of innocence in his/her favor. This presumption remains with the defendant until it is
overcome by the State with evidence that is sufficient to convince you beyond a reasonable doubt that the
defendant is guilty of the offense charged.
No person shall be convicted of any crime unless and until each element of the crime as charged is proven
beyond a reasonable doubt.
The burden of proof rests upon the State to prove every material allegation of the indictment and every essential
element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt.
There is no burden of proof upon the defendant whatsoever, and the burden never shifts to the defendant to
introduce evidence or to prove innocence. When a defense is raised by the evidence, the burden is on the State to
negate or disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
However, the State is not required to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all doubt or to a mathematical
certainty. A reasonable doubt means just what it says. A reasonable doubt is a doubt of a fair-minded, impartial
juror honestly seeking the truth. A reasonable doubt is a doubt based upon common sense and reason. It does not
72
mean a vague or arbitrary doubt but is a doubt for which a reason can be given, arising from a consideration of the
evidence, a lack of evidence, or a conflict in the evidence.
After giving consideration to all of the facts and circumstances of this case, if your minds are wavering, unsettled,
or unsatisfied, then that is a doubt of the law, and you should acquit the defendant. But, if that doubt does not exist
in your minds as to the guilt of the accused, then you would be authorized to convict the defendant.
If the State fails to prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, it would be your duty to acquit the
defendant.
Bare Suspicion
Facts and circumstances that merely place upon the defendant a grave suspicion of the crime charged or that
merely raise a speculation or conjecture of the defendant's guilt are not sufficient to authorize a conviction of the
defendant.
Jury; Judges of Law and Facts
Members of the jury, it is my duty and responsibility to determine the law that applies to this case and to instruct
you on that law. You are bound by these instructions. It is your responsibility to determine the facts of the case
from all of the evidence presented. Then you must apply the law I give you in the charge to the facts as you find
them to be.
Evidence; Generally
Evidence is the means by which any fact that is put in issue is established or disproved. Evidence includes all of
the testimony of the witnesses and the exhibits admitted during the trial. It also includes any stipulations, which are
facts agreed to by the lawyers. It does not include the indictment, the plea of not guilty, opening statements or
closing arguments by the lawyers, or the questions asked by the lawyers.
Direct and Circumstantial Evidence
Evidence may be either direct or circumstantial or both.
Direct evidence is evidence that points immediately to the question at issue.
Evidence may also be used to prove a fact by inference. This is referred to as circumstantial evidence.
Circumstantial evidence is the proof of facts or circumstances, by direct evidence, from which you may infer other
related or connected facts that are reasonable and justified in the light of your experience.
To warrant a conviction on circumstantial evidence, the proven facts must not only be consistent with the theory
of guilt but also exclude every other reasonable theory other than the guilt of the accused.
The comparative weight of circumstantial evidence and direct evidence on any given issue is a question of fact for
the jury to decide.
Stipulations
The parties have entered into certain stipulations that have been approved by the court. Where parties stipulate
facts, this is in the nature of evidence. You may take that fact or those facts as a given without the necessity of
further proof. However, you are not required to do so, and even such matters may be contradicted by other
evidence. You make all decisions based on the evidence in this case.
Credibility of Witnesses
You must determine the credibility or believability of the witnesses. It is for you to determine which witness or
witnesses you believe or do not believe, if there are some whom you do not believe.
73
In deciding credibility, you may consider all of the facts and circumstances of the case, the manner in which the
witnesses testify, their intelligence, their interest or lack of interest in the case, their means and opportunity for
knowing the facts about which they testify, the nature of the facts about which they testify, the probability or
improbability of their testimony, and the occurrences about which they testify. You may also consider their
personal credibility insofar as it may have been shown in your presence and by the evidence.
Conflicts in Testimony
When you consider the evidence in this case, if you find a conflict, you should settle this conflict, if you can,
without believing that any witness made a false statement. If you cannot do so, then you should believe that
witness or those witnesses whom you think are best entitled to belief.
You must determine what testimony you will believe and what testimony you will not believe.
Witness, Impeached by
To impeach a witness is to prove that the witness is unworthy of belief. A witness may be impeached by
disproving the facts to which the witness testified; proof of general bad character; proof that the witness has been
convicted of a crime involving dishonesty or false statement; and/or proof of contradictory statements, previously
made by the witness about matters relevant to the witness's testimony and to the case.
If it is sought to impeach a witness by any of the above – except disproving the fact to which the witness testified
– proof of the general good character of the witness may be shown. The effect of the evidence is to be determined
by the jury.
If any attempt has been made in this case to impeach any witness by proof of contradictory statements
previously made, you must determine from the evidence whether any such statements were made, whether such
statements were contradictory to any statements the witness made on the witness stand, and whether such
statements were relevant to the witness's testimony and to the case.
If you find that a witness has been successfully impeached by proof of previous, contradictory statements, you
may disregard that testimony, unless it is supported by other creditable testimony. The credit to be given to the
balance of the testimony of the witness would be for you to determine.
It is for you to determine whether or not a witness has been impeached and to determine the credibility of such
witness and the weight the witness's testimony shall receive in the consideration of the case.
Prior Consistent Statement; Substantive Evidence
Should you find that any witness has made any other statement on the witness stand consistent with another
witness's testimony from the witness stand and that such prior consistent statement is material to the case and the
witness's testimony then you are authorized to consider that other statement as substantive evidence.
Prior Inconsistent Statement; Substantive Evidence
Should you find that any witness has made any other statement inconsistent with that witness's testimony from
the stand in this case and that such prior inconsistent statement is material to the case and the witness's testimony
then you are authorized to consider that other statement not only for purposes of impeachment, but also as
substantive evidence in the case.
Immunity or Leniency Granted Witness
In assessing the credibility of a witness, you may consider any possible motive in testifying, if shown. In that
regard you are authorized to consider any possible pending prosecutions, negotiated pleas, grants of immunity or
leniency, or similar matters. You alone shall decide the believability of the witnesses.
74
Accomplice; Corroboration
The testimony of a single witness, if believed, is generally sufficient to establish a fact. An exception to this rule is
made in the case of burglary, where the witness is an accomplice. The testimony of the accomplice alone is not
sufficient to warrant a conviction. The accomplice's testimony must be supported by other evidence of some type,
and that evidence must be such as would lead to the inference of the guilt of the accused independent of the
testimony of the accomplice.
It is not required that supporting evidence be sufficient to warrant a conviction or that the testimony of the
accomplice be supported in every material particular.
The supporting evidence must be more than that a crime was actually committed by someone. It must be
sufficient to connect the accused with the criminal act and must be more than sufficient to merely cast upon the
accused a grave suspicion of guilt.
Slight evidence from another source that connects the accused with the commission of the alleged crime and
tends to show participation in it may be sufficient supporting evidence of the testimony of an accomplice. In order
to convict, that evidence, when considered with all of the other evidence in the case, must be sufficient to satisfy
you beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty.
Whether or not any witness in this case was an accomplice is a question for you to determine from the evidence
in this case.
The testimony of one accomplice may be supported by the testimony of another accomplice. Whether or not the
testimony of one accomplice does, in fact, support the testimony of another accomplice is a matter for you to
determine.
The sufficiency of the supporting evidence of an accomplice is a matter solely for you to determine.
Definition of Crime
This defendant is charged with a crime against the laws of this state. A crime is a violation of a statute of this state
in which there is a joint operation of an act (or omission to act) and intention.
Intent
Intent is an essential element of any crime and must be proved by the State beyond a reasonable doubt.
Intent may be shown in many ways, provided you, the jury, believe that it existed from the proven facts before
you. It may be inferred from the proven circumstances or by acts and conduct, or it may be, in your discretion,
inferred when it is the natural and necessary consequence of the act. Whether or not you draw such an inference is
a matter solely within your discretion.
Criminal intent does not mean an intention to violate the law or to violate a penal statute but means simply the
intention to commit the act that is prohibited by a statute.
No Presumption of Criminal Intent
This defendant will not be presumed to have acted with criminal intent, but you may find such intention (or the
absence of it) upon a consideration of words, conduct, demeanor, motive, and other circumstances connected with
the act for which the accused is being prosecuted.
Mistake of Fact
A person shall not be found guilty of a crime if the act (or omission to act) constituting the crime was induced by a
misapprehension of fact that, if true, would have justified the act or omission.
Parties to Crime
Every party to a crime may be charged with and convicted of commission of the crime.
75
A person is a party to a crime only if that person directly commits the crime; or intentionally helps in the
commission of the crime; or intentionally advises, encourages, hires, counsels, or procures another to commit the
crime; or intentionally causes some other person to commit the crime under such circumstances that the other
person is not guilty of any crime either in fact or because of legal incapacity.
Principal, Failure to Prosecute; Other Involved Persons
Any party to a crime who did not directly commit the crime may be indicted, tried, convicted, and punished for
commission of the crime upon proof that the crime was committed and that the person was a party to it, even
though the person alleged to have directly committed the crime has not been prosecuted or convicted, has been
convicted of a different crime or degree of crime, is not amenable to justice, or has been acquitted.
Knowledge
Knowledge on the part of the defendant that the crime of burglary was being committed and that the defendant
knowingly and intentionally participated in or helped in the commission of such crime must be proved by the State
beyond a reasonable doubt.
If you find from the evidence in this case that the defendant had no knowledge that a crime was being committed
or that the defendant did not knowingly and intentionally commit, participate, or help in the commission of and
was not a conspirator in the alleged offense, then it would be your duty to acquit the defendant.
On the other hand, should you find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant had knowledge that the
crime of burglary was being committed and that the defendant knowingly and intentionally participated or helped
in the commission of it, then you would be authorized to convict the defendant.
Burglary in the Second Degree (Intent to Commit a Theft)
A person commits the offense of burglary in the second degree when without authority and with intent to
commit a theft therein he or she enters or remains within the building of another. It makes no difference whether
the building was occupied, unoccupied, or vacant.
Burglary; Intent to Steal
The evidence need not show that an actual theft was accomplished; however, an intent to commit a theft, that is,
an intent to steal, is an essential element of burglary as alleged in this indictment.
An intent to steal may be shown in many ways, provided you, the jury, believe beyond a reasonable doubt that it
existed from the proven facts and circumstances before you.
You may infer an intent to steal where the evidence shows an unlawful entry without authority into the place
described in the indictment of another where items of some value are present/stored or kept inside and where
there is no other apparent motive for the entry. Whether or not you make such inference is a matter solely for you,
the jury, to determine.
Conspiracy; Culpability
A conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to do an unlawful act, and the existence of a
conspiracy may be established by proof of acts and conduct, as well as by proof of an express agreement. When
persons associate themselves in an unlawful enterprise, any act done by any party to the conspiracy to further the
unlawful enterprise is considered to be the act of all the conspirators. However, each person is responsible for the
acts of others only insofar as such acts are naturally or necessarily done to further the conspiracy.
Whether or not a conspiracy existed in this case is a matter for you to determine.
76
Conspiracy; Conduct and Presence of Parties
Presence, companionship, and conduct before and after the commission of the alleged offense may be
considered by you in determining whether or not such circumstances, if any, give rise to an inference of the
existence of a conspiracy.
Mere Presence; Guilt by
A jury is not authorized to find a person who was merely present at the scene of the commission of a crime at the
time of its perpetration guilty of consent in and concurrence in the commission of the crime, unless the evidence
shows, beyond a reasonable doubt, that such person committed the alleged crime, helped in the actual
perpetration of the crime, or participated in the criminal endeavor.
Mere Association; Guilt by
A jury is not authorized to find a person who was merely associated with other persons involved in the
commission of a crime guilty of consent in or concurrence in the commission of the crime, unless the evidence
shows, beyond a reasonable doubt, that such person helped in the actual perpetration of the crime or participated
in the criminal endeavor.
Conspiracy; Admission of Coconspirator
If the existence of a conspiracy has been shown beyond a reasonable doubt by evidence other than by the
declarations of any of the alleged coconspirators, then any admissions or statements made by one or more of the
conspirators during and in furtherance of the alleged conspiracy may be considered by the jury against all of the
conspirators.
Should you determine that there was no conspiracy or if you are not satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that a
conspiracy existed at the time a particular declaration was made, that the defendant on trial was not a party to a
conspiracy, that the existence of a conspiracy has been shown only by the declarations of coconspirators, that the
alleged admissions by coconspirators were not made during and in furtherance of the alleged conspiracy, or that no
admissions were made to a third party by an alleged coconspirator, then you are to disregard any testimony as to
any alleged admissions made out of the presence of the defendant by an alleged coconspirator.
Conspiracy; Renunciation and Abandonment of Criminal Enterprise
If you believe that the defendant conspired with one or more other persons to commit the crime alleged in this
indictment, but that before the overt act occurred the defendant withdrew agreement to commit the crime and the
defendant voluntarily and completely renounced and abandoned all participation in the criminal endeavor prior to
the commission of the offense, if any, then the defendant would not be guilty of the offense alleged, and it would
be your duty to acquit the defendant.
Verdict; Generally
If, after considering the testimony and evidence presented to you, together with the charge of the court, you
should find and believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant in Milton County, Georgia, did on or about
the date alleged commit the offense of as alleged in the indictment, you would be authorized to find the defendant
guilty. In that event, the form of your verdict would be, "We, the jury, find the defendant guilty."
If you do not believe that the defendant is guilty, or if you have any reasonable doubt as to the defendant's guilt,
then it would be your duty to acquit the defendant, in which event the form of your verdict would be, "We, the
jury, find the defendant not guilty."
Court Has No Interest in Case
By no ruling or comment that the court has made during the progress of the trial has the court intended to
express any opinion upon the facts of this case, upon the credibility of the witnesses, upon the evidence, or upon
the guilt or innocence of the defendant.
77
Sentencing; Responsibility for
You are only concerned with the guilt or innocence of the defendant. You are not to concern yourselves with
punishment.
Deliberations
One of your first duties in the jury room will be to select one of your number to act as foreperson, who will
preside over your deliberations and who will sign the verdict to which all twelve of you freely and voluntarily agree.
You should start your deliberations with an open mind. Consult with one another and consider each other's
views. Each of you must decide this case for yourself, but you should do so only after a discussion and consideration
of the case with your fellow jurors. Do not hesitate to change an opinion if you are convinced that it is wrong.
However, you should never surrender an honest opinion in order to be congenial or to reach a verdict solely
because of the opinions of the other jurors.
Unanimous Verdict
Whatever your verdict is, it must be unanimous (that is, agreed by all). The verdict must be in writing and signed
by one of your members as foreperson, dated, and returned to be published in open court.
Retire to Jury Room
You may now retire to the jury room, but do not begin your deliberations until you receive the indictment and
any evidence that has been admitted in the case.
Bailiff, escort the jury to the jury room.
78
2016 RULES OF THE
GEORGIA HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION
These rules are in effect 1 October 2015 through 30 September 2016.
I. Rules of the Organization
A. The Problem
1. Rules (Rule 1)
2. Problem (Rule 2)
3. Witness Bound by Statements (Rule 3)
4. Unfair Extrapolation (Rule 4)
5. Witnesses (Rule 5)
6. Voir Dire (Rule 6)
B. The Trial
1. Mock Trial Team (Rule 7)
2. Instruction and Use (Rule 8)
3. Activities Permitted During the School Day
(Rule 9)
4. Resolution of Section B Rules Violations (Rule
10)
5. Team Presentation (Rule 11)
6. Team Duties (Rule 12)
7. Swearing of Witnesses (Rule 13)
8. Trial Sequence and Time Limits (Rule 14)
9. Timekeeping (Rule 15)
10. Time Extensions (Rule 16)
11. Prohibited and Permitted Motions (Rule 17)
12. Sequestration (Rule 18)
13. Bench Conferences (Rule 19)
14. Supplemental Material/Illustrative Aids (Rule 20)
15. Trial Communication (Rule 21)
16. Viewing a Trial (Rule 22)
17. Videotaping/Photography (Rule 23)
C. Judging
1. Decisions (Rule 24)
2. Composition of Panel (Rule 25)
3. Scoresheets/Ballots (Rule 26)
4. Completion of Scoresheets/Judging
Guidelines (Rule 27)
5. Team Advancement (Rule 28)
6. Power Matching/Seeding for Regional
Competitions (Rule 29)
7. Power Matching/Seeding for District
Competitions (Rule 30)
8. Power Matching/Seeding for State Finals
Competition (Rule 31)
9. Effect of Bye/Default (Rule 33)
D. Dispute Settlement
1. Reporting a Rules Violation/
2. Inside the Bar (Rule 34)
3. Dispute Resolution Procedure (Rule 35)
4. Effect of Violation on Score (Rule 36)
5. Reporting a Rules Violation/Outside the Bar
(Rule 37)
II. Rules of Procedure
A. Before the Trial
1. Team Roster (Rule 38)
2. Stipulations (Rule 37)
3. The Record (Rule 40)
B. Beginning the Trial
1. Jury Trial (Rule 41)
2. Standing During Trial (Rule 42)
3. Student Work Product (Rule 43)
C. Presenting Evidence
1. Argumentative/Ambiguous Questions and
Non-Responsive Answers (Rule 44)
2. Assuming Facts Not in Evidence (Rule 45)
3. Lack of Proper Predicate/Foundation (Rule
46)
4. Procedure of Introduction of Exhibits (Rule
47)
5. Use of Notes (Rule 48)
6. Redirect/Recross (Rule 49)
D. Opening Statement/Closing Argument
1. Special Mock Trial Objections (Rule 50)
E. Critique
1. The Critique (Rule 51)
III. The Georgia High School Mock Trial
Competition Rules of Evidence
NOTICE: November 18, 2015
The Rules Subcommittee acted to update the Georgia High
School Mock Trial Competition Rules of Evidence to follow
changes made by the National High School Mock Trial
Championship, specifically to Rule 50(a) and Rules 803(6)-(8).
These changes are immediately in effect for the 2016 season.
Blue text are updates made prior to October 1; are orange text
updates made November 18.
79
I. RULES OF THE ORGANIZATION
A. THE PROBLEM
Rule 1. Rules
(a) The Georgia Mock Trial Competition, and all of the
Special Projects sponsored by the Georgia High School
Mock Trial Committee, including, but not limited to, the
Law Academy and the Court Artist Competition, are
governed by the Rules of the Organization, the Rules of
Procedure, and the Georgia High School Mock Trial Rules
of Evidence. Specifically, the Code of Ethical Conduct
identified in Rule 7(k), and the disciplinary processes
outlined in Rule 10 are applicable to the Competition and
to the Special Projects noted above. Additionally, all
policies of the Georgia Mock Trial Competition contained
in the Policy Manual and Coaches Manual are binding on
participating teams. Any clarification of rules or case
materials will be issued in writing to all participating
teams and/or students.
(b) These Rules govern rounds in regions, districts and at the
State Finals. When a team registers to compete in this
program, that team agrees to comply with the rules, the
policies and the Code of Ethical Conduct of the Georgia
High School Mock Trial Competition. The Rules
Subcommittee has the authority to remove a team or
individual team members or coaches from the Georgia
High School Mock Trial Competition for non-compliance
with these rules, with competition policy and/or the
Code of Ethical Conduct.
(c) Any modification to the rules of a competition made on-
site must be reduced to writing and signed by the trial
coordinator and the teacher or attorney coaches of the
affected teams.
(d) Individual scoring judges have within their discretion the
ability to discount points for violations of these rules.
(e) The Mock Trial season shall extend from October 1
through the Final Round of the State Finals tournament.
(f) A o k t ial egio ust o sist of at least fi e tea s. In the event that a region drops to four teams, volunteer
teams will be solicited to move into the affected region
to bring the number of teams up to at least five. A team
invited under these circumstances to volunteer to move
into the affected region will be under no obligation to
accept the invitation and will suffer no penalty for
declining, but will be eligible to have their team
registration fee waived for the next season in
acknowledgment of their assistance. If a volunteer team
is not identified to salvage the affected region within 5
days of beginning the search, that region will be
dissolved for that season and the remaining teams will
be reassigned to other regions, on a space available
basis. If the mock trial office is unable to reassign a team
affected by the dissolution of a region for any reason,
that team may be eligible for a 70% refund of their team
registration fee. Team reassignment under these
circumstances may not be contested by any party. If the
number of teams drops below five within 7 days of the
first scheduled competition date, the regional
o petitio ill p o eed u de e e ge i u sta es a d the s o i g ill e o du ted as
outlined in Rule 29(b)(7).
(g) Teams will be allowed to indicate a preference for
regional placement on the team registration form. The
Mock Trial office will make regional assignments on a
first come, first served basis. This preference is one of
several factors that the Mock Trial Office will use to
determine regional placement. Other factors include but
are not limited to previous regional placement, school
location, space availability at the regional competition
site, and/or the number of other schools in that school
system participating in the program. Space is limited in
most regions.
(h) The state coordinator reserves the right to move teams
from assigned regions to other neighboring regions in
order to maintain an equitable balance in the size of
neighboring regions, or for any other administrative
purpose deemed by the state coordinator to be in the
best interests of the program; provided, however, that
team reassignments necessitated by a region dropping
below five teams will be handled solely as provided by
Rule 1(e). Any team whose assignment has been shifted
from one region to another during the season, with the
exception of those affected by the dissolution of a
regional competition under Rule 1(f), has a right to
appeal such a decision before the Rules Subcommittee
Chair within 24 hours of receiving notification of the
reassignment, but the subsequent ruling of the
Subcommittee Chair is final. Other teams in a region
affected by such shifts in the assignment of a team into
or out of said region do not have a right to appeal
administrative decisions made by the Subcommittee
Chair.
(i) A o k t ial dist i t ust o sist of si tea s. (j) Teams qualify for the district competition in the
following manner:
1. In districts comprised of two Regions, teams who
finish in the top three spots after the
final/championship round will advance to the
district competition.
2. In districts comprised of three Regions, the Region
Champion and Region Finalist will advance to the
district competition.
(k) Teams must participate in at least one (in the case of a
qualifying Regional Champion team) or two (in the case
of a non-Regional Champion team) preliminary rounds
and one final/championship round at the district level of
o petitio a d i the title of Dist i t Cha pio i order to proceed to the State Finals level of competition.
(l) If, for any reason, a round or rounds of a regional or
district competition is postponed or cancelled, with the
exception of the cancellation of competition rounds in a
region that has been dissolved for the season under Rule
1(f), it is the responsibility of the regional or district
coordinator to announce the date of the rescheduled
round or rounds within seven days of the original
regional or district competition date and to fully staff any
rescheduled rounds in compliance with these rules. No
regional competition rounds may be held within the 14
days before the first round of the district tournament.
No district competition rounds may be held within 7 days
before the first round of the state tournament.
(m) If, for any reason, a team qualifying for the district
competition withdraws from the GHSMT Competition
before the district competition, that team will forfeit its
place at the district competition. The team(s) beneath
the forfeiting team will shift upward and the 3rd
(now
vacant) spot will then be offered to the 4th
place team
from that region. If that team declines the offer, the spot
80
will then be offered to the 4th
place team from the other
region, and then to the 5th
place team of the original
region, and so on, alternating between the regions, until
a team accepts the spot and that team will advance to
the district competition. If a team, after winning the title
of Regio Cha pio , ithd a s f o the GH“MT Competition before the district competition, the title will
then be conferred on the regional finalist team.
(n) If, for any reason, a district champion team withdraws
from the GHSMT Competition after winning the title of
Dist i t Cha pio , that tea ill fo feit the title a d its place at the State Finals tournament. The title will
then be conferred on the district finalist team and the
district finalist team, as the new District Champion, will
advance to State.
Rule 2. The Problem
The problem will be an original fact pattern which may
contain any or all of the following: statement of facts, indictment,
stipulations, witness statements/affidavits, jury charges, exhibits,
etc. Stipulations may not be disputed at trial. Witness statements
may not be altered. Only three witnesses per side will be called.
Rule 3. Witness Bound by Statements
(a) Each witness is bound by the facts contained in his/her
own witness statement and/or any exhibits relevant to
his/her testimony. Fair extrapolations may be allowed,
provided reasonable inference may be made from the
it ess’ state e t. If, in direct examination, an attorney
asks a question which calls for extrapolated information
pivotal to the facts at issue, the information is subject to
objection under Rule 4, outside the scope of the
problem.
(b) If, in cross-examination, an attorney asks for unknown
information, the witness may or may not respond, so
lo g as a espo se is o siste t ith the it ess’ statement or affidavit and does not materially affect the
it ess’ testi o . (c) Students shall be prohibited from responding with new
material facts which are not in their witness statements
or consistent with the Statement of Facts.
(d) A witness is not bound by facts contained in other
witness statements.
(e) The Case Summary (or Statement of Facts), if provided, is
meant to serve as background information only. It may
not be used for substantive evidence, cross-examination,
or impeachment.
Rule 4. Unfair Extrapolation
(Additional explanations regarding this rule may be found in the
Coaches Manual)
(a) Unfair extrapolations are best attacked through
impeachment and closing arguments and are to be dealt
with in the course of the trial. A fair extrapolation is one
that is neutral.
(b) Attorneys shall not ask questions calling for information
outside the scope of the case materials or requesting an
unfair extrapolation. If a witness is asked information not
contained in the it ess’ state e t, the a s e ust e consistent with the statement and may not materially
affe t the it ess’ testi o o a substantive issue of
the case.
(c) Attorneys for the opposing team may refer to Rule 4 in a
spe ial o je tio , su h as u fai e t apolatio o This
information is beyond the scope of the statement of
fa ts.
(d) Possible rulings by a judge include:
1. No extrapolation has occurred;
2. An unfair extrapolation has occurred; or
3. The extrapolation was fair.
(e) The decision of the presiding judge regarding
extrapolations or evidentiary matters is final.
(f) When an attorney objects to an extrapolation, the judge
will rule in open court to clarify the course of further
proceedings.
(g) Points should be deducted from individual scores of
participants who make unfair extrapolations or ask
questions that call for unfair extrapolations. Witnesses
and attorneys making unfair extrapolations and
attorneys who ask questions that require the witness to
answer with an unfair extrapolation should be penalized
by having a point or points deducted from their
individual scores.
(h) The number of points deducted should be determined by
the severity of the extrapolation. If a team has several
team members making unfair extrapolations, the
offe di g tea ’s o e all poi ts should also be reduced
accordingly.
(See Rule 27 for the treatment of rule infractions.)
Rule 5. Witnesses
Any student may play any witness role, regardless of the
stude t’s a e, eligio , eth i it , se , ph si al att i utes, o disability. Where a witness is specifically described as being of a
particular sex, religion, or race or as having a particular physical
attribute, injury, or disability, any student of any sex, religion,
race, physical attribute, or disability may play that role. At no
time will an examining attorney or witness make an issue of the
stude t’s a tual a e, eligio , eth i it , se , ph si al att i utes, o disa ilit at t ial, ut oth ill e o fi ed to the ase’s description of the witness role being portrayed. The gender of
students will be clearly indicated on the Trial Squad Roster form.
Rule 6. Voir Dire
Voir dire examination of a witness is not permitted.
B. THE TRIAL
Rule 7. Mock Trial Team
(a) Team Composition and Eligibility—A team shall be
composed of young people who are between the ages of
14 and 19 and who are currently enrolled or receiving
educational instruction at the high school level; at least
one attorney coach; and at least one teacher coach in
compliance with subsections (b) through (d) below.
(b) Students – All student participants must be currently
enrolled or be receiving accredited or approved
educational instruction at the school, or through the
school organization that registers the team, or otherwise
qualify for participation under subpart (3) of this rule.
1. No requests will be granted for students to
participate on a mock trial team not affiliated with
the school or school organization where they are
officially enrolled or receiving educational
instruction as a student.
2. For the purpose of this Rule, the te s hool includes traditional schools, charter schools, on-
line or virtual schools, and other state- or school 81
system-sa tio ed a ade ies, a d s hool o ga izatio i ludes e tities that p o ide accredited or approved educational instruction for
students at the high school level such as home
school associations, cooperatives, collectives, and
the like.
3. Home school students neither enrolled with, nor
receiving educational instruction from a school or
school organization during the competition year
may compete as a member of an established mock
trial team at a school if the following conditions
are met:
i. Prior to and during the mock trial competition
year, the student meets the admission
requirements of the school with the team on
which the student wishes to compete (the
spo so i g s hool o spo so i g tea --
i.e., the student would be otherwise eligible to
become enrolled or receive educational
instruction and to participate in interscholastic
activities at the school;
ii. The student resides in the county in which the
sponsoring school is located unless the state
coordinator determines that this geographic
limitation creates an undue hardship and on
that basis grants an exception;
iii. The student submits the special application
form to the Mock Trial office by the date
established for such applications, which form
shall include at a minimum, a certification that
the student has not been recruited or received
any special treatment or accommodation that
would cause the team to be in violation of the
letter or the spirit of the Mock Trial Rules;
iv. The sponsoring team submits the special
application form to the mock trial office by the
date established for such applications, which
form shall include at a minimum: the signature
of the school principal, headmaster/mistress,
or the like and the teacher coach; a statement
of thei o se t to the stude t’s pa ti ipatio as a team member; and a certification that the
stude t full eets the spo so i g s hool’s admission requirements and its governing
interscholastic eligibility rules, that the
stude t’s pa ti ipatio ill ot dis ou age team participation by students actually
enrolled at the school, and that the student
has not been recruited or received any special
treatment or accommodation that would cause
the team to be in violation of the letter or the
spirit of the Mock Trial Rules;
v. The sponsoring team provides to the state
coordinator all information and documentation
requested for the purpose of making a decision
on the application; and
vi. The state coordinator determines that the
stude t’s e uested pa ti ipatio eets the above criteria, is not the result of unfair
e uiti g a d ill ot esult i a u fai advantage to the other mock trials teams in
the state su h that the stude t’s pa ti ipatio should not be allowed.
4. Students who are not home school students, but
who are simultaneously enrolled at two different
schools as part of an authorized dual enrollment
program (e.g., a traditional high school and a
sanctioned special academy), may participate on
the mock trial team registered by and affiliated
with either school, but not both. However, such
students, once they elect a team on which to
compete, must honor that election throughout
high school so long as they are dually enrolled and
both schools have registered mock trial teams.
5. No non-school organization (i.e. a Boy/Girl Scout
troop, Boys/Girls Club, etc.) wishing to participate
in this program may allow students who are
currently enrolled or receiving educational
instruction at a school or school organization as
defined herein that has a team active in the
competition to participate on that non-school
o ga izatio ’s tea . (c) Attorney Coaches—A team is to be sponsored by an
attorney in good standing with the State Bar of Georgia.
The primary attorney coach may register additional
attorneys as assisting coaches all of whom must be in
good standing with the State Bar of Georgia. No person
may serve as an attorney coach who is currently under
sanction by the Supreme Court of Georgia for disciplinary
reasons. Law clerks, paralegals, law students and
attorneys admitted in another state, who are in good
standing with their State Bar Association may assist the
coaching staff but must operate under the professional
supervision of a fully licensed attorney coach. As the
sponsor of the team, the attorney coach will act as
liaison between the team and the local and state bar
associations. The coaching staff will act as legal advisers
in preparing the team for competition. No attorney
coach may coach more than one team.
(d) Teacher Coaches—The teacher coach will act as the
primary liaison between the team and the mock trial
office and will submit the registration form and fee. The
teacher coach will also act as the educational adviser to
the team, serving as guide to both the team members
and their attorney coaches, so that all decisions related
to the program are made in the best interests of the
education of the team members. The final authority over
the direction of a mock trial team rests with the teacher
coach. No teacher coach may coach more than one
team. The teacher coach may designate the primary
attorney coach to be the liaison with the mock trial office
and to be responsible for submitting the team
registration and fee.
(e) Number of Teams per School— Only one team per
school, facility or organization may compete in the
regional, district, State Finals or national competitions.
Although there is no limit on the number of members a
team may have, a maximum of fourteen members per
team may compete during any level (regional, district, or
State Finals) of the state competition. A team may use
different students between each level of the state
competition. Substitutions during a competition day are
regulated by Rule 7(e).
(f) Official/Competing and Non-Competing/Additional Team
Members—These fourteen team members are
desig ated as offi ial/ o peti g tea e e s; all othe stude t pa ti ipa ts a e desig ated o -
o peti g/additio al tea e e s. All
official/competing and non-competing/additional team
members must sign the Code of Ethical Conduct form
82
(see Rule 7(k)). On their Code of Ethical Conduct form,
teams must identify their official/competing team
members by designating each of them as a member of
one of two trial squads —"P", for Prosecution/Plaintiff;
or "D", for Defense. Each trial squad, P or D, will have a
maximum of seven competing team members each (3
serving in attorney roles, 3 serving in witness roles and 1
serving as a timekeeper—see Rule 12). The Code of
Ethical Conduct form must be submitted to the on-site
trial coordinator before the first competition round at
any level of the competition in order to be eligible to
compete. At each competition round, roles and
responsibilities of official/competing team members
within each trial squad must be identified and listed on
the Trial Squad Roster Form (see Rule 36). From one
round to the next, roles and responsibilities of the
official/competing team members may be interchanged
within each designated trial squad, but not between trial
squads. However, no substitutions by a non-
competing/additional team member for an
official/competing team member may be made during
the entirety of a competition level, unless there is an
emergency that arises during competition. A non-
competing/additional team member may not serve as an
assistant timekeeper during any round. Non-compliance
with this portion of Rule 7, at any level or round of the
state competition, may result in penalties being applied
by the trial coordinator under Rule 33(b) and (c).
(g) Substitution During a Round—If an emergency arises
during the competition and a team must substitute a
non-competing/additional team member for an
official/competing team member, permission must be
obtained from the on-site trial coordinator and that
permission, if given, will extend only to the end of the
last round during that competition level. In the case of
an emergency affecting team composition before the
day of the competition, contact the state mock trial
office.
(h) Unable to Field a Full Competition Team—A team, unable
to field a full team of 14 members, may compete with as
few as nine members. If the team has 12 or 13 members,
the team would compete without timekeepers and move
forward in accordance with Rule 7(i). In the case of 9 to
11 members, six team members should be assigned
attorney duties, three for each side. The remaining three
to five team members will serve as witnesses, with one,
two or all three playing the roles of two witnesses
(depending on the overall number of witness-members
available) beginning in the courtroom with the
Plaintiff/Prosecution, then transferring to the
Defe da t/Defe se’s courtroom to play those roles.
(i) Submitting to Time Kept by Opposing Team—If the team
is unable to provide a timekeeper, it must submit to the
ti es alled the opposi g tea ’s timekeeper. If
neither team in a round is able to provide a timekeeper,
one coach from each team will be designated as the
official timekeeper from that team for that round.
(j) Team Names—The team name may reflect the city,
county, community, neighborhood, or geographic area
where most of its members reside. The team name may
be chosen to honor an individual. All team names should
e hose so that the ph ase, [i se t a e] Mo k T ial Tea , s olizes oth the tea a d the dig it of the legal profession. Team names are subject to the approval
of the state mock trial office. Team names will be
registered in the order of the receipt of a completed
registration form and fee by the state office. A team
name may not include the following terms: s hool, high, a ade , i stitute, a pus, o e te .
(k) Required Eligibility Forms—In order to verify eligibility of
coaches and students, coaches must submit required
forms by the published deadlines. All coaches (teachers
and attorneys) must be reported to the state mock trial
office on the registration form or the Supplemental
Attorney Coach form. Names of team members with
birthdates must be reported to the state office on the
Team Member List. These forms are posted on the
website and are due in the state mock trial office no later
than the date published on the forms. The state mock
trial office may disqualify a team from competition for
failure to meet these deadlines. Changes in team
composition following the published deadline must be
cleared with the state mock trial office no later than 5
usi ess da s efo e the tea ’s s heduled o petitio date. Team member changes will not be permitted at the
competition site.
(l) Ethics—The Code of Ethical Conduct governs all
participants, observers, guests, and parents at Georgia
Mock Trial Competition events, including, but not limited
to, the Competition itself, the Law Academy and the
Court Artist Competition. A copy of the code must be
signed by all students and participating coaches prior to
any of the events outlined above and must be delivered
at registration to the coordinator of the event.
Participants are responsible for making guests and
parents aware of the code and all rules regarding
conduct during the event.
(m) Decorum—Counsel should treat opposing counsel with
courtesy and tact. Attorneys should conduct themselves
as professionals in these proceedings. Therefore,
opposing counsel, witnesses, and the presiding judge
must be treated with the appropriate courtesy and
respect. All participants, including coaches, presiding
judges and attorneys on the judging panel, are expected
to display proper courtroom decorum. A trial
coordinator has the authority to refuse entry to or
remove a coach and/or other spectator from a
courtroom before or during a trial round (or rounds) if
the trial coordinator feels that the actions of the coach
and/or spectator in the courtroom is causing or may
cause an undue distraction to the teams competing in
that courtroom. The Plaintiff/Prosecution team shall be
seated closest to the jury box. No team shall rearrange
the courtroom without prior permission of the judge.
(See Rule 27 for the treatment of rule infractions.)
Appropriate courtroom attire is expected. Small children
and food should not be brought into the courtroom.
Rule 8. Instruction and Use
(a) The Problem shall not be used as a basis for any course
of study, at any instructional level, during the
competition year for which the Problem is created until
such time as the Final Round of the State Competition
has been completed and scored.
(b) This Rule shall apply to elementary, middle school, high
school, college, graduate and post-graduate programs,
private and public, whether or not individuals who would
direct or otherwise be involved in the study or analysis of
the Problem support a mock trial team,
83
Plaintiff/Prosecution and Defense squads, or smaller
groups of individual members of any mock trial team.
(c) The prohibition on Working the Current Competition
Case includes, but is not limited to discussion and/or
development of the Case Facts, Witness Statements or
Exhibits, Rules of Procedure, Rules of Evidence, and/or
litigation strategies.
(d) Any use of the Problem in the competition year for
which it was created as outlined above shall be
interpreted as a violation of the Young Lawyers Division,
State Bar of Georgia copyright of said materials, whether
or not used for a non-profit or educational purpose.
Further, any such use of the Problem in the manner
outlined above by any individual involved in any way
with the coaching or support of a mock trial team,
Plaintiff/Prosecution and Defense squads, or smaller
groups of individual members of a mock trial team shall
be deemed a violation of the Procedural and Ethical
Rules of Competition, regardless of whether any
information shared in the course of study is shared with
a competition team or members thereof.
Rule 9. Activities Permitted During the School Day
(Additional explanations regarding this rule may be found in the
Coaches Manual)
(a) Teams compete in the Georgia Mock Trial Competition
as an extracurricular activity and, therefore, must adhere
to the State Standards of the Georgia Department of
Education requiring that individual and group practice be
conducted outside the school day. (See the Coaches
Manual for further information on the State Standards
and examples of proper and improper activities under
this rule.)
(b) Definition of Working on the Current Co petition Case — Working on the current competition case is the
organized studying, discussion or preparation of the case
materials, including but not limited to discussion of the:
1. case facts, witness statements or exhibits,
2. rules of procedure,
3. rules of evidence; and
4. litigation strategies.
(c) No organized group practice or meeting of a mock trial
team, Plaintiff/Prosecution and Defense squads, or
smaller groups of individual members may be held
during regular school hours for the purpose of working
with the current competition case. Any meeting of a
mock trial team organized by a coach for the purpose of
working on the current competition case during regular
school hours, including associated travel for such a
meeting, is interpreted as a violation of this rule.
(d) Nothing about this Rule should be construed to
discourage teams from observing real life court
proceedings. Individuals and teams are clearly permitted
to observe such proceedings outside of school hours,
including during school holidays. Individual team
members may observe court proceedings during school
hours with the permission of their parents and their
school provided that they:
1. observe the proceedings as part of a school-
sponsored field trip and students who are non-
team members are present; or
2. observe the proceedings independently and no
other team members (including teacher coaches)
are present; or
3. observe the proceedings independently as part of
a group of students that includes non-team
members.
(e) If such court attendance cannot be made outside of
school hours or during school hours as part of any trip
specifically permitted above, a team may apply to its
Regional Coordinator for an Exception allowing said
team or its members to watch court proceedings during
school hours on a single date. The application shall:
1. Be in writing;
2. Conform to the State Standards of the Georgia
Department of Education;
3. Explain why such team cannot attend real life
court proceedings outside of school hours;
4. Specify the court proceeding to be attended;
5. Specify the day court shall be attended; and
6. Specify the hours, not to exceed 3 hours per
Exception, to be spent in court.
(f) Regional Coordinators may grant up to three (3)
Exceptions (totaling nine (9) hours attending court
proceedings) per team during the regular season and up
to two (2) Exceptions (totaling six (6) hours attending
court proceedings) per team for teams advancing to the
State Finals. Regional Coordinators shall reply to all
applications in writing. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES
SHALL AN EXCEPTION BE GRANTED FOR A TEAM TO
PRACTICE OR TO WORK ON THE CURRENT CASE AT ANY
LOCATION, INCLUDING AT A COURTHOUSE, DURING
SCHOOL HOURS. Exceptions are intended solely for the
purpose of allowing students the opportunity to watch
real life court proceedings. All applications and
responses will be forwarded promptly to the State Mock
Trial Coordinator. Any abuse of this procedure shall
subject the team to the disciplinary procedures outlined
in Section IV of the Grievance Procedure.
Rule 10. Resolution of Section B Rules Violations
(a) The State Bar of Georgia recognizes that the High School
Mock Trial Competition is a competition involving
student and teacher volunteers who are not professional
attorneys. These extracurricular teams choose to
participate in this competition and abide its Rules. No
action taken by the High School Mock Trial Committee in
enforcement of these Rules shall be construed beyond
the purview of this competition. In that spirit, students
and teams are encouraged to resolve all disputes
without resorting to formal grievances. The following
procedure applies only to violations of Rules that
concern team eligibility and conduct and other "outside
the bar" aspects of the competition on non-competition
days. All violations of rules, both inside and outside the
bar, that occur on competition days are governed by
section D of the Rules.
(b) A grievance alleging a violation of the Rules must be
given to the Regional Coordinator of the affected region
or the District Coordinator of the affected district or the
State Coordinator as soon as possible. If given to the
Regional or District Coordinator, the Regional or District
Coordinator shall promptly forward the grievance to the
State Coordinator. All grievances must be submitted in
writing, specifically detailing the alleged violation and
any attempts to resolve the dispute informally prior to
the filing of a formal grievance. Should the complaint
originate with any person charged with deciding the
disposition of such complaint, or consenting thereto, the
84
person originating the complaint shall recuse
himself/herself from the disposition process. Any
member of the Panel, Grievance Committee, or
Governing Board described below may participate in the
disposition process by teleconference.
(c) Upon receipt of a complaint, the State Coordinator shall
consult with the Chair of the Subcommittee on the Rules,
the Special Consultant to the High School Mock Trial
Committee, and the Chair of the High School Mock Trial
Co ittee the Pa el fo a i itial e aluatio of the complaint. This evaluation shall be convened and
conducted as soon as practicable.
1. If the Panel determines that the incident
complained of could be interpreted as a violation
of the Rules, the party or team alleged to have
committed the violation shall be notified of the
complaint and offered an opportunity to respond
in writing. Such response must be made within 12
hours of notification.
2. The grievance and response shall be forwarded to
all members of the Panel. No other evidence or
testimony shall be allowed except as ordered by
majority vote of the Panel.
3. The Panel, with the advice and consent of the
State Coordinator, shall determine by majority
vote whether a violation of the Rules has occurred.
If a violation is found, the Panel may impose
discipline as provided in Rule 10(h).
(d) The party aggrieved by the decision of the Panel may
appeal to the Governing Board.
(e) The Governing Board shall consist of the following
members:
1. The Chair of the High School Mock Trial Committee
2. The 1st
Vice Chair of the High School Mock Trial
Committee
3. The 2nd
Vice Chair of the High School Mock Trial
Committee
4. The Special Consultant to the High School Mock
Trial Committee;
5. The Immediate Past Chair of the High School Mock
Trial Committee
6. The Chair of the Subcommittee on the Rules;
7. The Chair of the Subcommittee on the Problem;
8. The Regional/District Coordinator for the affected
region/district, as the case may be;
9. The President of the Young Lawyers Division;
10. The President-Elect of the Young Lawyers Division;
and
11. The Secretary of the Young Lawyers Division.
If any chair is unavailable, his or her vice-chair may
serve.
(f) All appeals must be registered in writing with the State
Coordinator within 2 hou s of the Pa el’s de isio . (g) After an appeal is registered, the Governing Board shall
convene as soon as practicable. A quorum of the
Governing Board (7 of 11) is required for any decision.
The decision shall be rendered by majority vote, and all
parties shall be notified of the decision. All decisions of
the Governing Board shall be final.
(h) “hould a ajo it of the Go e i g Boa d’s oti g members be unable to reach a decision on the appeal,
the decision of the Panel shall stand as a summarily
affirmed.
(i) Should discipline be imposed, either by the panel or the
Governing Board, the following range of actions shall be
considered, weighing the severity of the infraction
against the goal of allowing students to compete:
1. Warning: The lowest level of discipline, this will
constitute a letter to the affected parties advising
them of the Rules violation and of potential
consequences of continued violations.
2. Reprimand: A reprimand to be published in Mock
Trial Briefs, advising all participants in the Mock
Trial Program that a team or its member has
committed a Rules violation and of the potential
consequences of continued violations.
3. Point Deduction: For infractions not rising to a
level requiring disqualification of a team member
or entire team, point deductions ranging from 1 to
10 points can be imposed against a team member
or entire team in a single round, in an entire
regional competition, in an entire competition
year, or for succeeding years, depending upon the
severity of the violation.
4. Member Disqualification: For severe infractions by
individual team members, those team members
shall be disqualified from competition for a given
year or succeeding years, depending upon the
severity of the infraction. This punishment may
also be used against team members with repeated
lesser violations, with whom reprimands and point
deductions have not been effective.
5. Team Disqualification: For severe infractions by an
entire team, that team shall be disqualified from
competition for a given year or succeeding years,
depending upon the severity of the infraction. This
punishment may also be used against teams with
repeated lesser violations, with which reprimands
and point deductions have not been effective.
Rule 11. Team Presentation
(a) Teams must be prepared to present both the
Prosecution/Plaintiff and Defense/Defendant sides of the
case simultaneously. Any team who arrives at a
competition site, at any level of the competition, with
only one side (P or D, but not both) available to compete,
will be immediately withdrawn from the competition
and not allowed to compete in any round.
(b) In the case of an emergency occurring during a round of
competition, a team may participate with less than nine
members. In such a case, a team may continue in the
competition by making substitutions to achieve a two-
attorney/three witness composition. Any team
competing under this emergency arrangement is
ineligible to advance to the championship round.
(c) Final determination of emergency forfeiture will be
made by the trial coordinator, in consultation with
available Committee leaders. Under extraordinary
circumstances, the trial coordinator, in consultation with
available Committee leaders, may declare an emergency
prior to the competition round.
(d) A forfeiting team will receive a loss and points totaling
the average number of the ballots and the points
received by the losing teams in that round. The non-
forfeiting team will receive a win and an average number
of ballots and points received by the winning teams in
that round.
85
Rule 12. Team Duties
(a) Official competing team members must handle all
aspects of the trial during a competition round, including
any rules disputes at the conclusion of the trial round.
(b) Team members are to divide their duties evenly. Each of
the three attorneys will conduct one direct and one
cross; in addition, one will present the opening
statements and another will present closing arguments.
In other words, the eight attorney duties for each team
will be divided as follows:
1. Opening Statement
2. Direct Examination of Witness #1
3. Direct Examination of Witness #2
4. Direct Examination of Witness #3
5. Cross Examination of Witness #1
6. Cross Examination of Witness #2
7. Cross Examination of Witness #3
8. Closing Argument (including Rebuttal) [See Rule
14.]
Every attorney must conduct a direct and cross
examination.
(c) Opening Statements must be given by both sides at the
beginning of the trial. The Prosecution/Plaintiff gives the
closing argument first but may reserve all or a portion of
its closing time for a rebuttal.
(d) The attorney who will examine a particular witness on
direct examination is the only person who may make the
objections to the opposing atto e ’s uestio s of that it ess’ oss e a i atio , a d the atto e ho ill
cross examine a witness will be the only one permitted
to make objections during the direct examination of that
witness.
(e) The attorneys who make the opening statement or the
closing argument during a trial round are the only people
ho a ake a o je tio to a oppo e t’s ope i g statement or closing argument, as outlined in Rule 50(a).
(f) Each team must call three witnesses. Witnesses must be
called only by their own team and examined by both
sides. A team may not treat its own witness as a hostile
witness, unless expressly authorized within the case
materials. Witnesses may not be recalled by either side.
Witnesses may be called in any order, regardless of the
order in which they are listed on the Trial Squad Roster
Form or in which they have been called in earlier rounds
of the competition.
Rule 13. Swearing of Witnesses
(a) The following oath may be used before questioning
begins: Do ou p o ise that the testi o ou a e about to give will faithfully and truthfully conform to the
facts and rules of the o k t ial o petitio ?
(b) The swearing of witnesses will be conducted by the
examining attorney prior to questioning or by the
presiding judge at the start of the trial. No religious texts
or references to a deity may be used.
Rule 14. Trial Sequence and Time Limits
(a) The trial sequence and time limits are as follows:
1. Opening Statement (5 minutes per side)
2. Direct and Redirect (optional) Examination (25
minutes per side)
3. Cross and Recross (optional) Examination (20
minutes per side)
4. Closing Argument (5 minutes per side)
(b) Redirect and Recross examinations must conform to
restrictions in Rule 611(d). The P ose utio /Plai tiff’s e uttal is ot li ited to the s ope of the Defe se’s
closing argument.
(c) Attorneys are not required to use the entire time
allotted to each part of the trial. Time remaining in one
part of the trial will not be transferred to another part of
the trial.
(d) Even if a team has exhausted its time for direct and/or
cross examination, Rule 12(e) requires that each witness
be called and subjected to direct and cross examination.
Accordingly, attorneys out of time will be allowed only
one question in direct: Will the it ess please state ou a e fo the e o d? The opposing team will be
permitted to conduct a cross examination of the witness.
No questions will be allowed on cross examination if a
team has used all of its allotted time for cross
examination.
(See Rule 27(b) for the treatment of rule infractions.)
Rule 15. Timekeeping
(Additional explanations regarding this rule may be found in the
Team and Coach Manuals.)
(a) Time limits are mandatory and will be enforced.
(b) Time for objections, extensive questioning from the
judge, or administering the oath will not be counted as
part of the allotted time during examination of witnesses
and opening and closing statements.
(c) Time does not stop for introduction of evidence.
(d) Each team will provide one timekeeper for each round
for each squad (Prosecution/Plaintiff and
Defense/Defendant). A master copy of the Time Sheet is
provided on the website. Time card templates are also
provided on the website. Time cards must be printed on
yellow paper. When the time allowed for a category has
expired, the timekeeper will raise the STOP card so that
it may be visible to the judge and both counsels. If the
STOP card is raised and the attorney continues without
permission from the judge to do so, attorneys for the
opposing team may use a special objection, such as
ti e has e pi ed, to i g the atte to the judge’s attention.
(e) At the end of each task during the trial presentation (i.e.
at the end of each opening, at the end each witness
examination, at the end of each cross examination and
at the end of each closing argument) if there is more
than a se o d dis epa et ee the tea s’ timekeepers, the timekeepers must notify the presiding
judge of the discrepancy. The presiding judge will then
rule on the discrepancy, the timekeepers will
synchronize their stopwatches accordingly and the trial
will continue. No time disputes will be entertained after
the trial concludes.
(f) At the conclusion of the round, the presiding judge will
ask the timekeepers to present their forms. It is the sole
discretion of the scoring judges as to how they will
interpret and weigh violations of time limits, and their
decisions will be final.
Rule 16. Time Extensions and Scoring
The presiding judge has sole discretion to grant time
extensions. If time has expired the attorney may not continue
without permission from the Court. Judges are encouraged to
allow the completion of an answer which is in progress at the
moment time is called. If an attorney pleads for additional 86
examination after time is called, judges may permit a time
extension but are strongly encouraged to limit any time extension
to one question only.
Rule 17. Prohibited and Permitted Motions
(a) No pre-trial motions may be made. A motion for directed
verdict, acquittal, or dismissal of the case at the end of
the Plai tiff/P ose utio ’s ase a ot e used. No
motions may be made unless expressly provided for in
the problem.
(b) A motion for a recess may be used only in the event of
an emergency (e.g., health emergency). To the greatest
extent possible, team members are to remain in place.
Should a recess be called, teams are not to communicate
with any observers, coaches, or instructors regarding the
trial.
(c) In the event that a team member attorney believes,
during the course of a trial round in which that team
member attorney is competing, that the presiding judge
has materially departed from the rules of the mock trial
competition, the team member attorney may move for
compliance with the rules of the mock trial competition.
Such motions must be presented respectfully, must
di e t the p esidi g judge’s atte tio to the appli a le rule, and must be raised at the time of the presiding
judge’s alleged depa tu e f o the ules. No claim that
the presiding judge has departed from the rules of the
mock trial competition may be made after the judging
panel has returned to the courtroom for debriefing.
Rule 18. Sequestration
Teams may not invoke the rule of sequestration.
Rule 19. Bench Conferences
Bench conferences may be granted at the discretion of the
presiding judge, but should be made from the counsel table in
the educational interest of handling all matters in open court.
Rule 20. Supplemental Material/Illustrative Aids
(Additional explanations regarding this rule may be found in the
Coaches’ Manual)
(a) Teams may refer only to materials included in the trial
packet. No illustrative aids of any kind may be used,
unless provided in the case materials. No enlargements
or alterations of the case materials by teams will be
permitted. If any team member has a disability and
requires special assistance, services, or printed materials
in alternative formats, in order to participate in the
Georgia Mock Trial Competition, the teacher or attorney
coach must contact the State Mock Trial Coordinator
well in advance of the regional competition date to
receive modified case materials or make arrangements
for special assistance or services.
(b) Absolutely no props, uniforms, or costumes are
permitted, unless specifically authorized in the trial
materials. Costuming is defined as hairstyles, clothing,
accessories, and makeup, which are case specific.
(c) The only documents which the teams may present to the
presiding judge or scoring panel are the individual
exhibits as they are introduced into evidence and the
team roster forms. Teams shall not show any copies of
any exhibit to the scoring panel other than the single
individual copy of any exhibit that has been admitted
into evidence. Exhibit notebooks are not to be provided
to the presiding judge or scoring panel.
(See Rule 27 for the treatment of rule infractions.)
Rule 21. Trial Communication
(a) Instructors, non-competing team members, alternates,
Court Artist contestants, and observers shall not talk to,
signal, communicate with, or coach their teams during a
trial. No coach is allowed inside the bar at any time
during a trial. This rule remains in force during any recess
time which may occur.
(b) For purposes of this rule, the trial ends after all closing
arguments in that round, including rebuttals, have
concluded and the judge has asked the evaluators to
retire to calculate their scores.
(c) Official/Competing team members may, among
themselves, communicate during the trial; however, no
disruptive communication is allowed. Signaling of time
the tea s’ ti ekeepe s shall ot e o side ed a violation of this rule.
(d) Non-competing/additional team members, contest
participants, teachers, and coaches must remain outside
the bar in the spectator section of the courtroom. Only
official/competing team members participating in the
round may sit inside the bar and communicate with each
other.
(e) Except in the case of an emergency, no
official/competing team member is allowed to leave a
courtroom during a round without the permission of the
court.
(f) If a recess is taken during a trial for any reason, to the
greatest extent possible team members should remain
seated in their appropriate positions within the
courtroom until the trial resumes.
(g) Official/Competing team members may not use cell
phones, Blackberries, PDAs, laptops or other electronic
communication devices during a trial.
(h) All electronic communication devices (belonging to team
members, coaches, contest participants and observers)
should be turned off during the entirety of the trial.
Rule 22. Viewing a Trial
(a) Team members, alternates, coaches, spectators and any
other persons directly associated with a mock trial team
are not allowed to view other teams in competition, so
long as their team remains in the competition.
(b) A team that has been eliminated from one level of the
competition may not share its scoresheets,
judge/evaluator comment sheets, or other observations
of a oppo e t’s pe fo a e ith a othe tea that remains in the competition, until that team is eliminated
from the competition entirely.
(c) A violation of Rule 22(b) will be considered as occurring
outside the a a d ill e ha dled i a o da e ith the procedure outlined in Rule 35.
Rule 23. Videotaping/Photography
(a) Any team has the option to refuse participation in
videotaping, tape-recording, still photography, or media
coverage.
(b) Media coverage will be allowed by the two teams in the
championship round at the State Finals.
(c) Media representatives authorized by the trial
coordinator will wear identification badges.
87
C. JUDGING
Rule 24. Decisions
All decisions of the judging panel are FINAL.
Rule 25. Composition of Panel
(a) The judging panel will consist of at least three
individuals. The composition of the judging panel and the
role of the presiding judge will be at the discretion of the
trial coordinator, with the same format used throughout
the competition, as follows:
1. One presiding judge and two attorney scoring
evaluators (all three of whom complete score
sheets); or
2. One presiding judge and three attorney scoring
evaluators (scoring evaluators only complete score
sheets).
(b) The semi-final and/or championship round may have a
larger panel at the discretion of the trial coordinator.
(c) All presiding judges and scoring evaluators receive the
judge’s editio of the o k t ial a ual, hi h i ludes orientation materials and a bench brief and a briefing in
a judges’ o ie tatio . (d) Judging panel members should turn off and/or not use
their cell phones, pagers, PDAs, etc. during a trial round.
(e) In the event of an emergency (ex. sudden illness, etc.), if
a judging panel member must leave the courtroom, the
presiding judge will call for a brief recess, assess whether
the judging panel member will be able to return in a
reasonably short period of time and then resume the
p o eedi gs upo the pa el e e ’s etu to the courtroom. During the entirety of any type of recess,
Rule 21(f) applies to the teams in the courtroom.
(f) If the panel member is unable to return to the
courtroom, the trial coordinator must be informed and
the panel composition adjusted to best meet the
requirements of the rules and the round should resume.
Rule 26. Scoresheets/Ballots
(a) The te allot ill efe to the de isio ade a scoring judge as to which team made the best
presentation in the round. The te s o esheet is used in reference to the form on which speaker and team
points are recorded. Scoresheets are to be completed
individually by the scoring judges. Scoring judges are not
bound by the rulings of the presiding judge. The team
that ea s the highest poi ts o a i di idual judge’s scoresheet is the winner of that ballot. The team that
receives the majority of the three ballots wins the round.
The ballot votes determine the win/loss record of the
team for power-matching and ranking purposes. While
the judging panel may deliberate on any special awards,
(i.e., Outstanding Attorney/Witness) the judging panel
may not deliberate on individual scores.
(b) When exceptional presentations are made, the judging
panel has the option of recognizing one Outstanding
Attorney and/or one Outstanding Witness per
competition round. This award is determined by a
majority vote of the judging panel and will be announced
at the closing assembly following preliminary rounds.
(c) Judging panel members may not discuss the individual
speaker or team points from their individual ballot with
team members, team coaches or any other individual
directly related to a team in the competition. In addition
to the oral debriefing, judging panel members will be
provided with an optional judging panel worksheet
. o hi h the a record any individual
observations they wish to share with a team or team
member; team members, team coaches and other
individuals directly related to a team in competition may
not challenge a judging panel member with respect to
his/her scores.
(d) Any questions regarding the accuracy of mathematical
computations on a completed scoresheet, blanks on a
completed scoresheet and/o the a u a of a tea ’s final record at any given level of the competition must be
brought to the attention of the trial coordinator on site
by the primary teacher or attorney coach within 30
minutes of the announcement of the teams moving on
to the semi-final or final round or the announcement of
the winner of that level of the competition.
Rule 27. Completion of Scoresheets
(a) Scoresheets are to be completed in four steps:
1. Speaker Points—The scoring evaluator will record
a number of speaker points (1-10) for each section
of the trial.
2. Sub-Total—At the end of the trial, the scoring
e aluato ill total the su of ea h tea ’s individual speaker points and place this sum in the
Sub-Total box.
3. Team Points—The scoring evaluator will give a
number of points (1-10) to each team in the Team
Points box. NO TIE IS ALLOWED IN THE TEAM
POINT BOX.
4. Final Point Total—The scoring evaluator will add
the sub-total and team points boxes to achieve a
final point total for each team. NO TIE IS ALLOWED
IN THE FINAL POINT TOTAL BOX. The team with
the highest number of points in the Final Point
Total box receives the ballot from that scoring
judge.
(b) Each scoring evaluator may wish to consider specific
point deductions for rules violations, which the scoring
evaluator has observed during the trial, whether or not
the formal dispute process has been invoked. Deductions
may be considered for violations and charged against the
score of an individual speaker (in the Speaker Points
categories) or against the entire team (in the Team
Points category). Examples of rule violations include but
are not limited to: Unfair Extrapolations (Rule 4);
Exceeding Time Limits (Rule 14); Use of Unapproved
Supplemental Material (Rule 20); Improper Courtroom
Decorum (Rule 40 and Ethics Code §1); Student Work
Product (Rule 41 and Ethics Code §3); and Excessive or
Frivolous Objections (Ethics Code §1).
(c) Should only two scoring evaluators be available for a
round, the trial coordinator shall average the scores of
the scoring evaluators present at the specific round to
achieve the required third score. The third scoring
e aluato ’s score shall equal one-half the sum of the
other two scoring e aluato s’ total scores for
Plaintiff/Prosecution and Defendant/Defense.
(d) Fractions will be rounded to the nearest higher whole
number.
(e) In the rare instance that the third scoresheet has a tie in
the Final Point Total boxes, the philosophy outlined in
Rule 28(a)(4) applies; only the point spread between the
two actual scoresheets from the round will be compared.
In this case, whichever team has the greatest point
88
spread is the team that should receive the ballot of the
third scoresheet. However, the Final Point Total of the
third should remain as a tie and be factored into the
point summaries used in power matching.
(f) In cases where a scoresheet is submitted with a blank in
a speaker point or team point box, the scoring
coordinator will make every effort to contact that
evaluator to have the evaluator complete the
scoresheet. In the event that the evaluator cannot be
reached either by phone or in person to correct the
scoresheet, the scoring coordinator will fill in the blank
by averaging the speaker points awarded by that
evaluator for that squad. The scoring coordinator will
add this averaged total to the blank box, initial the
addition, note on the scoresheet that it is an averaged
point award, correct the final point total box and notify
the mock trial office.
Rule 28. Team Advancement
(a) Teams will be ranked based on the following criteria (the
Ranking Rule in the order listed:
1. Win/Loss Record—Equals the number of
courtrooms won or lost by a team.
2. Total Number of Ballots—Equals the number of
s o i g judges’ otes a tea ea ed i p e edi g rounds.
3. Total Number of Points Accumulated in Each
Round
4. Point Spread against Opponents—The point
spread is the difference between the total points
earned by the team whose tie is being broken less
the total poi ts of that tea ’s oppo e t i ea h previous round. The greatest sum of these point
spreads will break the tie in favor of the team with
the largest cumulative point spread if the teams
are in the winning bracket. If the tie occurs
between two teams in the losing bracket, then the
tie will be broken in favor of the team receiving
the smallest cumulative point spread.
(b) The esults of the pe fo a e of ea h tea ’s Plaintiff/Prosecution and Defendant/Defense sides in
different courtrooms will not be added together for
averaging purposes, to determine which teams advance,
for breaking a tie, or for any other purpose.
(c) The championship round (and semi-final round, when
utilized) stands alone, with each team beginning with a
clean slate. If the two teams in the championship round
tie in the following three categories in this order—win/loss of courtroom, number of ballots, and number of
points—the trial coordinator will use this procedure to
resolve the tie:
1. Figure the point spread for each ballot won by a
team and
2. Add the point spreads for each team.
The team with the largest cumulative point spread wins
the championship. Only in the extremely rare event that
this point-spread total also results in a tie, Rule 28 would
e i oked i its e ti et , thus e aluati g the tea s’ performances throughout this level of competition (i.e.,
the State Finals would look only at performance at the
State Finals level). The trial coordinator would examine
the individual team records, taking each of the following
steps in this order until the tie is broken:
1. Compare the win/loss records;
2. Compare the ballot records from preliminary
rounds;
3. Compare the total number of points earned in
preliminary rounds;
4. Compare the point spread from the preliminary
rounds. At each step, the tie is broken in favor of
the team with the highest number (i.e., more wins,
ballots, points, or larger point spread than the
opponent).
(d) Announcements of the results of final regional ranking
and district champion round are subject to verification
by the state mock trial office before those results
become official.
(e) Wildcard Teams at State Finals: In seasons where an odd
number of Districts are comprised, a Wildcard team will
be chosen to advance to the State Finals competition.
The mock trial office will pool all district finalist teams
and will draw the Wildcard team. This Wildcard team will
advance to the State Finals competition. No matches at
the State Finals Competition (random or power matches)
will be affected by regional or district conflicts.
Rule 29. Power Matching/Seeding for Regional Competitions
(Additional explanations regarding the power-match scoring
system may be found in the Coaches Manual.)
(a) A random method of selection will determine opponents
in the first round. A power-match system will determine
opponents for all other rounds. A discussion of the
power match system is included in the Coa hes’ Manual
and is thereby incorporated into the Rules of the
Competition. (A copy of the Coaches’ Manual is posted on the GHSMTC website.)
(b) Power matching will provide that:
1. Pairings for the first round will be at random. In
the first round, the P and D squads from any given
school team will be matched randomly with the P
and D squads from two other school teams. School
team matches (or tea to tea at hes—where the P and D of two schools are matched
only against each other) are prohibited in the first
round.
2. All teams are guaranteed to present each side of
the case twice.
3. Brackets will be determined by win/loss record.
Plaintiff/Prosecution and Defendant/Defense
squads of each team will be matched according to
their separate performances in the first round.
Sorting within brackets will be determined in the
following order: (1) win/loss record; (2) ballots; (3)
total team points; then (4) point spread. The squad
with the highest number of ballots in the bracket
will be matched with the opposing squad with the
lowest number of ballots in the bracket; the next
highest with the next lowest, and so on until all
teams are matched.
4. If there are an odd number of squads in a bracket,
the squad in the bottom of that bracket will be
matched with the top squad from the next lower
bracket.
5. Teams will not meet the same opponent twice in
the preliminary rounds.
6. To determine the two teams rising to the
championship round, win/loss, ballot, and point
s o es ill e totaled fo ea h tea ’s Plaintiff/Prosecution and Defendant/Defense
89
squads. The two teams with the best combined
ranking in these categories in this order (i.e.,
win/loss, ballot, and point scores) will rise to the
championship round.
7. In regions operating under emergency
circumstances with only four teams competing,
the scoring coordinator will rank those teams after
the randomly matched first round in order using
the Ranking Rule as outlined in Rule 28(a). When
setting matches for the second round, the scoring
coordinator will observe the power matching
procedure outlined in Rule 29 as closely as possible
while adhering first and foremost to the following
restrictions in setting the round two matches for
four teams:
i. No team will be matched against itself.
ii. No squad will be matched against the same
squad it encountered in the first ou d’s random draw.
iii. Team to team matches will be avoided in all
preliminary rounds.
(c) At the regional level, the two teams emerging with the
strongest record from the two preliminary rounds
(producing scores from four courtrooms) will advance to
the final round. The first-place team will be determined
by the win/loss record, ballots, and total points earned
(in this order) from the championship round only. Ties
will be broken following the procedure outlined in Rule
28.
(d) At the regional level, where 10 or fewer teams are
competing, the two teams emerging with the strongest
record from the two preliminary rounds (producing
scores from four courtrooms) will advance to the final
round. The first-place team will be determined by the
win/loss record, ballots, and total points earned (in this
order) from the championship round only. Ties will be
broken following the procedure outlined in Rule 28.
(e) If a region has 11+ teams competing, that regional
competition will include a semi-final round after the two
preliminary rounds. The top four teams determined by
the two preliminary rounds will compete in the semi-
final round. The most powerful team will be matched
with the least powerful team, and the two middle teams
will be matched together, regardless of whether the
squads have competed against each other in the
preliminary rounds. The two most powerful teams
emerging from the semi-final round will rise to the
championship round. The regional champion team will
be determined by the win/loss record, ballots, and total
points earned (in this order) from the championship
round only. Ties will be broken following the procedure
outlined in Rule 28.
Rule 30. Seeding and Round Matching for District Competition
(a) All matches at the district level will be conducted as
head-to-head knockout rounds.
1. Head-to-head matches the P and D squads of one
team to the D and P squads of another team (P1 v.
D2, P2 v. D1).
2. The winning teams of each head-to-head match
will be determined first by the total number of
ballots won, and total points earned (in this order),
i ea h ou d’s at h o l . Ties ill e oke following the procedures outlined in Rule 28(a)
and (c).
(b) Districts that are comprised of two regions shall be
seeded and matched in the following manner:
1. Each Regional Champion will receive a bye in the
first round.
2. The second and third place teams from one region
will be matched against the third and second place
teams from the other region, respectively.
3. At the end of the first round, the two teams
winning their first round match will advance to the
second round. These teams will be matched
against the two Regional Champions in the
following manner:
i. If each advancing team from the first round is
from separate regions, the match will be made
so eithe of a egio ’s tea s ill meet in the
second round.
ii. If each advancing team from the first round is
from the same region, the team who finished
3rd
at the egio al le el ill eet that egio ’s champion while the team who finished 2
nd at
the regional level will meet the other regional
champion in the second round.
4. At the end of the second round, the two teams
that won their second round match will face off in
the final/championship round. The first-place team
will be determined by the results from the
championship round only.
(c) Districts that are comprised of three regions shall be
seeded and matched in the following manner:
1. Region Champion teams will have the average
allot total f o the tea ’s th ee o fou i the case of a semi-final round at the regional level)
regional competition rounds calculated prior to
the first round of the district competition. This
ballot average will be used to seed the Regional
Champion teams.
2. The top two seeded Regional Champion teams will
receive a first round bye.
3. The three region finalist teams from each region
will have the point averages calculated prior to the
first round of the district competition in the same
manner as outlined Rule 31(b)(1). This point total
will be used to seed the three region semi-finalists.
4. The third seeded Region Champion team (who did
not receive the bye) will be matched against the
lowest seeded finalist team and the first and
second seeded finalist teams will be matched for
the first round.
5. At the end of the first round, the two teams
winning their first round match will advance to the
second round. The higher ranked team of the two
teams will be matched against the second seeded
Regional Champion team and the lower ranked of
the two teams will be matched against the top
seeded Regional Champion team.
6. At the end of the second round, the two teams
that won their second round match will face off in
the final/championship round. The first-place team
will be determined by the results from the
championship round only.
Rule 31. Power Matching and Seeding at the State Finals
Tournament
(a) Teams will compete as a team in head-to-head matches
for all rounds of the State Finals Tournament.
90
(b) A random method of selection will determine opponents
in the first round.
(c) After the first round, two evenly populated brackets will
be determined by win/loss record. Teams will be
matched according to their collective performances in
the first round. Sorting within brackets will be
determined in the following order: (1) win/loss record;
(2) ballots; (3) speaker points; then (4) point spread. The
team with the highest number of ballots in the bracket
will be matched with the team with the lowest number
of ballots in the bracket; the next highest with the next
lowest, and so on until all teams are matched.
(d) Teams will not meet the same opponent twice in the
preliminary rounds.
(e) The two teams who win both preliminary rounds will
advance to the final round. The first-place team will be
determined by the win/loss record, ballots, and total
points earned (in this order) from the championship
round only. Ties will be broken following the procedure
outlined in Rule 28.
Rule 32. [reserved]
Rule 33. Effect of a Win by Default
For the purpose of advancement and seeding, when a team
wins by default, the winning team for that round will be given a
win and the number of ballots and points equal to the average of
all i i g tea s’ allots a d poi ts of that sa e ou d. A win
by default can only occur under the circumstances outlined in
Rule 11.
D. DISPUTE SETTLEMENT
Rule 34. Reporting a Rules Violation/Inside the Bar
(a) Disputes, which involve team members competing in a
competition round and occur within the bar, must be
filed immediately following the conclusion of that trial
round. Disputes must be brought to the attention of the
presiding judge at the conclusion of the trial.
(b) If any team believes that a substantial rules violation has
occurred, one of its team member attorneys must
indicate that the team intends to file a dispute. The
scoring panel will be excused from the courtroom, and
the presiding judge will provide the team member
attorney with a dispute form, on which the team
member will record in writing the nature of the dispute.
The team member may communicate with counsel
and/or team member witnesses before lodging the
notice of dispute or in preparing the form.
(c) At no time in this process may team coaches
communicate or consult with the team member
attorneys. Only team member attorneys may invoke the
dispute procedure.
(d) The dispute procedure described in this rule may not be
used to challenge an action by the presiding judge which
a team believes to materially depart from the rules of
the mock trial competition. If a team believes that such a
material departure has occurred, one of its team
member attorneys must move, during the trial round, for
compliance with the rules of the mock trial competition
in accordance with Rule 17. (See Rule 35(a) for resolution
procedure)
(e) Rules violations and/or disputes, which involve teams,
individual team members or coaches during the course
of the round or during the competition day, which are
not brought to the attention of the presiding judge
during a round (under Rule 34(a)) or to the trial
oo di ato ’s atte tio du i g the o petitio da a teacher or attorney coach (under Rule 37), but which are
discovered in the normal course of organizing and
running the business of the competition on competition
day and which are discovered by the trial coordinator or
one of his/her coordinating team members, should be
dealt with on-site (see Rule 35(b) & (c) for resolution
procedure).
Rule 35. Dispute Resolution Procedure
(a) The presiding judge will review the written dispute and
determine whether the dispute should be heard or
denied. If the dispute is denied, the judge will record the
reasons for this, announce her/his decision to the Court,
retire to complete his/her scoresheet (if applicable), and
turn the dispute form in with the scoresheets. If the
judge feels the grounds for the dispute merit a hearing,
the form will be shown to opposing counsel for their
written response. After the team has recorded its
response and transmitted it to the judge, the judge will
ask each team to designate a spokesperson. After the
spokespersons have had time (not to exceed three
minutes) to prepare their arguments, the judge will
conduct a hea i g o the dispute, p o idi g ea h tea ’s spokesperson three minutes for a presentation. The
spokespersons may be questioned by the judge. At no
time in this process may team coaches communicate or
consult with the team member attorneys. After the
hearing, the presiding judge will adjourn the court and
retire to consider her/his ruling on the dispute. That
decision will be recorded in writing on the dispute form,
with no further announcement.
(b) Rules violations and/or disputes brought by trial
coordinators and/or a member of the coordinating team
must be dealt with on site and in consultation with the
appropriate Director of Competitions, the Rules
Subcommittee Chair, the State Coordinator, the Chair of
the Committee, either Vice Chair of the Committee
and/or the Special Consultant to the Committee. The
trial coordinator should request a verbal explanation of
the violation and/or dispute from the offending team,
individual or coach before contacting the appropriate
and/or available HSMT leader. In consultation, the trial
coordinator and the HSMT leader(s) contact will decide
the outcome of the situation. All decisions in this process
made by the trial coordinator in consultation with
HSMTC leadership will be considered final.
(c) If a trial coordinator, in consultation with HSMTC
leadership, determines that a rules violation did occur as
described in Rules 32(b) and 33(b), the trial coordinator
and HSMTC leader(s) may choose to impose one or more
of the consequences outlined in Rule 10(e) 1-5.
Rule 36. Effect of Violation on Score
If the presiding judge determines that a substantial rules
violation has occurred, the judge will inform the scoring judges of
the dispute a d p o ide a su a of ea h tea ’s a gu e t. The scoring judges will consider the dispute before reaching their
final decisions. The dispute may or may not affect the final
decision, but the matter will be left to the discretion of the
scoring judges.
91
Rule 37. Reporting of Rules Violation/Dispute Outside the Bar
on Competition Day
(a) Time is of the essence in all matters during any level of
the competition. Coaches and team members are
expected to communicate before and after competition
rounds on a variety of competition-related topics, in
addition to student performance. Moreover, coaches
should communicate with each other during the course
of the competition day so that they are aware, within a
reasonable amount of time, of events that occur during
the competition that relate to their competition team,
including any potential outside the bar rules
violation/dispute that may have occurred.
(b) A Rules Violation/dispute, which involves people other
than team members and/or occurs outside the bar only
during a trial round on competition day, may be brought
by the primary teacher or attorney coaches exclusively.
Such disputes must be brought to the attention of the
trial coordinator as soon as possible, but in no event
more than 30 minutes after the end of the round in
which the alleged violation occurred. The complaining
party must complete a dispute form in order for the
dispute to be heard. The form will be taken to the
tou a e t’s o u i atio ’s e te , he eupo a dispute resolution panel will:
1. Notify all pertinent parties;
2. Allow time for a response, if appropriate;
3. Conduct a hearing; and
4. Rule on the charge.
(c) The trial coordinator and/or his/her designated dispute
resolution panel must handle all disputes of this type on
site and on the day of the competition. The dispute
resolution panel may notify the judging panel of the
affected courtroom of the ruling on the charge.
(d) The dispute resolution panel will be composed of
designees, including available HSMTC leaders, appointed
by the trial coordinator, who may also sit on the panel.
(e) The decision of the dispute resolution panel in these
matters will be considered final and no appeals will be
heard.
(f) If a trial coordinator, in consultation with HSMTC
leade ship, dete i es that a outside the a ules violation did occur, the trial coordinator and/or HSMTC
leader(s) may choose to impose one or more of the
consequences outlined in Rule 10(e)(1-5).
(g) Teams shall not bring outside the bar disputes/issues
that arise on competition day directly to the state mock
trial office for consideration at any time.
(h) If a coach discovers a potential outside the bar violation
after the 30-minute time frame for disputes has elapsed,
but on the same day that the alleged violation occurred,
and wishes to have the matter reviewed, that coach is
required to bring the issue to the attention of the trial
coordinator before leaving the competition site. The trial
coordinator will then convene the dispute resolution
panel to review the matter as described in sections (b)
through (e) of this rule. If a coach leaves the competition
site knowing that a potential outside the bar rules
violation/dispute has occurred, but without formally
bringing it to the attention of the trial coordinator, the
team forfeits the right to file the complaint or have the
matter reviewed in any way.
(i) Only under the most extenuating of circumstances,
which must be described in writing, may a coach bring a
complaint of an outside the bar rules violation/dispute to
the Rules chair on the Monday after that level of the
competition has concluded. If the Rules Chair determines
that the issue could not be brought to the attention of
the trial coordinator at the competition site, s/he will
review the issue and may choose to request a response
from the alleged offender in order to gain a clearer
understanding of the situation. The Rules Chair may
resolve the dispute at the time it is submitted; if the
Rules Chair determines that a violation did occur, s/he, in
consultation with other HSMTC leaders and with the
advice of the State Coordinator, may impose one or
more of the consequences outlined in Rules 10(e)(1-5)
on the offending team, coach, or individual team
member.
(j) The Rules Chair, in his/her sole discretion, may also elect
not to resolve the dispute but to include the issue in the
rules review at the next meeting of the Subcommittee on
the Rules. Regardless of whether the dispute is resolved,
it will have no bearing on the outcome of any
competition round(s) during the competition level at
which the dispute arose.
II. RULES OF PROCEDURE
A. BEFORE THE TRIAL
Rule 38. Trial Squad Roster Form
Copies of the Trial Squad Roster Form must be completed and
duplicated by each team prior to arrival at the competition site.
Teams must be identified by the code assigned at registration. No
information identifying team origin should appear on the form.
Before beginning a trial, the teams must exchange copies of the
Trial Squad Roster Form. Witness lists should identify the gender
of each witness so that references to such parties will be made in
the proper gender. Copies of the Trial Squad Roster Form should
also be made available to the judging panel and presiding judge
before each round. The Trial Squad Roster Form is available as a
fillable and saveable PDF on the HSMT website and should be
submitted in typed form whenever possible.
Rule 39. Stipulations
Stipulations shall be considered part of the record and already
admitted into evidence.
Rule 40. The Record
The stipulations, the indictment, and the Charge to the Jury
will not be read into the record.
B. BEGINNING THE TRIAL
Rule 41. Jury Trial
The case will be tried to a jury; arguments are to be made to
judge and jury. Teams may address the scoring judges as the jury.
Rule 42. Standing During Trial
Attorneys who are able will stand while giving opening and
closing statements, during direct and cross examinations, and for
all objections.
(See Rule 27 for the treatment of rule infractions.)
92
Rule 43. Student Work Product
All opening statements and closing arguments, all direct and
cross examinations, and all objections shall be substantially the
work product of team members and not be scripted by coaches.
(See Rule 27 for the treatment of rule infractions.)
C. PRESENTING EVIDENCE
Rule 44. Argumentative/Ambiguous Questions and Non-
Responsive Answer
(a) Argumentative—An attorney shall not ask a question
which asks the witness to agree to a conclusion drawn by
the questions without eliciting testimony as to new facts;
provided, however, that the Court may in its discretion
allow limited use of argumentative questions on cross
examination.
(b) Ambiguous Questions—An attorney shall not asks
questions that are capable of being understood in two or
more possible ways.
(c) Non-Responsive Answer—A it ess’ a s e is objectionable if it fails to respond to the question asked.
Rule 45. Assuming Facts Not in Evidence
An attorney shall not ask a question that assumes unproved
facts. However, an expert witness may be asked a question based
upon stated assumptions, the truth of which is reasonably
supported by the evidence.
Rule 46. Lack of Proper Predicate/Foundation
Attorneys shall lay a proper foundation prior to moving
admission of evidence. After the motion has been made, the
exhibits may still be objectionable on other grounds.
Rule 47. Procedure for Introduction of Exhibits
At the regional and state level of the Georgia High School
Mock Trial Competition, the following procedure for introducing
evidence is accepted practice. All teams should be prepared to
follow these steps and all presiding judges should allow students
to utilize this procedure for the introduction of evidence during
competition rounds.
1. All evidence will be pre-marked as exhibits.
2. Timekeepers will not stop time during the introduction
of evidence.
3. Show the exhibit to opposing counsel.
4. Ask for permission to approach the witness. Give the
exhibit to the witness.
5. I o ha d you what has been marked as Exhibit
No.___ fo ide tifi atio .
6. Ask the witness to identify the exhibit. Would ou ide tif it please?
7. Witness answers with identification only.
8. Offer the exhibit into evidence. You Ho o , e offe Exhibit No.___ into evidence at this time. The
authe ti it of this e hi it has ee stipulated.
9. Court: Is the e a o je tio ? (If opposing counsel
believes a proper foundation has not been laid, the
attorney should be prepared to object at this time.)
10. Opposi g Cou sel: No, ou Ho o , o Yes, ou Ho o . If the espo se is Yes, the o je tio ill e stated on the record. Court: Is the e a espo se to the o je tio ?
11. Cou t: E hi it No. ___ is/is ot ad itted.
12. If the exhibit is admitted into evidence, the attorney
may now solicit testimony on its contents.
Rule 48. Use of Notes
Attorneys may use notes in presenting their cases. Witnesses
are not permitted to use notes while testifying during the trial.
Attorneys may consult with each other at counsel table verbally
or through the use of notes.
Rule 49. Redirect/Recross
Redirect and Recross examinations are permitted, provided
they conform to the restrictions in Rule 611(d) in the Rules of
Evidence.
D. SPECIAL MOCK TRIAL OBJECTIONS
Rule 50. Special Mock Trial Objections
(a) O jections during Openings/Closings: No objections
may be raised during opening statements or during
closing arguments. If a team believes an objection would
ha e ee p ope du i g the opposi g tea ’s ope i g statement or closing argument, one of its attorneys (per
Rule 12(e)) may, following the opening statement or
closing argument, stand to be recognized by the judge
a d a sa , If I had ee pe itted to o je t du i g [opening statement or closing argument], I would have
o je ted to the opposi g tea ’s state e t that ________________. The opposing team is allowed a
response. The presiding judge will not rule on the
o je tio . Presiding and scoring judges will weigh the
o je tio and response (if given) individually.
(b) Scope of Closing Arguments: Closing Arguments must be
based on the actual evidence and testimony presented
during the trial, including rebuttal.
(c) Excessive and/or Intentionally Evasive and/or Non-
Responsive Answers from Witnesses: If a team believes
that an opposing team's witness has engaged in
excessive or intentional evasiveness and/or excessive or
intentional non-responsive answers on cross, solely to
use up a oppo e t’s allotted oss e a i atio ti e, and the attorney handling the cross examination of that
witness has exhausted all methods of attempting to
control that witness, that attorney may, at the end of
that oss e a i atio ake a o je tio to e essi e/i te tio al e asi e ess/ o -responsiveness
on the part of that witness.
If an attor e akes this o k t ial o je tio , he o she may stand at the end of his/her cross examination
and ask to be recognized by the presiding judge saying,
You ho o , I o je t to the e essi e/i te tio al evasiveness/non-responsiveness displayed by Witness X.
I believe his/her sole purpose for using this tactic was to
use up allotted ti e du i g oss e a i atio .
(d) The presiding judge shall allow no response to the
objection from the opposing team. The presiding judge
shall not rule on this objection; however, the presiding
judge may indicate to scoring evaluators that they may
o side the o je tio at thei dis etio he completing their scoresheet (see Rule 27 for point
deductions for rules infractions).
(e) Evaluators may deduct points from any witness or
witnesses and any team whose conduct properly
draws such an objection or reasonably could have
properly drawn such an objection even if no objection is
made. Evaluators may also award additional points to
attorneys or teams that effectively control
witnesses/teams that use such delaying tactics during
93
the oss e a i atio , ega dless of a o je tio under this rule being made.
E. CRITIQUE
Rule 51. The Critique
(a) The judging panel is allowed 10 minutes for debriefing.
The timekeepers will monitor the critique following the
trial. Presiding judges are to limit critique sessions to the
10 minutes total time allotted.
(b) Judges shall not make a ruling on the legal merits of the
trial. Judges may not inform the students of scoresheet
results or the awarding of outstanding attorney or
witness certificates.
III. GEORGIA HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL
COMPETITION RULES OF EVIDENCE
In American trials, complex rules are used to govern the
admission of proof (i.e., oral or physical evidence). These rules
are designed to ensure that all parties receive a fair hearing and
to exclude evidence deemed irrelevant, incompetent,
untrustworthy, unduly prejudicial or otherwise improper. If it
appears that a rule of evidence is being violated, an attorney may
raise an objection to the judge. The judge then decides whether
the rule has been violated and whether the evidence must be
excluded from the record of the trial. In the absence of a properly
made objection, however, the evidence will probably be allowed
by the judge. The burden is on the mock trial team to know the
Georgia High School Mock Trial Competition Rules of Evidence
and to be able to use them to protect their client and fairly limit
the actions of opposing counsel and their witnesses.
For purposes of mock trial competition, the Rules of Evidence
have been modified and simplified. They are based on the Federal
Rules of Evidence, and its numbering system. Where rule
numbers or letters are skipped, those rules were not deemed
applicable to mock trial procedure. Text in italics or underlined
represent simplified or modified language.
Not all judges will interpret the Rules of Evidence (or
procedure) the same way, and mock trial attorneys should be
prepared to point out specific rules (quoting, if necessary) and to
argue persuasively for the interpretation and application of the
rule they think appropriate.
The Mock Trial Rules of Competition, the Rules of Procedure,
and these simplified Rules of Evidence govern the Georgia Mock
Trial Competition.
Article I. General Provisions
Rule 101. Scope
These rules govern proceedings in the Georgia Mock Trial
Competition.
Rule 102. Purpose and Construction
These rules should be construed so as to administer every
proceeding fairly, eliminate unjustifiable expense and delay, and
promote the development of evidence law, to the end of
ascertaining the truth and securing a just determination.
Rule 105. Limited Admissibility
When evidence which is admissible as to one party or for one
purpose, but is not admissible as to the other party or for another
purpose is admitted, the judge, upon request, shall restrict the
evidence to its proper scope and instruct the jury accordingly.
Rule 106. Remainder of or Related Writings or Recorded
Statements
When a writing or recorded statement or part thereof is
introduced by a party, an adverse party may require the
introduction at that time of any other part or any other writing or
recorded statement which ought in fairness to be considered
contemporaneously with it.
Article II. Judicial Notice
Rule 201. Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts
(a) This rule governs judicial notice of an adjudicative fact
only, not a legislative fact.
(b) The court may judicially notice a fact that is not subject
to reasonable dispute because it is a matter of
mathematical or scientific certainty. For example, the
court could take judicial notice that 10 x 10 = 100 or that
there are 5280 feet in a mile.
(c) The court must take judicial notice if a party requests it
and the court is supplied with the necessary information.
(d) The court may take judicial notice at any stage of the
proceeding.
(e) A party is entitled to be heard on the propriety of taking
judicial notice and the nature of the fact to be noticed.
(f) In a civil case, the court must instruct the jury to accept
the noticed fact as conclusive. In a criminal case, the
court must instruct the jury that it may or may not
accept the noticed fact as conclusive.
Article III. Presumptions in Civil Actions and
Proceedings (Not applicable in criminal cases)
Rule 301. Presumptions in General in Civil Actions and
Proceedings
In all i il a tio s a d p o eedi gs…a presumption imposes
on the party against whom it is directed the burden of going
forward with evidence to rebut or meet the presumption, but
does not shift to such party the burden of proof in the sense of
the risk of non-persuasion, which remains throughout the trial
upon the party on whom it was originally cast.
Article IV. Relevancy and its Limits
Rule 401. Test for Relevant Evidence
Evidence is relevant if:
(a) it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable
than it would be without the evidence; and
(b) the fact is of consequence in determining the action.
Rule 402. General Admissibility of Relevant Evidence
Relevant evidence is admissible unless these rules provide
otherwise. Irrelevant evidence is not admissible.
94
Rule 403. Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion,
Waste of Time, or Other Reasons
The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value
is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the
following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the
jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting
cumulative evidence.
Rule 404. Character Evidence; Crimes or Other Acts
(a) Character Evidence.
1. Prohibited Uses. E ide e of a pe so ’s ha a te o character trait is not admissible to prove that on a
particular occasion the person acted in accordance
with the character or trait.
2. Exceptions for a Defendant or Victim in a Criminal
Case. The following exceptions apply in a criminal
case:
a. a defendant may offer evidence of the
defe da t’s pe ti e t t ait, a d if the e ide e is admitted, the prosecutor may offer evidence
to rebut it;
b. a defendant may offer evidence of an alleged
victi ’s pe ti e t t ait, a d if the e ide e is admitted, the prosecutor may:
i. offer evidence to rebut it; and
ii. offe e ide e of the defe da t’s sa e trait; and
c. in a homicide case, the prosecutor may offer
e ide e of the alleged i ti ’s t ait of peacefulness to rebut evidence that the victim
was the first aggressor.
3. Exceptions for a Witness. E ide e of a it ess’s character may be admitted under Rules 607, 608,
and 609.
(b) Crimes, Wrongs, or Other Acts.
1. Prohibited Uses. Evidence of a crime, wrong, or
othe a t is ot ad issi le to p o e a pe so ’s character in order to show that on a particular
occasion the person acted in accordance with the
character.
2. Permitted Uses. This evidence may be admissible for
another purpose, such as proving motive,
opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge,
identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident.
Rule 405. Methods of Proving Character
(a) By Reputation or Opinion. When evide e of a pe so ’s character or character trait is admissible, it may be
p o ed testi o a out the pe so ’s eputatio o testimony in the form of an opinion. On cross-
examination of the character witness, the court may
allow an inquiry into relevant specific instances of the
person’s conduct. (b) By Specific Instances of Conduct. Whe a pe so ’s
character or character trait is an essential element of a
charge, claim, or defense, the character or trait may also
be proved by relevant specific insta es of the pe so ’s conduct.
Rule 406. Habit, Routine Practice
E ide e of a pe so ’s ha it o a o ga izatio ’s outi e practice may be admitted to prove that on a particular occasion
the person or organization acted in accordance with the habit or
routine practice. The court may admit this evidence regardless of
whether it is corroborated or whether there was an eyewitness.
Rule 407. Subsequent Remedial Measures
When measures are taken that would have made an earlier
injury or harm less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent
measures is not admissible to prove:
negligence;
culpable conduct;
a defect in a product or its design; or
a need for a warning or instruction.
But the court may admit this evidence for another purpose,
such as impeachment or — if disputed — proving ownership,
control, or the feasibility of precautionary measures.
Rule 408. Compromise Offers and Negotiations
(a) Prohibited Uses. Evidence of the following is not
admissible — on behalf of any party — either to prove or
disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim or to
impeach by a prior inconsistent statement or a
contradiction:
1. furnishing, promising, or offering — or accepting,
promising to accept, or offering to accept — a
valuable consideration in compromising or
attempting to compromise the claim; and
2. conduct or a statement made during compromise
negotiations about the claim — except when offered
in a criminal case and when the negotiations related
to a claim by a public office in the exercise of its
regulatory, investigative, or enforcement authority.
(b) Exceptions. The court may admit this evidence for
a othe pu pose, su h as p o i g a it ess’s ias o prejudice, negating a contention of undue delay, or
proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or
prosecution.
Rule 409. Offers to Pay Medical And or Similar Expenses (civil
case only)
Evidence of furnishing, promising to pay, or offering to pay
medical, hospital, or similar expenses resulting from an injury is
not admissible to prove liability for the injury.
Rule 410. Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements
(a) Prohibited Uses. In a civil or criminal case, evidence of
the following is not admissible against the defendant
who made the plea or participated in the plea
discussions:
1. a guilty plea that was later withdrawn;
2. a nolo contendere plea;
3. a statement made during a proceeding on either of
those pleas under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure
11 or a comparable state procedure; or
4. a statement made during plea discussions with an
attorney for the prosecuting authority if the
discussions did not result in a guilty plea or they
resulted in a later-withdrawn guilty plea.
(b) Exceptions. The court may admit a statement described
in Rule 410(a)(3) or (4):
1. in any proceeding in which another statement made
during the same plea or plea discussions has been
introduced, if in fairness the statements ought to be
considered together; or
95
2. in a criminal proceeding for perjury or false
statement, if the defendant made the statement
under oath, on the record, and with counsel present.
Rule 411. Liability Insurance (civil case only)
Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability
is not admissible to prove whether the person acted negligently
or otherwise wrongfully. But the court may admit this evidence
for anothe pu pose, su h as p o i g a it ess’s ias o p o i g agency, ownership, or control.
Article V. Privileges
Rule 501. General Rule
There are certain admissions and communications excluded
from evidence on grounds of public policy. Among these are:
1. communications between husband and wife;
2. communications between attorney and client;
3. communications among grand jurors;
4. secrets of state; and
5. communications between psychiatrist and patient.
Article VI. Witnesses
Rule 601. General Rule of Competency
Every person is competent to be a witness.
Rule 602. Need for Personal Knowledge
A witness may testify to a matter only if evidence is
introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has
personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove personal
k o ledge a o sist of the it ess’s o testi o . This ule does ot appl to a it ess’s e pe t testi o u de Rule . (See Rule 2.2)
Rule 603. Oath or Affirmation
Before testifying, every witness shall be required to declare
that the witness will testify truthfully, by oath or affirmation,
ad i iste ed i a fo al ulated to a ake the it ess’ o s ie e a d i p ess the it ess’ i d ith the dut to do so.
[The mock trial oath is provided in the Rules of the Competition at
Rule 12.]
Rule 604. Interpreters
An interpreter is subject to the provisions of these rules
relating to the qualification as an expert and the administration
of an oath or affirmation to make a true translation.
Rule 607. Who May Impeach A Witness
Any party, including the party that called the witness, may
atta k the it ess’s edi ilit .
Rule 608. A Wit ess’s Chara ter For Truthful ess or Untruthfulness
(a) Reputation or Opinion Evidence. A it ess’s edi ilit may be attacked or supported by testimony about the
it ess’s eputatio fo ha i g a ha a te fo truthfulness or untruthfulness, or by testimony in the
form of an opinion about that character. But evidence of
t uthful ha a te is ad issi le o l afte the it ess’s character for truthfulness has been attacked.
(b) Specific Instances of Conduct. Except for a criminal
conviction under Rule 609, extrinsic evidence is not
ad issi le to p o e spe ifi i sta es of a it ess’s o du t i o de to atta k o suppo t the it ess’s
character for truthfulness. But the court may, on cross-
examination, allow them to be inquired into if they are
probative of the character for truthfulness or
untruthfulness of:
1. the witness; or
2. another witness whose character the witness being
cross-examined has testified about.
By testifying on another matter, a witness does not waive any
privilege against self-incrimination for testimony that relates only
to the it ess’s ha a te fo t uthful ess.
Rule 609. Impeachment by Evidence of a Criminal Conviction
(a) In General. The following rules apply to attacking a
it ess’s ha a te fo t uthful ess e ide e of a criminal conviction:
1. for a crime that, in the convicting jurisdiction, was
punishable by death or by imprisonment for more
than one year, the evidence:
a. must be admitted, subject to Rule 403, in a civil
case or in a criminal case in which the witness
is not a defendant; and
b. must be admitted in a criminal case in which
the witness is a defendant, if the probative
value of the evidence outweighs its prejudicial
effect to that defendant; and
2. for any crime regardless of the punishment, the
evidence must be admitted if the court can readily
determine that establishing the elements of the
crime required proving — o the it ess’s ad itti g — a dishonest act or false statement.
(b) Limit on Using the Evidence After 10 Years. This
subdivision (b) applies if more than 10 years have passed
si e the it ess’s o i tio o elease f o confinement for it, whichever is later. Evidence of the
conviction is admissible only if its probative value,
supported by specific facts and circumstances,
substantially outweighs its prejudicial effect.
(c) Effect of a Pardon, Annulment, or Certificate of
Rehabilitation. Evidence of a conviction is not admissible
if:
1. the conviction has been the subject of a pardon,
annulment, certificate of rehabilitation, or other
equivalent procedure based on a finding that the
person has been rehabilitated, and the person has
not been convicted of a later crime punishable by
death or by imprisonment for more than one year; or
2. the conviction has been the subject of a pardon,
annulment, or other equivalent procedure based on
a finding of innocence.
(d) Juvenile Adjudications. Evidence of a juvenile
adjudication is admissible under this rule only if:
1. it is offered in a criminal case;
2. the adjudication was of a witness other than the
defendant;
3. a adult’s o i tio fo that offe se ould e ad issi le to atta k the adult’s edi ilit ; a d
4. admitting the evidence is necessary to fairly
determine guilt or innocence.
(e) Pendency of an Appeal. A conviction that satisfies this
rule is admissible even if an appeal is pending. Evidence
of the pendency is also admissible.
96
Rule 610. Religious Beliefs or Opinions
E ide e of a it ess’s eligious eliefs o opi io s is ot admissible to attack or suppo t the it ess’s edi ilit .
Rule 611. Mode and Order of Interrogation and Presentation
(a) Control by the Court; Purposes. The court should
exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of
examining witnesses and presenting evidence so as to:
1. make those procedures effective for determining the
truth;
2. avoid wasting time; and
3. protect witnesses from harassment or undue
embarrassment.
(b) Scope of cross examination. The scope of the cross
examination shall not be limited to the scope of the
direct examination, but may inquire into any relevant
fa ts o atte s o tai ed i the it ess’ state e t, including all reasonable inferences that can be drawn
from those facts and matters, and may inquire into any
omissions from the witness statement that are otherwise
material and admissible.
(c) Leading Questions. Leading questions should not be
used on direct examination of a witness (except as may
e e essa to de elop the it ess’ testi o . Ordinarily, leading questions are permitted on cross
examination. When a party calls a hostile witness, an
adverse party, or a witness identified with an adverse
party, leading questions may be used. A hostile witness
may only be called pursuant to Rule 12(f).
(d) Redirect/Re-cross. After cross examination, additional
questions may be asked by the direct examining
attorney, but questions must be limited to matters
raised by the attorney on cross examination. Likewise,
additional questions may be asked by the cross
examining attorney or re-cross, but such questions must
be limited to matters raised on redirect examination and
should avoid repetition.
(e) Permitted Motions. The only motion permissible is one
requesting the judge to strike testimony following a
successful objection to its admission.
Rule 612. Writing Used to Refresh a Witness’s Me or
If a written statement is used to refresh the memory of a
witness either while testifying or before testifying, the Court shall
determine that the adverse party is entitled to have the writing
produced for inspection. The adverse party may cross examine
the witness on the material and introduce into evidence those
portions which relate to the testimony of the witness.
Rule 613. Wit ess’s Prior State e t
(a) Showing or Disclosing the Statement During
Examination. When examining a witness about the
wit ess’s p io state e t, a pa t eed ot sho it o disclose its contents to the witness. But the party must,
on request, show it or disclose its contents to an adverse
pa t ’s atto e . (b) Extrinsic Evidence of a Prior Inconsistent Statement.
Extrinsic evide e of a it ess’s p io i o siste t statement is admissible only if the witness is given an
opportunity to explain or deny the statement and an
adverse party is given an opportunity to examine the
witness about it, or if justice so requires. This subdivision
does ot appl to a opposi g pa t ’s state e t under Rule 801(d)(2).
Article VII. Opinions and Expert Testimony
Rule 701. Opinion Testimony by Lay Witness
If a witness is not testifying as an expert, testimony in the
form of an opinion is limited to one that is:
(a) atio all ased o the it ess’s pe eptio ; (b) helpful to lea l u de sta di g the it ess’s testi o
or to determining a fact in issue; and
(c) not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized
knowledge within the scope of Rule 702.
Rule 702. Testimony by Experts
If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will
assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine
a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge,
skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the
form of an opinion or otherwise.
Rule 703. Bases of a E pert’s Opi io Testi o
An expert may base an opinion on facts or data in the case
that the expert has been made aware of or personally observed.
If experts in the particular field would reasonably rely on those
kinds of facts or data in forming an opinion on the subject, they
need not be admissible for the opinion to be admitted. But if the
facts or data would otherwise be inadmissible, the proponent of
the opinion may disclose them to the jury only if their probative
value in helping the jury evaluate the opinion substantially
outweighs their prejudicial effect.
Rule 704. Opinion on Ultimate Issue
(a) In General — Not Automatically Objectionable. An
opinion is not objectionable just because it embraces an
ultimate issue.
(b) Exception. In a criminal case, an expert witness must not
state an opinion about whether the defendant did or did
not have a mental state or condition that constitutes an
element of the crime charged or of a defense. Those
matters are for the trier of fact alone.
Rule 705. Dis losi g the Fa ts or Data U derl i g A E pert’s Opinion
Unless the court orders otherwise, an expert may state an
opinion — and give the reasons for it — without first testifying to
the underlying facts or data. But the expert may be required to
disclose those facts or data on cross-examination.
Article VIII. Hearsay
Rule 801. Definitions
The following definitions apply under this article:
(a) Statement. “tate e t ea s a pe so ’s o al asse tio , written assertion, or nonverbal conduct, if the person
intended it as an assertion.
(b) Declarant. De la a t ea s the pe so ho ade the statement.
(c) Hearsay. Hea sa ea s a state e t that: 1. the declarant does not make while testifying at the
current trial or hearing; and
2. a party offers in evidence to prove the truth of the
matter asserted in the statement.
(d) Statements That Are Not Hearsay. A statement that
meets the following conditions is not hearsay:
1. A Declarant-Wit ess’s Prior State e t. The
declarant testifies and is subject to cross-97
examination about a prior statement, and the
statement:
a. is inconsistent ith the de la a t’s testi o and was given under penalty of perjury at a
trial, hearing, or other proceeding or in a
deposition;
b. is o siste t ith the de la a t’s testi o and is offered to rebut an express or implied
charge that the declarant recently fabricated it
or acted from a recent improper influence or
motive in so testifying; or
c. identifies a person as someone the declarant
perceived earlier.
2. A Opposi g Part ’s State e t. The statement is
offered against an opposing party and:
a. was made by the party in an individual or
representative capacity;
b. is one the party manifested that it adopted or
believed to be true;
c. was made by a person whom the party
authorized to make a statement on the
subject;
d. was ade the pa t ’s age t o e plo ee o a matter within the scope of that relationship
and while it existed; or
e. as ade the pa t ’s o o spi ato du i g
and in furtherance of the conspiracy.
The statement must be considered but does not by itself
esta lish the de la a t’s autho it u de C ; the e iste e o scope of the relationship under (D); or the existence of the
conspiracy or participation in it under (E).
Rule 802. Hearsay Rule
Hearsay is not admissible except as provided by these Rules.
Rule 803. Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay – Regardless
of Whether the Declarant is Available as a Witness
The following are not excluded by the hearsay rule, regardless
of whether the declarant is available as a witness:
1. Present Sense Impression. A statement describing or
explaining an event or condition, made while or
immediately after the declarant perceived it.
2. Excited Utterance. A statement relating to a startling
event or condition, made while the declarant was
under the stress of excitement that it caused.
3. Then-Existing Mental, Emotional, or Physical
Condition. A state e t of the de la a t’s the -
existing state of mind (such as motive, intent, or
plan) or emotional, sensory, or physical condition
(such as mental feeling, pain, or bodily health), but
not including a statement of memory or belief to
prove the fact remembered or believed unless it
elates to the alidit o te s of the de la a t’s ill. 4. Statement Made for Medical Diagnosis or
Treatment. A statement that:
a. is made for — and is reasonably pertinent to —
medical diagnosis or treatment; and
b. describes medical history; past or present
symptoms or sensations; their inception; or
their general cause.
5. Recorded Recollection. A record that:
a. is on a matter the witness once knew about
but now cannot recall well enough to testify
fully and accurately;
b. was made or adopted by the witness when the
atte as f esh i the it ess’s e o ; a d
c. accurately refle ts the it ess’s k o ledge. If admitted, the record may be read into evidence
but may be received as an exhibit only if offered by
an adverse party. 6. Records of a Regularly Conducted Activity. A record
of an act, event, condition, opinion, or diagnosis if:
a. the record was made at or near the time by —
or from information transmitted by —
someone with knowledge;
b. the record was kept in the course of a regularly
conducted activity of a business, organization,
occupation, or calling, whether or not for
profit;
c. making the record was a regular practice of
that activity;
d. all these conditions are shown by the
testimony of the custodian or another qualified
witness, or by a certification that complies with
Rule 902(11) or (12) or with a statute
permitting certification; and
e. the opponent does not show that the source of
information nor the method or circumstances
of preparation indicate a lack of
trustworthiness.
7. Absence of a Record of a Regularly Conducted
Activity. Evidence that a matter is not included in a
record described in paragraph (6) if:
a. the evidence is admitted to prove that the
matter did not occur or exist;
b. a record was regularly kept for a matter of that
kind; and
c. the opponent does not show that the possible
source of the information nor other
circumstances indicate a lack of
trustworthiness.
8. Public Records. A record or statement of a public
office if:
a. it sets out:
i. the offi e’s a ti ities; ii. a matter observed while under a legal duty
to report, but not including, in a criminal
case, a matter observed by law-
enforcement personnel; or
iii. in a civil case or against the government in
a criminal case, factual findings from a
legally authorized investigation; and
b. the opponent does not show that the source of
information nor other circumstances indicate a
lack of trustworthiness.
10. Absence of a Public Record. Testimony that a diligent
search failed to disclose a public record or statement
if the testimony or certification is admitted to prove
that:
a. the record or statement does not exist; or
b. a matter did not occur or exist, if a public office
regularly kept a record or statement for a
matter of that kind.
16. Statements in Ancient Documents. A statement in a
document that is at least 20 years old and whose
authenticity is established.
18. Statements in Learned Treatises, Periodicals, or
Pamphlets. A statement contained in a treatise,
periodical, or pamphlet if:
98
a. the statement is called to the attention of an
expert witness on cross-examination or relied
on by the expert on direct examination; and
b. the publication is established as a reliable
autho it the e pe t’s ad issio o testi o , a othe e pe t’s testi o , o by judicial notice.
If admitted, the statement may be read into
evidence but not received as an exhibit.
21. Reputation Concerning Character. A reputation
a o g a pe so ’s asso iates o i the o u it o e i g the pe so ’s ha a te .
22. Judgment of a Previous Conviction. Evidence of a
final judgment of conviction if:
a. the judgment was entered after a trial or guilty
plea, but not a nolo contendere plea;
b. the conviction was for a crime punishable by
death or by imprisonment for more than a
year;
c. the evidence is admitted to prove any fact
essential to the judgment; and
d. when offered by the prosecutor in a criminal
case for a purpose other than impeachment,
the judgment was against the defendant.
The pendency of an appeal may be shown but does
not affect admissibility.
Rule 804. Hearsay Exceptions; Declarant Unavailable
(a) Criteria for Being Unavailable. A declarant is considered
to be unavailable as a witness if the declarant:
1. is exempted from testifying about the subject matter
of the de la a t’s state e t e ause the ou t ules that a privilege applies;
2. refuses to testify about the subject matter despite a
court order to do so;
3. testifies to not remembering the subject matter;
4. cannot be present or testify at the trial or hearing
because of death or a then-existing infirmity, physical
illness, or mental illness; or
5. is absent from the trial or hearing and the
state e t’s p opo e t has ot ee a le, process
or other reasonable means, to procure:
a. the de la a t’s atte da e, i the ase of a hearsay exception under Rule 804(b)(1) or (6);
or
b. the de la a t’s attendance or testimony, in the
case of a hearsay exception under Rule
804(b)(2), (3), or (4).
But this subdivision (a) does not apply if the
state e t’s p opo e t p o u ed o o gfull aused the de la a t’s u a aila ilit as a it ess i
order to prevent the declarant from attending or
testifying.
(b) The Exceptions. The following are not excluded by the
rule against hearsay if the declarant is unavailable as a
witness:
1. Former Testimony. Testimony that:
a. was given as a witness at a trial, hearing, or
lawful deposition, whether given during the
current proceeding or a different one; and
b. is now offered against a party who had — or, in
a civil case, whose predecessor in interest had
— an opportunity and similar motive to
develop it by direct, cross-, or redirect
examination.
2. Statement Under the Belief of Imminent Death. In a
prosecution for homicide or in a civil case, a
statement that the declarant, while believing the
de la a t’s death to e i i e t, ade a out its cause or circumstances.
3. Statement Against Interest. A statement that:
a. a easo a le pe so i the de la a t’s positio would have made only if the person believed it
to be true because, when made, it was so
o t a to the de la a t’s p op ieta o pecuniary interest or had so great a tendency
to i alidate the de la a t’s laim against
someone else or to expose the declarant to
civil or criminal liability; and
b. is supported by corroborating circumstances
that clearly indicate its trustworthiness, if it is
offered in a criminal case as one that tends to
expose the declarant to criminal liability.
4. Statement of Personal or Family History. A
statement about:
a. the de la a t’s o i th, adoptio , legiti a , ancestry, marriage, divorce, relationship by
blood, adoption, or marriage, or similar facts of
personal or family history, even though the
declarant had no way of acquiring personal
knowledge about that fact; or
b. another person concerning any of these facts,
as well as death, if the declarant was related to
the person by blood, adoption, or marriage or
was so intimately associated ith the pe so ’s fa il that the de la a t’s i fo atio is likel to be accurate.
5. Not Applicable.
6. Statement Offered Against a Party That Wrongfully
Caused the De lara t’s U availa ilit . A statement
offered against a party that wrongfully caused — or
acquiesced in wrongfully causing — the de la a t’s unavailability as a witness, and did so intending that
result. For the purposes of the mock trial competition,
required notice will be deemed to have been given.
The failure to give notice as required by these rules
will not be recognized as an appropriate objection.
Rule 805. Hearsay within Hearsay
Hearsay included within hearsay is not excluded by the rule
against hearsay if each part of the combined statements
conforms with an exception to the rule.
Rule 806. Attacking and Supporting Credibility
When a hearsay statement has been admitted, the credibility
of the declarant may be attacked and supported by any evidence,
which would be admissible for those purposes if declarant had
testified as a witness. Evidence of a statement or conduct by the
de la a t, i o siste t ith the de la a t’s hea sa state e t, is not subject to any requirement that the declarant may have been
afforded an opportunity to deny or explain. If the party against
whom a hearsay statement has been admitted calls the declarant
as a witness, the party is entitled to examine the declarant on the
statement as if under cross examination.
99
ARTICLE X. Contents of Writing, Recordings, and
Photographs
Rule 1002. Requirement of Original
To prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph,
the original writing, recording, or photograph is required ...
Copies of any case materials are considered as originals.
ARTICLE XI. Miscellaneous Rules
Rule 1103. Title
These rules may be known and cited as the Georgia High
School Mock Trial Competition Rules of Evidence.
100
INSTRUCTIONS FOR TIMEKEEPERS Under the Rules of The Georgia High School Mock Trial Competition, all timekeepers are expected to
follow these instructions when keeping time during a competition round.
Thank you for your diligence in this matter.
Before Competition Day 1. Timekeepers play an essential role during a mock trial competition round. At least two reliable
students should be recruited to fill these critical positions on the mock trial team.
2. The role of timekeeper is a required role in a competition round. Trial coordinators do not provide
additional volunteer personnel to act as timekeepers. (see 15(d))
3. NOTE: If a team does not provide their own student timekeepers, that team must submit to the
ti e kept y their oppo e t’s ti ekeeper i the trial rou d. (see Rule 7(h
4. NOTE: If a situation arises where both squads in a given trial round do not provide their own
student timekeepers, the trial coordinator will require coaches from those teams to act as
timekeepers during that trial round. (see Rule 7 (h))
5. Rule 14 defines the time blocks allocated to each portion of the trial. Rule 15 describes the duties of
a timekeeper. Timekeepers must review the rules for timekeeping and these instructions thoroughly
before competition day.
6. Timekeepers must understand how to recognize each part of the trial before competition date. If
there are any questions during a trial about whether or not time has stopped, politely ask the
presiding judge for clarification.
7. It is suggested that to keep tra k of hi h stop at h is for hi h side, la el the stop at hes P a d D a d keep the P stop at h o your left a d the D stopwatch on your right.
8. Time will not be counted for: objections, extensive questioning from the presiding judge or
administration of the oath. Time DOES NOT stop for the introduction of evidence (see Rule 15(c)).
9. Practice timekeeping duties during team rehearsals before competition day.
10. Make copies of the time cards on yellow paper or card stock using the time card template found in
the Coaches Manual. Time intervals may not be altered.
Before the Trial Round 1. On competition day, be sure each timekeeper has
a. At least one time sheet for each round of the competition (including the final round)
b. Two stopwatches per side (4 total per team)—NOTE: Some cell phones include a stopwatch
function, but it is strongly preferred, because of issues related to team communication
inside the bar & the use of electronic equipment by competing team members during a
competition round (see Rule 21), that timekeepers use traditional stopwatches for this task
unless an unexpected battery or similar emergency related to a stopwatch arises on site and
on competition day.
c. O e set of Ti e Re ai i g ards pri ted o yello paper or ard sto k
d. O e Ti e Card Use sheet
e. Two pencils
2. Enter the round number and team codes in the appropriate space on the time sheet.
3. In the Attorney Task boxes on the Time Sheet, indicate team attorneys presenting each task of the
trial y re ordi g a, , or i the spa e elo the task u er— a ould sig ify the first attor ey, the se o d, a d the third.
4. Enter the courtroom and take your position at the end of the jury box, away from any judging panel
member. Arrange stopwatches, time cards and Time Card Use sheet.
101
5. Rise when the judge and jury enter the courtroom and then be seated when the presiding judge
grants permission.
During the Trial Round 1. Timekeepers for both squads in a competition round will work together as a neutral ti ekeepi g
tea to i sure that ti e is kept a urately a d fairly for oth sides i the rou d. 2. For each task in a trial round, time starts when each attorney starts to speak. (i.e. when the attorney
actually speaks the first word of his/her opening, closing or examination question—examples
i lude ut are ot li ited to, May It Please the Court… , or Your Ho or, ladies/ge tle e of the jury… (for ope i gs/ losi g or Please state your a e for the ourt… (for e a i atio questions)—NOT he a attor ey respo ds to a presidi g judge’s i uiry as to hether that side is ready to proceed, asks for permission to reserve time for a rebuttal, asks for permission to
use/move a podium, or to swear a witness, etc.).
2. Time stops when the attorney makes the last statement on completion of a given task.
3. Occasions when time is not counted:
a. From time witness is called until s/he finishes taking the stand (including the administration
of the oath)
b. From time an objection is raised until the attorney resumes the task/examination that the
objection interrupted
c. During the time a judge may raise questions to a team, the panel or the trial coordinator
4. NOTE: Time stops for OBJECTIONS. Timekeepers will stop time he a attor ey says, O je tio , Your Ho or… . Ti ekeepers ill re-start time, after the presidi g judge’s ruli g, he the stude t attorney says the first word to continue the interrupted task/examination.
5. Time DOES NOT STOP for the introduction of evidence.
6. Reset a stopwatch to zero only at the following times:
a. At the egi i g of ea h side’s opening statement
b. At the egi i g of ea h side’s direct examination time block
c. At the egi i g of ea h side’s cross examination time block
d. At the egi i g of ea h side’s closing argument
7. Do NOT reset a stopwatch to zero at any other time.
a. Do not reset stopwatch to zero at the end of a direct or cross examination of a particular
witness, since the timekeeper may need to resume direct examination timing for redirect
questioning, and cross examination timing for re-cross questioning.
b. Do ot reset stop at h to zero at the e d of the P’s losi g argu e t, si e the ti ekeeper ay eed to resu e the P’s losi g argu e t timing IF the P side gives a portion of their
closing before the D side and then must make a rebuttal after the D side has concluded their
closing argument.
8. Timekeepers should display time cards simultaneously throughout the round and the cards must be
displayed to both squads (attorneys and witnesses) and the presiding judge only at the intervals set
out in the Time Card Use table. The STOP card must be displayed to both teams, the presiding judge
and to the scoring judges, as well.
9. Timekeepers may not display any additional increments of time (not outlined on the time card use
ta le to their o tea i depe de tly of the opposi g tea ’s ti ekeeper at a y ti e duri g the trial.
102
Discrepancies in Time Between Team Timekeepers During a Trial Round 1. If timing variations of 15 seconds or more occur at the completion of any task of the trial, the
timekeepers are to notify the presiding judge that a time discrepancy has occurred. (see Rule 15(e))
2. Timekeepers may raise time discrepancies of more than 15 seconds at the end of each task during
the trial presentation (i.e. at the end of each opening, at the end each witness examination, at the
end of each cross examination and at the end of each closing argument).
3. To do this, one timekeeper will politely gain the presidi g judge’s atte tio a d state: Your ho or, u der Rule 15(e , there is a ti e dis repa y of ore tha 15 se o ds.
4. The presiding judge will likely ask for an explanation of the discrepancy and will then rule on the time
discrepancy before the trial continues. The presiding judge has the option to rule on the discrepancy
without any explanation of why it occurred.
5. Timekeepers will synchronize their stopwatches to match the ruling of the presiding judge. (i.e. if the
P tea ’s stop at h i di ates that the P team has 2 minutes left in the direct examination block and
the D tea ’s stop at h i di ates that ti e has e pired for the P tea i the dire t e a i atio block, the presiding judge MIGHT decide to split the difference in the timing variation and give the P
team 1 minute to conclude the direct examination. The D timekeeper would adjust timing to allow
for the 1-minute decision.)
6. Any discrepancy between timekeepers of less than 15 seconds will not be considered a violation.
7. No time disputes will be entertained after the trial concludes.
8. The decisions of the presiding judge regarding the resolution of timing disputes are final.
Things to Remember During a Trial Round 1. The presiding judge has sole discretion to grant time extensions.
2. If time has expired and an attorney continues without permission from the Court, the timekeepers
should indicate so on the timesheet and should continue holding the STOP card until the overage is
acknowledged and dealt with by the presiding judge. (see Rule 15(d))
3. The time sequence listed gives the maximum time limits per trial segment (see Rule 14). Time not
used in one segment may not be applied to any other segment of the trial.
Concluding a Trial Round 1. After the round concludes, add up the time used for each side and sign the time sheet.
2. Politely o tai the presidi g judge’s atte tio a d tur i the ti e sheet efore the presidi g judge retires to the scoring room. No matter the confusion, timekeepers must deliver their time sheets to
the presiding judge immediately after the trial round has concluded.
3. If a i side the ar dispute is raised at the o lusio of the trial rou d, a presidi g judge ay request that timekeepers time portions of the dispute procedure.
4. Reset the stopwatch to zero in order to time the debriefing session.
5. Politely remind the presiding judge that both timekeepers will be timing the debriefing and that a
maximum of 10 minutes is allotted to that portion of the round.
6. Signal the presiding judge with the STOP card when the 10 minutes for debriefing has elapsed.
7. When the debriefing session has ended and the presiding judge has released both teams,
timekeepers should help the teams straighten up the courtroom for the next round.
103
TIME CARD USE CHART Georgia Mock Trial Competition
For Direct Examination (25 minutes total)
When your stopwatch says Hold up the timecard that says
5:00 20:00
10:00 15:00
15:00 10:00
20:00 5:00
21:00 4:00
22:00 3:00
23:00 2:00
24:00 1:00
24:20 0:40
24:40 0:20
24:45 0:15
24:50 0:10
24:55 0:05
25:00 STOP
For Cross Examination (20 minutes total)
When your stopwatch says Hold up the timecard that says
5:00 15:00
10:00 10:00
15:00 5:00
16:00 4:00
17:00 3:00
18:00 2:00
19:00 1:00
19:20 0:40
19:40 0:20
19:45 0:15
19:50 0:10
19:55 0:05
20:00 STOP
104
For Opening Statements & Closing Arguments (5 minutes each)
When your stopwatch says Hold up the timecard that says
1:00 4:00
2:00 3:00
3:00 2:00
4:00 1:00
4:20 0:40
4:40 0:20
4:45 0:15
4:50 0:10
4:55 0:05
5:00 STOP
The time sheet and the timecard templates can be found under the
FORMS LINK in the secure Team Information section of the website.
Timecards must be printed on yellow paper or card stock.
105
Explanation of the Performance Ratings
Used on the Mock Trial Ballot Individual participants will be rated on a scale of 1-10 speaker points, according to their role(s) in the trial. The
scoring evaluator is scoring INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE in each speaker category and TEAM PERFORMANCE in the
Team Points and Total Points boxes. The scoring evaluator is NOT scoring the legal merits of the case.
Scoring evaluators are strongly encouraged to exercise their OPTION of recognizing outstanding individual
performance by honoring one OUTSTANDING ATTORNEY and one OUTSTANDING WITNESS per competition round.
This would be a joint decision of the majority of the judging panel, including all scoring evaluators and the presiding
judge. The appropriate certificates should be completed and signed by the judging panel and returned to the trial
coordinator for distribution during the awards ceremony.
Scoring evaluators may individually consider penalties for violation(s) of the Rules of the Competition or the Code of
Ethical Conduct. Penalties would reduce point awards in the appropriate performance categories below. Penalties
will not be indicated separately on the ballot. Please see Rule 27 for the treatment of rule infractions.
POINT(S) PERFORMANCE CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING STUDENT PERFORMANCE
1 – 2 Not Effective Unsure of self, illogical, uninformed, not prepared, speaks incoherently, definitely
ineffective in communication
3 – 4 Fair Minimally informed and prepared. Performance is passable, but lacks depth in terms
of knowledge of task and materials. Communication lacks clarity and conviction.
5 – 6 Good Good, solid, but less than spectacular performance. Can perform outside the script
but with less confidence than when using script. Logic and organization are
adequate, but not outstanding. Grasps major aspects of the case, but does not
convey mastery of it. Communications are clear and understandable, but could be
stronger in fluency and persuasiveness.
7 – 8 Excellent Fluent, persuasive, clear and understandable. Organizes materials and thoughts well
and exhibits mastery of the case and materials.
9 – 10 Outstanding Superior qualities listed for 7-8 points performance. Additionally, thinks well on feet,
is logical, keeps poise under duress. Can sort essential from nonessential and use
time effectively to accomplish major objectives. Demonstrates the unique ability to
utilize all resources to emphasize vital points of the trial.
On a scale of 1-10 (with 10 being the highest), rate the performance of the town teams in the categories on the
ballot. Each category is to be evaluated separately. DO NOT GIVE FRACTIONAL POINTS. After scoring speaker
points for individuals, award 1-10 points to each team as the team award. Each scoring evaluator should consider
5 as the a erage tea a ard, ith redu tio s ade for tea pe alties a d additio s for outsta di g tea performance. Please see Rule 27 for the treatment of rule infractions.
Teams MAY NOT receive the same team point award, and the final total must not be the same for each team. Ties
are NOT ALLOWED in the Team Points or Final Total boxes. The team with the largest number of total points on the
s oresheet i s the judge’s allot. The tea ith the largest u er of allots per ourtroo i s the courtroom.
Scoring evaluators are reminded to total all scores and sign the ballot.
106
107
Contact the Mock Trial Office for More Information
Michael Nixon, State Coordinator404-527-8779 or toll-free800-334-6865 (ext.779)
Sponsored by the Young Lawyers Division of the State Bar of Georgia, the Georgia Bar
Foundation, the Council of State Court Judges and the Georgia Civil Justice Foundation
