Team Manual and

Case Materials for the

2019 Mock Trial Season

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 mocktrial@gabar.org

Facebook: GeorgiaMockTrial Twitter: GA_MockTrial

Michael Nixon, Director/State Mock Trial Coordinator

2019 Mock Trial Team Manual TABLE OF CONTENTS

ADA Compliance & Deadline Reminders ............................................................................................................. 3 Honor Roll of Georgia Champions ........................................................................................................................ 4 Prior Georgia Mock Trial Cases ............................................................................................................................ 5 Supporters of the GHSMT Competition ............................................................................................................... 6 YLD High School Mock Trial Committee ............................................................................................................... 7 Competition Rationale and Goals ........................................................................................................................ 9

The 2019 Case Materials 2019 Case Credits.......................................................................................................................................................... 10 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 11 Stipulations ................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Witness Summary ......................................................................................................................................................... 12 Exhibit Summary ........................................................................................................................................................... 13 Complaint ...................................................................................................................................................................... 14 Answer .......................................................................................................................................................................... 16 Witness Statements ...................................................................................................................................................... 18 Exhibits .......................................................................................................................................................................... 49 Charge of the Court....................................................................................................................................................... 56

The 2019 Rules I. Rules of the Competition

A. The Problem ..................................................................................................................................................... 61 B. The Trial ........................................................................................................................................................... 62 C. Judging ............................................................................................................................................................. 69 D. Dispute Settlement .......................................................................................................................................... 72

II. Rules of Procedure A. Before the Trial ................................................................................................................................................ 73 B. Beginning the Trial ........................................................................................................................................... 74 C. Presenting Evidence .......................................................................................................................................... 74 D. Special Mock Trial Objections ........................................................................................................................... 74 E. Critique .............................................................................................................................................................. 75

III. Georgia High School Mock Trial Competition Rules of Evidence I. General Provisions ............................................................................................................................................. 75 II. Judicial Notice ................................................................................................................................................... 75 III. Presumptions in Civil Actions and Proceedings ............................................................................................... 76 IV. Relevancy and Its Limits ................................................................................................................................... 76 V. Privileges ........................................................................................................................................................... 77 VI. Witnesses ......................................................................................................................................................... 77 VII. Opinions and Expert Testimony ...................................................................................................................... 78 VIII. Hearsay ........................................................................................................................................................... 79 X. Contents of Writing, Recordings, and Photographs .......................................................................................... 81 XI. Miscellaneous Rules ......................................................................................................................................... 81

Competition Information Timekeeper Instructions & Time Card Use Chart.......................................................................................................... 82 Explanation of the Performance Ratings Used on the Mock Trial Ballot ...................................................................... 87

All manuals, competition forms, and timekeeper information may be found behind the password protected portion of the TEAM INFO page of the Mock

Trial website (www.georgiamocktrial.org).

Copyright © 2018 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.

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 mocktrial@gabar.org 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 16, 2019 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 Info 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 1, 2019 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, 2019 All attorney coaches wishing to receive CLE credit for coaching during the 2018 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, 2019 Information about nominating a coach for an Outstanding Coach award may be found on the Mock Trial website on the Team Information page.

3

Honor Roll of Georgia’s State 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)

2016 – Jonesboro High School, Jonesboro ................................................................... Boise, ID (17th place)

2017 – Henry W. Grady High School, Atlanta .......................................................... Hartford, CT (3rd place)

2018 – Jonesboro High School, Jonesboro .................................................................... Reno, NV (4th place)

*From 1983 until 1990, only the placement of the top four teams was announced during the national level of competition.

4

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 – Georgia v. Pyke .................................................................................................................... Homicide

2015 – Stuart v. Garfunkel Property Group ........................................ Negligent Hiring/Negligent Retention

2016 – Georgia v. Talbot Berrien ....................................................................................................... Burglary

2017 – Cobb v. Bryson ................................................................................................................ Tort/Battery

2018 – Georgia v. Dewitt ............................................................................................................ Tort/Battery

5

Supporters of the Georgia High School Mock Trial Competition

From July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018 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

State Bar of Georgia Young Lawyers Division of the State Bar of Georgia

Clayton County School District

Patrons

Hon. John C. Carbo

Southern Pearl Crescent Foundation

Sponsors

Bell Management Consultants

Arletta Bender

Debra Deberry

Angela Floyd

Georgia Trial Lawyers Association

Mike Jacobs

Courtney Johnson

Bruce R. Millar

Kimberly Newsome

Nora Polk

Bethany Rezek

Hon. Margaret Rezek

Matthew Simmons

Mildred Sharkey

Kiesha Storey

Friends

LaJuan Bradley

Clayton County Retired Educators, Jonesboro

Susan Croft

Kenneth Ernstes

Faye Evans

Dover Lemon

Barbara Lewis

Shondeana Morris

Felicia Perry

In-Kind Donors

Chick-fil-A Dwarf House, Joe Wilburn, Jonesboro

Cobb County Bar Association, Younger Lawyers Section, Marietta

Western Circuit Bar Association

Zaxby’s, Athens

6

THE 2018-2019 HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL COMMITTEE Hon. Rizza O’Connor, YLD President

Will Davis, YLD President-Elect

Amanda Seals Bersinger, HSMTC Chair Stephen Pruitt, HSMTC 1st Vice Chair

Norman Barnett, 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

Ken Hodges President of the State Bar of Georgia

Darrell Sutton State Bar of Georgia President-Elect

Buck Rogers State Bar of Georgia Immediate Past President

Nicole Leet Young Lawyers Division Immediate Past 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)

Sara A. “Sally” Evans (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) E. Righton Johnson (2015-16)

Adam Hebbard (2016-17) Peyton Bell (2017-18)

7

THE 2018-2019 HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TR IAL SUBCOMMITTEES

Regional Coordinators

Hon. Eric Brewton Craig Call

Kim Colmey Kevin Epps

Chris Flowers Nicole Golden Adam Hebbard

Christina Jenkins Chaundra Lewis

Alan Lightcap Nathan Lock

Adrienne Nash William Noland

Mercedes Ordonez Robert Thomas Byron Watson

Sandy Wisenbaker

Subcommittee on the Problem

Hon. Michael Barker, Chair Jon Setzer, Vice Chair

Christy Barker Peyton Bell

Amanda Seals Bersinger Sherri Marie Carr

Hon. Melodie Clayton Julie Culhane

Will Davis Kevin Epps

Lee Ann Feeley Adam Hebbard

Beth Jones Hon. Jennifer Mann

Stephen Pruitt John Raterree Bonnie Smith Katie Wood

Subcommittee on Development

(Fundraising) Amanda Seals Bersinger, Chair

Sally Evans Adam Hebbard Betsy Hodges

E. Righton Lewis Aimee Maxwell

Subcommittee on the Rules

Kevin Epps, Chair Christy Barker

Norman Barnett Amanda Seals Bersinger

Julie Culhane Will Davis

Deshala Dixon Sally Evans

Lee Ann Feeley Adam Hebbard William Noland Ashley Palmer Stpehen Pruitt

Jon Setzer Bonnie Smith Robert Smith

Suzanne Smith

Non-Voting Coach Representatives to the Rules Subcommittee:

Carl Gebo Ken Mauldin

State Finals Planning Board

Hon. Stephen Louis A. Dillard, Special Consultant Christy Barker

Norman Barnett Peyton Bell

Amanda Bersinger Sherri Marie Carr

Will Davis Deshala Dixon

Kevin Epps Lee Ann Feeley Adam Hebbard Catherine Hicks E. Righton Lewis

Judge Jennifer Mann William Noland Ashley Palmer Stephen Pruitt

Emily Richardson Bonnie Smith

Suzanne Smith Jon Setzer

Elizabeth Thomas Breana Ware Katie Wood

Subcommittee on Honors and Awards

Jon Setzer, Chair Amanda Seals Bersinger

Adam Hebbard Betsy Hodges

Special Projects Task Force

Aimee Maxwell, Chair Julie Culhane Rhonda Klein

2018 Law Academy Faculty & Staff

Norman Barnett Hon. John Carbo Sherri Marie Carr

Mike Dunham Kevin Epps Ben Felder

Adam Hebbard Barry Stewart Mann

Michael Nixon Megan Pearson

Jon Setzer Bonnie Smith

Harsha Sridhar Breana Ware

Craig Harding Memorial Court Artist Contest

Julie Culhane, Contest Director

8

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 rewards of competing against one’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!

9

The 2019 Mock Trial Case authored by the

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE PROBLEM | YLD HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL COMMITTEE STATE BAR OF GEORGIA

IN THE STATE COURT OF MILTON COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA

JACK/JACKIE HUTCHINSON, ) ) v. ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO: 2019-MT LANE SHUTZE, ) ) 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:

Hon. Michael H. Barker, Magistrate Court of Chatham County, Savannah

John Ratterree, II, Esq., Atlanta Christy Barker, Esq., Chatham County District Attorney’s

Office, Savannah Sherri Marie Carr, Esq., Seneca, SC Hon. Melodie Clayton, Ret., Marietta Julie Culhane, Esq., Allstate Dealer Services,

Jacksonville, FL Will Davis, Esq., Naggiar & Sarif, LLC, Atlanta Lee Ann Feeley, Esq., DeKalb Public Defender’s Office,

Decatur

Adam Hebbard, Esq., Athens C. Elizabeth “Beth” Jones, Esq., Marietta Hon. Jennifer B. Mann, Magistrate Court of Gwinnett

County, Lawrenceville Jon Setzer, Esq., Gwinnett County District Attorney’s

Office, Lawrenceville Bonnie Smith, Esq., Fulton County District Attorney’s

Office, Atlanta Katie Wood, Esq., Atlanta Michael Nixon, Woodstock

10

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.

Since the 2001 season, the Georgia Mock Trial Competition has written original cases for each season of the competition. This process involves the time and creative efforts or many people over the course of more than three months as members of the Problem Subcommittee of High School Mock Trial Committee. The process typically starts in July with the Subcommittee picking a topic and plot and authors launching their first drafts of witness statements. Individual subcommittee members assist with the creation of exhibits, flesh out ideas to get around a hang up in the plot, and edit multiple drafts of the problem, all on their volunteered free time.

This annual effort has been led by Judge Michael Barker throughout this period, serving as chair of the Subcommittee. Many of the case topics derive from ideas dreamed up by Judge Barker, usually starting with an earnest “what if…”. With the assistance of the Mock Trial office, Judge Barker compiles the first drafts of the statements into a cohesive fact pattern, making sure everything comes together in time for the case’s release at the beginning of the season. The indictments, complaints, answers, legal authorities, and charge of the court are his. Each season requires many, many hours of preparation time from the subcommittee, with Judge Barker putting in the lion share over the course of the late summer and early fall.

After 18 years of leading the process, this 2019 problem is Judge Barker’s last as chair of the subcommittee. Judge Barker’s historical reference of past season’s cases and ideas garnered over these years has been crucial in the development of cases over the years, as has been his ability to see the big picture of both sides of the case in effort to keep the case balanced for the sides and enough material for each side to use at trial. Just as important as his mock trial case knowledge is his vast array of pop culture knowledge, often finding its way into the case materials; some obvious, most obscure. Through this 2019 season, Judge Barker has led the Problem Subcommittee through the creation of nineteen Georgia problems and two National Championship problems (2009 and 2019). Because of his leadership, Georgia’s mock trial cases are considered some of the best, well-written high school mock trial problems in the country.

On behalf of the Georgia High School Mock Trial Committee of the Young Lawyers Division of the State Bar of Georgia, we thank Judge Barker for the many years, and many cases, he has given to the students of Georgia. Unlike the Knights of the Round Table, Judge Barker’s quest was always a success and we are forever grateful.

Michael Nixon Director, Georgia High School Mock Trial Competition

Everyone dreams of winning the lottery. “What would you do with a million dollars?” Reality isn’t as

simple. A player has a 1 in 302 million chance of winning the Mega Millions grand prize. Powerball is a little better at a 1 in 292 million chance. You have a better chance at being killed by a shark (1 in 3.7 million) or killed by a meteorite (1 in 1.9 million). A high school senior football player has much better odds of playing in the NFL at 1 in 90,000! Despite the impossibly low odds, people all across the nation play the lottery every day.

The dream seems more attainable when you pool your resources with others and jump into a lottery pool. Everyone in the group has the big dreams of hitting it big and holding the giant check. Unfortunately, it’s also just as easy for that group to fracture when the dream turns to reality and disagreements arise over who was in the group, how much each member gets, who gets to hold the check for the cameras, etc.

This is what happened in July, 2018, with a group of friends at the WorkSpace office rental in Miltonville. These five friends have played the lottery every Tuesday for the past year, hoping to win the BigBucks jackpot. They came close once. On Fridays, a few of them also played the Mega Pick drawing as well. Lane Shutze was the organizer, collector, and ticket-buyer for the group. Lane kept record of everyone’s contributions in a

11

notebook s/he kept in his/her desk. Ten dollars a drawing could win a lifetime of millions for these five friends.

On this particular Friday, Lane and his/her best friend in the office, Gabriel/Gabrielle Wren, went to Lucky’s Grab and Go in Carley Corners Village to buy the Mega Pick tickets, purchasing them from Kerry Chatham, the day shift manager. With the pot at $120 million, it would be a big win. And as luck would have it, they won! Everyone was excited at the office on Monday, including Jack/Jackie Hutchinson, the third player in the group. Except, Lane’s notebook only showed two contributions: Lane’s and Gabriel/Gabrielle’s. Lee Fannin and Sonny/Sunny Rawlings both talked to Jack/Jackie in the days leading up to the Friday drawing, with Jack/Jackie mentioning turning the contribution in to Lane. But his/her name wasn’t in the book.

Convinced that Lane was cheating him/her out of the winnings, Jack/Jackie sued Lane before the Lotto Commission could pay out any money. The fractures in the group were permanent, now with Jack/Jackie gone and Lane’s reputation in question. As is often the case, the dream of a lottery win can quickly turn into a nightmare for the winners.

STIPULATIONS 1. Any reference to a previous season’s mock trial case is for the edification of mock trial veterans and

may not be used as an unfair extrapolation of fact. Only references specifically contained in the current case materials are relevant and available for trial as presently stated.

2. All exhibits included in the problem are authentic in all respects, and no objections to the authenticity of the exhibits shall be entertained.

3. Stipulations cannot be contradicted or challenged. 4. The signatures on the witness statements and all other documents are authentic. 5. There are NO costume options permitted as an exception to Rule 20 this season. 6. The Charge of the Court is accurate in all respects; no objections to the charge shall be entertained. 7. Chain of custody for evidence is not in dispute. 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. 9. Exhibits 1, 2, and 3 fairly and accurately depict the view or scene each purport to depict. 10. The handwriting on Exhibit 5 is Lane Shutze’s. 11. The handwriting on Exhibit 6 is Jack/Jackie Hutchinson. The source of the check mark on Exhibit 6

cannot be identified. 12. The handwriting in black ink on Exhibit 7 is Lee Fannin’s.

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 Plaintiff Jack/Jackie Hutchinson, Plaintiff

Sonny/Sunny Rawlings Kerry Chatham

For the Defense Lane Shutze, Defendant Gabriel/Gabrielle Wren

Lee Fannin

12

EXHIBITS Teams in competition may use the following exhibits. Teams may print and use exhibits in either a black and white or color format. They are pre-numbered and are to be referred to by the assigned number, as follows:

Exhibit Numbers and Title/Descriptions

1. ..... Floorplan for WorkSpace 2. ..... Map of Carley Corners Village 3. ..... Layout of Lucky’s Grab and Go 4. ..... Lottery ticket 5. ..... Excerpt from notebook 6. ..... Post-it note, Hutchinson 7. ..... Post-it note, Fannin

*Exhibit 1 will be provided to teams in a large color format at each competition level. Copies of the Exhibit will be posted on the Team Info page of the website for teams to use at practice. Teams are not to bring their own large formatted copies of the Exhibit to competition.

13

IN THE STATE COURT OF MILTON COUNTY

STATE OF GEORGIA

JACK/JACKIE HUTCHINSON, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO: 2019-MT

)

LANE SHUTZE, )

)

Defendant. )

COMPLAINT

COMES NOW Jack/Jackie Hutchinson, Plaintiff in the above-styled action, and files this

Complaint showing the Court as follows:

1.

Defendant, Lane Shutze, is a resident of Milton County and may be served with a copy of

this Complaint within the confines of said county. Jurisdiction and venue are therefore

appropriate in this Court.

2.

Plaintiff and Defendant regularly participate in a “lottery pool,” where funds are collected

to play certain Lotto Georgia contests.

3.

The proceeds from winning lottery tickets are shared evenly with the contributors for that

game.

4.

Plaintiff contributed to the “lottery pool” for the June 29, 2018 drawing.

5.

One ticket purchased from the June 29, 2018 “lottery pool” was successful.

6.

Despite having contributed to the cost of the purchase of the group of tickets comprising

the lottery pool, Defendant refuses to give Plaintiff a pro rata share of the proceeds.

14

7.

To avoid the probable depletion of the funds prior to trial, Plaintiff requests that Defendant

be ordered to pay all lottery proceeds from the June 29, 2018 drawing into the registry of the

court.

8.

Defendant has acted in bad faith in the instant matter, and has caused Plaintiff

unnecessary trouble and expense, and has been stubbornly litigious, so as to entitle Plaintiff

to an award of attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the following relief:

(a) that process issue and Defendant be served with a copy of this Complaint;

(b) that Plaintiff have a trial by jury on all issues;

(c) that Plaintiff be awarded a pro rata share of the aforementioned lottery proceeds;

(d) that Plaintiff be awarded costs and attorney’s fees in bringing this action; and

(e) that Plaintiff be awarded such other and further relief as the Court deems just

and proper under the circumstances.

This 23rd day of July, 2018.

Ken Hodges, Esq.

By:______________________________

Ken Hodges Law

Attorney for Plaintiff

15

IN THE STATE COURT OF MILTON COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA

JACK/JACKIE HUTCHINSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO: 2019-MT ) LANE SHUTZE, ) ) Defendant. )

ANSWER

COMES NOW Lane Shutze, Defendant in the above-styled action, and files this Answer showing the

Court as follows:

1.

The allegations contained in paragraph one are admitted.

2.

The allegations contained in paragraph two are denied as pled. Defendant regularly participates in

the “lottery pool,” and Plaintiff only occasionally participates.

3.

The allegations contained in paragraph three are admitted.

4.

The allegations contained in paragraph four are denied

5.

The allegations contained in paragraph five are admitted.

6.

The allegations contained in paragraph six are denied.

7.

Even though Defendant asserts that Plaintiff is not entitled to the proceeds, Defendant is amenable

to paying the proceeds into the registry of the court until resolution of the case.

8.

The allegations contained in paragraph eight are denied.

16

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for the following relief:

(a) that the case be dismissed, with all costs taxed upon Plaintiff;

(b) that Plaintiff take nothing;

(c) that Defendant be awarded costs and attorney’s fees in defending this action; and

(d) that Defendant be awarded such other and further relief as the Court deems just and

proper under the circumstances.

This 20th day of August, 2018.

Rizza O’Connor, Esq.

By:______________________________

O’Connor, Toombs, and Lyons

Attorneys for Defendant

17

Statement of Jack/Jackie Hutchinson

STATEMENT OF JACK/JACKIE HUTCHINSON

1. I’m from a small town in the middle of nowhere Georgia, but I always wanted to get out of that 1

small town and challenge myself. I was the quiet, nerdy kid in high school, and I thought that going to 2

a really big school close to Atlanta would help me disappear a little bit while still getting a top-notch 3

education. I wasn’t part of any crowd in my little town and never felt that I fit in. It was hard to have 4

friends. I was good at school, especially math but that made me stand out as the odd one even more. 5

“Loser” was a common phrase I heard. Finally, after high school, I went to Kennesaw State University 6

to get a dual degree in Architecture and Applied Mathematics. 7

8

2. At Kennesaw, I started seeing mathematics in the world around me, especially in buildings and 9

design. I finished my degree in applied mathematics but also took courses in architectural design. I 10

really had an eye for it. A lot of architects are frustrated artists because they design these beautiful 11

buildings but don’t account for any real-world engineering issues. A graceful beam stretching across a 12

theater’s lobby gives the design the “wow” factor, but there’s no way that would give the support the 13

building needs. Engineers take the architect’s design, curse them for being unrealistic, and then 14

replace the beautiful curve with a brutal poured concrete 18-inch beam to make sure it stands up. In 15

the end, both the engineer and architect are unhappy. With my natural knack for math and a 16

developing eye towards design, I could see these conflicts as I made my designs. True, I’m not an 17

engineer, but my designs are a lot closer to what they need than regular architects. 18

19

3. Knowing Atlanta, or even a larger metro-like area like Macon or Savannah, wasn’t for me, I looked 20

for something that had a big-city feel without all of the craziness. Moving to Miltonville has allowed 21

me to succeed without getting terribly lost in the crowd. Of course, that means I’ve just managed to 22

stumble upon more creative ways to lose. When I was younger, I always thought I was at a 23

disadvantage because I kept to myself so much, but I finally realized that it was just a way of making 24

myself more successful. I started getting work in my smart-designs. I found WorkSpace not long after 25

getting to Miltonville and found it was a great fit for me. I could rent a desk when I needed it and have 26

an office address, conference room, and other “professional” amenities when I needed them. When 27

I saw I could drastically reduce my overhead at WorkSpace, I applied for a desk as soon as I could. 28

29

4. Some have suggested that this combined math and architecture degree would leave me at a 30

disadvantage when it came to finding clients, but I have found the exact opposite. My technical title is 31

“architectural designer”, but I am talented enough to provide a litany of services to clients for a 32

fraction of the price a licensed architect might charge. Plus, with my applied mathematics, I could 33

foresee some of the traditional issues that would pop up at the engineering stage and be able to head 34

those off, saving the client money. I’ve been told that my design aesthetic rivals the most experienced 35

architects in the country, let alone Miltonville. I’ve toyed with going back for a Master’s or sitting for 36

my boards, but why bother? I’m doing just fine. 37

38

18

Statement of Jack/Jackie Hutchinson

5. When I started working at WorkSpace just last year, I tried to keep to myself and just get my work 39

done. I do a day-to-day desk rental, where I don’t have a permanent desk but use one that’s open 40

when I’m in the office. I keep all of my stuff in a locker provided by WorkSpace and can get it out as I 41

need it. Most others have a dedicated desk rental. I kind of like the floating part. I’ve gotten to know 42

some more people that way. I’ve always been a bit of a rule-follower, so I think some of my co-workers 43

thought I had a little bit of an attitude of superiority. That wasn’t the case; I’m just quiet, and I take a 44

long time to get to know people. I’m analytical and don’t jump to decisions quickly. Anyway, once I got 45

to know some of the main group at the office, I started to join them each week, and as a group we 46

played the lottery. They usually just played the smaller game, Big Bucks, on Tuesdays, with everyone 47

joining in for a very small buy-in. Then on Fridays, we’d play the Mega Pick. From the outside, our 48

group probably looked like quite the motley crew, but we all brought different styles and experiences 49

in to WorkSpace, and that’s what made our little group so great. Or, at least I thought. 50

51

6. Our small group, usually five of us, would try to go to lunch together once a week. Usually we did 52

a “Long Lunch Tuesday,” but every now and then, we’d have to reschedule or just take a rain check 53

because of deadlines, meetings, vacations, and other conflicts. 54

55

7. Speaking of conflicts, I suppose I should mention Lane Shutze. Lane is one of two architects that 56

share the space. Lane has a real superiority complex when it comes to comparing our professions. 57

First, s/he rents a cubicle space and likes to look down at those of us who float. S/He also doesn’t think 58

I’m a “real architect.” I can’t help it that my clients are still building theaters, community centers, and 59

corporate headquarters, while Lane is working on strip malls and car dealerships. I’ve extended the 60

olive branch multiple times just to have it thrown back in my face. Things didn’t get any better when 61

Reilly Real Estate selected me to draw up a proposed community theatre building. I had no idea they 62

were considering Lane for that project until after I met with them. It hasn’t been built yet. 63

64

8. Lane was appointed/volunteered as our lottery commissioner before I got to WorkSpace, and 65

organized the collection for each drawing. It was well known, though, that if someone couldn’t chip 66

in, that the others would cover those who hadn’t yet contributed. One of us would have to 67

affirmatively opt out to not be included, and that had never happened. As a lottery “captain,” Lane 68

was decidedly unlucky. We never seemed to hit any of our numbers, and his/her lack of good fortune 69

became a joke around WorkSpace. That is probably why the size of our pool kept dwindling. 70

71

9. There were two collections each week, due by lunch on the day of the drawing (Tuesday and 72

Friday). The Tuesday pot was the most regular -- with the First Monday Mixer and a Tuesday long 73

lunch, someone’s absence was usually noticed if that person had not chipped in. The Friday game was 74

not played by as many people; Lane, Gabby Wren, and myself were the typical regulars. We would try 75

to increase participation in the Friday game, but only half-heartedly. Friday only had real players 76

participating and we were okay with that. People probably still played the Tuesday game due to peer 77

pressure. It’s all good, because if fewer people played, there was less of a chance of splitting the 78

winnings with strangers. Lane was usually pretty good about listing the contributors in that fancy 79

notebook in his/her desk, but that was only because you were standing at his/her desk while s/he 80

19

Statement of Jack/Jackie Hutchinson

made the entry. If Lane was taking a three martini lunch or left early to “develop clients,” the usual 81

practice was to leave the money with a Post-it note on it under the model of some sci-fi thing on the 82

desk…Star Trek/Wars? A United Galaxy Sanitation Patrol Cruiser? Anyway, when the contribution was 83

entered, you’d get the Post-it back with a red check mark on it. 84

85

10. Lane would go to a nearby convenience store after work to buy the tickets. There was one just 86

down the way inside Carley Corner Village, Lucky’s, and s/he would go to the same one every Tuesday 87

and Friday, because that was, well, the most convenient. I went by the same convenience store every 88

morning on my way into the office because their coffee was significantly better than the coffee we 89

normally brewed at the coffee bar in the office, despite Sonny/Sunny’s best attempts. Sure, it was a 90

little more expensive, but it was an indulgence I allowed myself by cutting out some other costs. It 91

would’ve been a little easier to afford this indulgence if I didn’t play the lottery so often, but you can’t 92

win if you don’t play, right? 93

94

11. Kerry Chatham worked behind the counter most mornings. Because I’m normally so reserved, at 95

first, I just thanked him/her for my coffee and went on about my day. Over time, though, as we began 96

seeing each other almost every day, we started exchanging pleasantries and small-talk. I think he/she 97

knew me better than anyone else that worked in that area. One day I casually asked about the video 98

poker machines in the corner of the store. Kerry just sighed and said the store had a bit of a checkered 99

past with some improper payouts on gambling machines, but all that was behind them now. That really 100

surprised me, and I pressed for more. Kerry would not share any more information, except to say that 101

if I wanted to know “the ins and outs” of the payout scheme, I should ask Lane. 102

103

12. Someone once asked me what I would do if I won the lottery, and my answer is very simple: 104

Nothing. I’d do nothing. It would be nice to retire early, but I never expected that Lane was a little 105

more aggressive in his/her attitude about winning the lottery. He/she was always talking about the 106

extravagant things that he/she would do if he/she won. That’s why it really didn’t surprise me when I 107

heard Lane was mixed up in the payout mess at Lucky’s. 108

109

13. The first time the group decided to enter the lottery was about a year ago. The MegaPick was 110

especially high that week; I think it was around 400 million dollars. That meant, when we took the 111

lump sum payment as we agreed we would do, the five people in our group would each get about 45 112

million dollars after taxes. We didn’t win that time, but the excitement about entering was palpable. 113

The five of us made a pact. We’d enter every week in the hopes of hitting it big. 114

115

14. I remember once when the lottery did not go exactly as planned. A Tuesday drawing ended up 116

with a modest $500 jackpot. We were talking about it at WorkSpace on Wednesday when Lewis 117

Medlock (a fellow WorkSpacer) chimed in and claimed to have contributed. No name in the notebook 118

+ no Post-it with a check mark = no money, right? Well, Lane calls the rest of the winners into a 119

conference room and tells us we should give Lewis a share of the winnings. I disagreed. After all, rules 120

are rules. It made no sense…I felt like TK-421 tapping his helmet, because we just weren’t 121

communicating. Well, I was outvoted, and we cut Lewis in. 122

20

Statement of Jack/Jackie Hutchinson

123

15. I distinctly remember the week of that Mega Pick drawing on the 29th; that’s why I’m here. I was a 124

little short on cash on Monday, so I asked Gabby Wren to cover me for Tuesday’s game. S/He’s done 125

it in the past and it hasn’t ever been a big deal. Gabby is a pretty straight-up person, but I think there 126

is a little bit of a “sidekick” vibe going on with Lane. When I asked Gabby to cover, I could have sworn 127

s/he looked over at Lane to see if it was ok. Gabby really needs to step out of Lane’s shadow. I think I 128

still owe Gabby $10. I didn’t go to the Tuesday lunch – I brown-bagged it due to my temporary lack of 129

fluidity. 130

131

16. I was chatting with Lee Fannin that Wednesday morning about the lottery. Lee didn’t seem too 132

interested in playing, but some of that might have been fatigue – s/he had pulled an all-nighter, and 133

was headed out of the country until the next week, so s/he had other things on his/her mind. Lee said 134

something about chipping in for next Tuesday’s game, but I figured Lane might pitch a fit about that 135

since it was too early for that collection. Lee also mentioned something about the janitors not doing 136

their job the night before and trash being everywhere. I told Lee that I was going to make my 137

contribution for Friday’s game later that day. I actually pulled out a ten-dollar bill and put it under a 138

paperweight on my desk so I wouldn’t forget. 139

140

17. I went by Lane’s desk at lunch to give him/her the money, but, as usual, s/he wasn’t there. I took 141

one of my pink Post-it notes (the only person in the office who uses that color; I’ve got a whole brick 142

of them in my locker), wrote my name on it, and left it in the appropriate place. I didn’t see Lane the 143

rest of the day, but I was really busy, so s/he could have come back to the office. 144

145

18. Friday morning, I found myself in the coffee bar chatting with Sonny/Sunny Rawlings. S/He asked 146

if I was “in” for the Friday game, and I said “yes.” I saw Gabby and Lane around off and on, and every 147

time Lane looked at me, s/he had this Voldemort-style grin. It was kinda creepy, to be honest. Around 148

noon, I had enough of Lane’s taunting and told him/her off at his/her desk. S/He said I would be more 149

than welcome to come along to pick the numbers if I felt s/he was so unlucky but I didn’t want to hang 150

around him/her more than I had to. It was enough that I had to give him/her my money each week. 151

Apparently, my words finally got through and tweaked a nerve or something as s/he got really mad. 152

S/He blamed me for him/her getting in trouble with the Lotto Authority. I didn’t have anything to do 153

with that. I knew it happened, as it should have if s/he was taking illegal payouts. I know s/he did it in 154

the past and is probably trying to get Kerry to do it now. S/He didn’t like the truth being pushed back 155

in his/her face and stomped off. I never saw him/her again until Monday. 156

157

19. So there we are all standing around the next Monday morning, chatting about the weekend, when 158

Lane came in and said s/he had a surprise – we won the Friday drawing! As the only winning ticket, we 159

were going to get a payout of $120 million! The whole place erupted with cheers, whoops, hand 160

shaking and back patting. Then Gabby came in, so I ran over to share the news, but s/he already knew. 161

I know it is bad form and everything, but I started verbally spending the money in front of Gabby, but 162

s/he had an awkward look on his/her face when I started doing that. S/He said, “You need to talk to 163

21

Statement of Jack/Jackie Hutchinson

Lane about the drawing.” I asked him/her why and s/he wouldn’t tell me anything else. I rushed over 164

to Lane and said that I was excited about us winning the drawing. 165

166

20. Imagine my anger when Lane said I had not chipped in. I was livid! I grabbed the notebook out of 167

Lane’s desk, but (surprise!) my name wasn’t in there. That’s when I realized that Lane had never 168

returned my Post-it. I couldn’t believe it. I knew Lane had pocketed my money and probably lost it in 169

the video poker machines. I was so mad, I had to let off some steam, so I gave Gabby’s trash can a 170

swift kick. Sonny/Sunny had to separate us, I am ashamed to admit, because I was ready to kill Lane. 171

Sonny/Sunny led me out of WorkSpace down to the food court to cool off. I am not proud of my 172

behavior, and I said some things that I truly regret that day, but put yourself in my shoes and tell me 173

you wouldn’t have reacted in a similar way. 174

175

21. I returned to WorkSpace a little while later. Lane and Gabby had left. I sat at my desk, my mind 176

racing, when I remembered that I hadn’t gotten my Post-it note back – more evidence of my 177

contribution that Lane destroyed. That is when I remembered what Lee said about the trash not being 178

picked up that week. I frantically started poking around in the trash can near Lane’s desk. Suddenly, 179

there it was – in a can next to Lane’s cubicle– a small, balled up piece of pink justice. It was my note. I 180

guess Lane is sloppy when covering up criminal misdeeds. I took it to Sonny/Sunny, and s/he suggested 181

I should calm down and let tempers settle before doing anything. I asked Sonny/Sunny to talk to Lane 182

and Gabby about it. 183

184

22. I was going to try to work things out calmly and coolly and stopped in to Lucky’s for a coffee. I 185

needed to re-center myself. I told Kerry about the lottery ticket and what happened in the office. Kerry 186

said s/he figured we had won since they were notified they sold the winning ticket. S/He told me that 187

when Lane and Gabby were in there on Friday buying the tickets, Gabby asked Lane if I had put my 188

money in. Lane laughed and told Gabby, “No. Never saw it. And I’m not surprised either. Serves 189

him/her right.” And then that Lane’s contribution was “subsidized” somehow. That just confirmed my 190

suspicion of what Lane had done with my money. 191

192

23. That was the last straw. Lane is a cheat and a liar. S/He is trying to steal my rightful piece of the 193

lottery winnings. I don’t care how much it comes out to be. I only want justice for myself and what’s 194

rightfully mine. The only place I would get justice is before a jury of my peers. 195

__________________________

Jack/Jackie Hutchinson

SIGNED AND SWORN to me on, August 29, 2018.

______________________________

C.M. McCormack, Notary Public

Jack/Jackie Hutchinson

22

Statement of Jack/Jackie Hutchinson

WITNESS ADDENDUM

I have reviewed this statement, given by me on the date above, and I have nothing of significance to

add at this time. The material facts are true and correct.

Signed,

___________________________ ______________________

Jack/Jackie Hutchinson Date

Jack/Jackie Hutchinson Morning of Trial

23

Statement of Sonny/Sunny Rawlings

STATEMENT OF SONNY/SUNNY RAWLINGS

1. My name is Sonny/Sunny Rawlings, and I am the manager of WorkSpace, where our motto is: 1

“Space Is the Place to Work.” 2

3

2. One of the hardest things in this new gig-economy is convincing folks in the work-at-home crowd 4

to get out of their pajamas and get out of the house to go to an office space and what to do about 5

their dogs. They get comfortable working with their dog Rags snoozing on their feet until it’s time to 6

go out and stretch their legs. And Rags gets comfortable not having to hold off on an outdoor potty 7

break all day. Everyone would love to be able to work at home, except there are times where you need 8

a separate professional space. Coming home to the aroma of poo and/or pee potpourri at the end of 9

a hard work day can make the transition into a real office a real bummer. To say nothing of the clean-10

up issues. 11

12

3. That’s why WorkSpace is the perfect location for home-bound workers and their dogs to step out 13

into a comfortably affordable co-working office environment. We are located at Carley Corners Village 14

in the space previously occupied by JCNickel. And that means we are conveniently located near 15

Delaney’s Doggy Day Care. 16

17

4. We are not an environment where you are free to bring your dog to work; we’re not encouraging 18

office pets. Instead, we’ve negotiated a 5% discount program with J.D. Delaney’s for WorkSpace 19

tenants in need of doggy day care. 20

21

5. In addition, Delaney’s has a 10% discount for those who prefer the do-it-yourself approach to 22

taking their dogs on a mid-day constitutional. This can be accomplished in the secure outdoor dog park 23

that the owners of Carley Corners Village created upon realizing that they just didn’t need that many 24

parking spaces after two former department store anchors were converted into a warehouse club and 25

a co-working office environment. 26

27

6. That’s what I do with my shih tzu, Mr. Chase Kitties. He was a rescue named Chase, but when he 28

came home with me I discovered he liked to chase my kitties. So, I give the felines a respite during the 29

day by taking Mr. Chase Kitties to Delaney’s. And I give Mr. Chase Kitties a respite in the dog park at 30

mid-day, which earns me the 10 percent discount for do-it-yourself dog walking. 31

32

7. It’s not just the dog-friendly location that makes WorkSpace an ideal co-working office and 33

business center. We provide access to high-speed Wi-Fi, broadband with data security, uninterrupted 34

power supply, phone lines, printer/copier/scanners, 24/7 passcode protected access to the office, 35

good lighting, clean restrooms, and gourmet tea/coffee machines. 36

37

8. We have two floors of offices for rent. Each floor is divided into two sections. One side is for 38

companies or firms that need a suite of offices and spaces; these can range anywhere from three 39

offices and a small conference room to an entire group of offices, conference rooms, kitchen areas, 40

24

Statement of Sonny/Sunny Rawlings

etc. The other side is for individual renters; these tenants are only renting a single work area. On this 41

side, WorkSpace offers a large open floorplan area that has desks, bar-height tables, couch areas, a 42

tea/coffee bar, large conference tables, and small and large conference rooms. Each desk faces 43

another and they are separated by a frosted glass panel for some privacy so the other desk-renter isn’t 44

staring at you all day long. Some desks are reserved by the renters as their full-time space— that’s 45

what the architects Lane Shutze and Gabby Wren do—while others, like Jack/Jackie Hutchinson, use 46

one of the day-to-day first-come/first-served desks the days they need space. (Maybe that’s why Lane 47

and Gabby always seem to look down their noses at him/her, feeling like s/he’s not a “real” architect, 48

even though they do different work.) We offer a secure storage “locker” for the tenants who rent day-49

to-day desks, so they can store their things until they come back in. There are glass-walled offices 50

around the perimeter that are rented at a higher rate, which is what Lee Fannin uses for his/her Leaf 51

Anon operation. This makes sense given the odd hours s/he works. These are all single-occupant 52

offices with sliding glass doors that can be secured. My office is in one of these offices, and is located 53

in the middle of the wall of offices along the back wall. The right side of the space has a large collection 54

of cubicles with a five-foot tall privacy wall for tenants that need some separation without the ceiling-55

height walls of an office. 56

57

9. As the WorkSpace manager, I am the main point of contact for all the tenants, and keep up with 58

their needs. This runs the gamut from keeping the copier full of paper and clear of paper jams to 59

making sure the tea/coffee bar is stocked to sorting out disputes over who has reserved a communal 60

work desk and/or got there first. Most days I feel like a cross between a concierge and a kindergarten 61

teacher. 62

63

10. This job ensures that I get to know all of our tenants, and find a way to maintain a good 64

relationship with all of them. It’s good that I have walls, albeit glass, and a door that shuts so that I can 65

close myself off from the WorkSpace, and focus on budgets, tenant rent receipts, vendor payments, 66

etc. With the glass office, I can keep an eye on tenant interactions, and pop out to assist if I notice 67

something amiss. 68

69

11. WorkSpace sponsors a monthly mixer on the first Monday evening of the month with the 70

admittedly unimaginative name of “First Monday Mixer.” We fill galvanized tubs with ice to cool off 71

beer and wine in the tea/coffee bar, and urge our tenants to invite home-bound workers who might 72

be interested in a co-working environment. These mixers have been a good way for the tenants to 73

better get to know each other, and have allowed WorkSpace to recruit new tenants. For example, this 74

is how Lane introduced Gabby, his/her college friend, to WorkSpace. Lane got 25 percent off his/her 75

next month’s rent for recruiting a new tenant after Gabby signed the lease. From then on, Lane kept 76

after me for a discount on the rent, always reminding me that s/he brought in a new renter. 77

78

12. I always thought it was a bit unusual that Lane brought Gabby into the office being another 79

architect like Lane. Lane already wasn’t getting along with Jack/Jackie, especially when Jack/Jackie 80

won a client over Lane’s company. So, Lane’s already hurting business-wise and then s/he goes and 81

brings another architect in? I mean, I like the addition of another tenant. Maybe with Lane and Gabby 82

25

Statement of Sonny/Sunny Rawlings

knowing each other from college, they’re teaming up a bit to muscle Jack/Jackie out of the Miltonville 83

market? I don’t know. 84

85

13. It was in one of these First Monday Mixers in which I learned of the regular lottery pool that Lane 86

had established, and for which the other participants had dubbed him/her “commissioner.” Lane 87

asked me if I wanted to join in the lottery pool, explaining that a lot of folks in WorkSpace were playing 88

once or twice a week. Turns out it was a smaller handful but that’s okay. The group usually took up a 89

collection for the Tuesday BigBucks game and the Friday Mega Pick. The idea was for each player to 90

put in $10, which would fund two “tickets” of 6 numbers and a “power ball” number at $5 a “ticket.” 91

You had to have your money to Lane by noon on the day of the drawing to be part of the pool. Lane 92

kept track of all of the players in a black notebook s/he kept in his/her desk drawer. That was the 93

official roster of players each time. If any numbers hit, the plan was for the group to evenly split any 94

winnings among those who played. 95

96

14. The most regular game was the Tuesday BigBucks game, especially for the Tuesday following the 97

First Monday Mixer when it was easy to take up the collection. It got a little more complicated for the 98

Friday games. Often that collection was taken up by the end of lunch on Fridays, and depending on 99

what they had ordered for lunch, sometimes folks found themselves a little short on cash, and others 100

would spot them for their contribution—or not. Lane and Gabby were pretty good about being 101

available to “cover” those who were a bit short. Lane covered me once or twice without being 102

specifically asked. I don’t ask Gabby for any favors. You can tell so much about a person by how they 103

treat their pet…once I heard about what happened to Rags, I really didn’t want much to do with 104

him/her. 105

106

15. Lane is a bit of a challenge as well. S/He’s got a big personality, and likes to rule whatever group 107

s/he’s in. Especially with the Monday Mixers. It turns into the Lane Lounge with him/her holding court 108

on things and dominating the atmosphere. Every. Single. Time. Lane is mostly nice to everyone but 109

once you turn your back, watch out, s/he even goes after Gabby sometimes. Lane is really rough with 110

Jack/Jackie. S/He was relentless in his/her hounding Jack/Jackie about whatever was on his/her mind. 111

I’ve even felt it a little bit, too. I had talked to Gabby about doing some work on my house in finishing 112

out the basement and building an extension to have my 92-year-old grandmother move in. S/He and 113

I had worked out the arrangements and were starting to get the plans underway when Lane talked 114

Gabby out of doing it for me. I was paying Gabby a fair price. For some reason, though, Lane thought 115

that doing something like that was beneath Gabby’s level. I didn’t have any money into it yet but it 116

was a big disappointment. Thankfully, Jack/Jackie stepped in and helped me out. Well, until s/he 117

moved after this lottery fiasco. 118

119

16. For all of the games, when Lane’s work schedule pulled him/her out of the office, folks might just 120

drop a bill on Lane’s desk with a postie note with their name on it. If I noticed a cash drop like that, I 121

tried to keep an eye out for the money until Lane got back to his/her desk. But it wasn’t always possible 122

for me to monitor money like that, nor was it really my job. I’d have to take my eye off the bill if there 123

was a copier jam to clear or a new tenant to sign up. However, I had seen how ruthless Lane could be, 124

26

Statement of Sonny/Sunny Rawlings

so I tried to look out for the other players. Who knows? One day it could be me that Lane tries to 125

freeze out. Jack/Jackie seemed to be a little more trusting when it came to a money drop-off. I’m not 126

saying that anybody here would stoop so low so as to steal money like that, but it is a wide open, 127

heavily trafficked area. 128

129

17. Wednesday, June 27th was a normal day for me, dominated mostly by people complaining that 130

the custodians did not empty the trash at the desks Tuesday night. We’ve been having issues with 131

getting consistent service with this company for a while and I thought we had it handled. Apparently 132

not. There are typically two custodians each night and only one showed Tuesday. As a result, I was on 133

the phone with the custodial company all day Wednesday and walking around the office checking on 134

things. I walked by Lane’s desk a few times during the day, and at some point I remember seeing some 135

money under the X-Wing. There was probably a note attached since that’s what people do, but I didn’t 136

really see the whole thing to know whose it was. It may have been pink, or that could have been 137

something else on Lane’s desk. As to the custodians, no one showed up at all from Wednesday the 138

27th through that weekend. 139

140

18. I ran into Jack/Jackie at the coffee bar that Friday morning and asked him/her if s/he was putting 141

in for the big jackpot. S/He said that s/he’d already given Lane his/her money on Wednesday, so s/he 142

was good to go. “I really hope Shutze’s bad luck doesn’t ruin us again this time. A nice chunk of that 143

$120 million would change my address to Easy Street.” 144

145

19. I saw Lane on June 29th, and we wound up having lunch together. S/He was pretty quiet during 146

lunch and didn’t say much. I asked what was wrong and s/he said, “Hutchinson is what’s wrong. S/He 147

tried to get the Lotto Authority to ruin me. I always wondered who turned me in. I figured it was 148

Chatham. Nope, it was that rat Hutchinson. Vermin like that need to get put down…” I didn’t know 149

what was going on but it was dark. I was a little worried about what Jack/Jackie had said to get Lane 150

so upset. I thought I should give Jack/Jackie a heads up that Lane was like this, just in case s/he decided 151

to do something about it. At the end of lunch, I did find it odd that Lane asked me to pick up the tab 152

for lunch; s/he always seemed to have pocket money. When the bill came, Lane said something about 153

not having any cash on hand and that s/he’d pay me back that afternoon by buying me some drinks at 154

Rieke’s. I knew Lane was good for it, so I paid the check and we headed back to WorkSpace. 155

156

20. When we got back to the office, I hung around Lane a little to make sure s/he didn’t run into 157

Jack/Jackie. Lane went to his/her desk and got the notebook out of the drawer, saying he wanted to 158

see how much Jack/Jackie had “lost” over the past year compared to what s/he had put in. As s/he got 159

to the last page of entries, that showed that day’s drawing, it was stuck to the page in front of it. I 160

couldn’t see anything there and wondered aloud what that was about. Lane said “I don’t know. Started 161

happening a few days ago.” S/He tried to brush or rub something off the page with his/her thumb and 162

then closed the book, saying, “I’ve put in way more than anyone else has over the past year. If anyone 163

has a problem with my ‘bad luck’, it should be me.” S/He tossed the notebook on his/her desk and 164

walked off towards the coffee bar. I went back to my office and worked on the end-of-month reports. 165

166

27

Statement of Sonny/Sunny Rawlings

21. I saw Lane again as s/he was leaving Lucky’s Grab and Go with Gabby after buying the tickets. 167

They looked like they were heading towards Rieke’s. I seriously considered joining them, because you 168

could make a huge meal with the free food they serve during happy hour. However, I had just picked 169

Mr. Chase Kitties up from Delaney’s to take him to the outdoor dog park when I saw them walk by the 170

dog park towards Rieke’s outdoor seating area. I was sitting on a bench along the fence by the sidewalk 171

and could hear Lane telling Gabby that they were the only two players for the Friday game, so the split 172

should be much more favorable. Gabby said that s/he thought Jack/Jackie had given Lane his/her 173

money since s/he had heard Jack/Jackie talking to me about the big jackpot at the coffee bar that 174

morning, saying, “S/He’s really excited about this one for some reason, almost can’t sleep.” Lane 175

snorted and said, “I guess s/he didn’t want to put up with my bad luck anymore. Don’t worry about 176

him/her. Like I said, if this one hits, it’s that much more for me and you.” I thought about joining them 177

but because Rieke’s does not have a dog friendly patio, I decided to just take Mr. Chase Kitties home 178

to chase his kitties. 179

180

22. Looking back, I wished I had taken Lane and Gabby up on playing that Friday Mega Pick drawing. 181

$120 million dollars is a huge win! When Lane and Gabby came in Monday morning, they were happy 182

as clams. They proudly announced that one of their Friday tickets had won the entire jackpot, and 183

paraded around the office, showing off the ticket to everyone. Gabby even pulled up some Queen on 184

his/her phone for the parade. Everyone had the same reaction of excitement, followed immediately 185

by the realization that they’d missed out. Except for Jack/Jackie. S/He stayed excited long after 186

everyone else had their own letdown. S/He was talking excitedly to Gabby about the win and what big 187

plans s/he had for his/her share of the money when Gabby said something about the pool only being 188

him/herself and Lane. Jack/Jackie was quiet for a minute and then looked over at Lane shocked. It took 189

a few seconds for Jack/Jackie to blink and snap back but then s/he just launched him/herself at Lane, 190

yelling about being cheated out of the ticket and calling Lane a piece of scum and a rat. Lee took a step 191

back to get out of Jack/Jackie’s way and then helped me hold Jack/Jackie back before s/he could grab 192

Lane’s throat. Lane never seem phased by it and was almost smiling a little at Jack/Jackie through the 193

whole thing. I finally got Jack/Jackie to leave the office with me and go down to the food court to cool 194

off. I left him/her there after about 10 minutes and came back to the office. By then, everyone else 195

had cleared out. Lane’s trash can was gone and all of the stuff inside had been picked up. 196

197

23. About 40 minutes later, Jack/Jackie came back to the office but didn’t say anything to anyone. 198

The next thing I know, Jack/Jackie was looking through the cubicles for something. I got up from my 199

desk and watched him/her from the door of my office, mainly out of curiosity. I knew Lane wasn’t 200

there, so I wasn’t worried about another potential fist fight. My phone rang and I went to answer it 201

right before I heard this loud “whoop!” yell from outside. Just before I could get to my door, Jack/Jackie 202

is busting in holding a crumpled pink postie note saying, “I knew s/he cheated me out of my money 203

and threw it away! I’m gonna get it now!” I told him/her to calm down and not do anything brash. I 204

suggested that s/he talk to Gabby and Lane together and show them the note to see what they say. I 205

don’t know if that ever happened. Jack/Jackie didn’t renew his/her rental for July and hasn’t been back 206

since. I guess from this lawsuit we can figure out that they never worked it out. I feel bad for 207

28

Statement of Sonny/Sunny Rawlings

Jack/Jackie…Lane always liked being a bit of a jerk to him/her and when s/he seemed like something 208

broke Jack/Jackie’s way, Lane was in the middle of taking it away. 209

__________________________

Sonny/Sunny Rawlings

SIGNED AND SWORN to me on, September 26, 2018.

______________________________

C.M. McCormack, Notary Public

WITNESS ADDENDUM

I have reviewed this statement, given by me on the date above, and I have nothing of significance to

add at this time. The material facts are true and correct.

Signed,

___________________________ ______________________

Sonny/Sunny Rawlings Date

Sonny/Sunny Rawlings

Sonny/Sunny Rawlings Morning of Trial

29

Statement of Kerry Chatham

STATEMENT OF KERRY CHATHAM

1. My name is Kerry Chatham, I am 29 years old, and I was born and raised in Miltonville, Georgia. I 1

only left town long enough to get my Bachelor of Business Administration degree in accounting at The 2

University of Georgia in Athens, Georgia. I am a loyal Georgia Bulldog fan – I bleed red and black. My 3

plan was to graduate in May, 2010, hang around Athens the summer after graduation while 4

frequenting The Georgia Theatre or the 40 Watt Club, then begin my master’s degree in the fall, 5

finishing that up in two years. 6

7

2. Because I was a poor college student, I had to work, so I got hired as summer help at the 8

Dawggone Good Convenience Store at Five Points as a cashier. One afternoon I got bored and decided 9

to lay $1,500 down on a roll of Bulldawg scratch-offs. Much to my surprise, I won $750,000 on one of 10

the tickets. So, I ditched the plan to get my master’s degree, packed up my red and black memorabilia, 11

and headed home to Miltonville. 12

13

3. Upon my return to Miltonville, I bought a loft in downtown Miltonville right on the main street, 14

just down the road from what was then Carley Corners Mall. After paying taxes, buying and furnishing 15

the loft, I was able to put the rest of my winnings in an IRA so that I could have money set aside for 16

retirement. Because the convenience store job was so good to me, I decided to apply for a part-time 17

position at Lucky’s Grab and Go located in the Carley Corners Village. CCV used to be The Mall at Carley 18

Corners. After the mall lost the lawsuit filed against them by that elderly mall walker who was Fased 19

by that security guard, the owners had to sell it to pay the settlement. With brick and mortar retail 20

suffering so much lately, a lot of stores went out of business and closed. The new owners had to 21

reinvent the place so they re-branded it and did a lot of construction, combining and re-purposing 22

spaces. JCNickel became WorkSpace, a shared office concept. Another big anchor space was turned 23

into a CostClub warehouse store on the ground floor and an Eye-Max theater up top. Four smaller 24

stores on the ground floor were combined to make Lucky’s. Like most of the new places on the ground 25

floor, we’ve got an entrance on the outside as well as inside the building. Most of the stores were 26

turned into restaurants, a laser tag place, an escape room place, and one of those new ax-throwing 27

bars. It’s all geared towards a day/night multi-use property. Luckily, Lucky’s caters to both. 28

29

4. The owner of Lucky’s is a Georgia Bulldog alumnus, and our company colors are, you guessed it, 30

red and black. Also, because I could only spend so much time watching reality shows and poker 31

tournaments on my days off, I decided to move to a full-time position and I quickly moved up the 32

Lucky’s ladder and became the day shift store manager. 33

34

5. Lucky’s owner was good to me and appreciated the fact that I was instrumental in keeping the 35

store from being shut down when the Georgia Lotto Authority began an investigation of certain store 36

personnel. It turns out that the previous day shift manager and one store clerk were accused of, and 37

later copped guilty pleas to, paying cash out to a few customers who frequently played on our video 38

poker machines in the back. These two also admitted that they had told customers that certain scratch 39

30

Statement of Kerry Chatham

offs were not winners then kept the tickets and turned them in for money themselves. I happened to 40

witness the cash payouts on the video poker machines a couple of times. In fact, Lane Shutze was one 41

of the customers who got a couple of cash payments from the video poker machines from that day 42

clerk. Of course, the Lotto Authority doesn’t seem to be that interested in individual players cheating 43

the system, just the places involved with wrongdoing. It is funny to me that the customers who 44

received the cash payouts did not get into trouble, but I guess if it weren’t for the stores doing it, there 45

wouldn’t be cheating. I was a bit frustrated that both sides of the act weren’t punished. I got in touch 46

with the Lotto Authority and asked about what happens to the players like Lane who are a part of the 47

scheme. The lady I talked to said she’d have to get back to me about that but never did. After that 48

point, I never really trusted Lane again. 49

50

6. Funny, a few months after the furor from the guilty pleas died down, Lane came in once during 51

my shift, and asked me how much cash I would give him/her after a winning round of video poker. My 52

response was, “Not one red and black cent!” Lane quickly turned it into a joke and laughed it off by 53

saying, “Oh I was just kidding. You know I am a Georgia Lotto Authority secret shopper just checking 54

to make sure you’re operating by the books.” Needless to say, I was not amused and really just don’t 55

have much use for Lane. But Lane is a frequent shopper (or “flyer” as we like to say at Lucky’s) so I 56

must be civil to him/her no matter what my true feelings are. In fact, Lane is at the store so much 57

during my shifts that I often want to ask him/her to help wipe down the snack and drink counters since 58

s/he is usually just hanging around in the back of the store playing video poker, talking trash to the 59

other video poker players, and buying scratch off tickets. Lane always brags about how smart s/he is 60

and that s/he is under-appreciated by his/her employer and how much s/he does not like the other 61

people in the office. If you ask me, Lane’s employer might be more impressed with his/her work if s/he 62

was working during the day instead of hanging out at Lucky’s goofing off. 63

64

7. I got to know many of the office renters from WorkSpace because they came over frequently 65

throughout the day to get coffee (Lucky’s has the smoothest Bulldawg blend called UGAlicious), lottery 66

tickets, gourmet pastries, sandwiches, and dog treats. Many of the tenants brought their dogs with 67

them and dropped them off at Delaney’s Doggy Day Care, conveniently located in Carley Corners 68

Village. I really clicked with Jack/Jackie Hutchinson who came in daily for several months to buy coffee 69

in the mornings then back again to grab a sandwich to eat at his/her desk while working through lunch. 70

At first Jack/Jackie never said much more than hello, but eventually I was able to chip away at his/her 71

seemingly icy exterior and we soon became great friends. Turns out Jack/Jackie is from a small town, 72

didn’t really know anyone in Miltonville, and is really shy. Also, s/he works with Lane and the two of 73

them do not get along at all, so we have that in common. Lane typically bad mouths most people s/he 74

knows but is really harsh about Jack/Jackie when s/he is goofing off at Lucky’s. Lane looks down his/her 75

nose at most people with some sort of superiority complex, even though s/he doesn’t seem that 76

special. S/He probably gets that from being a Florida grad, those classless sots. I’m sure s/he’s got a 77

pair of jorts somewhere in his/her closet. Jack/Jackie has only been working out of WorkSpace since 78

last year but has beaten Lane out on a few key clients, much to Lane’s, and his/her firm’s, chagrin. Of 79

course, Jack/Jackie actually works long hours and really hard, while Lane spends most of his/her time 80

31

Statement of Kerry Chatham

buying the lottery tickets, going out to lunches, knocking off early for happy hour at Rieke’s, and 81

playing video poker at Lucky’s. 82

83

8. In getting to know Jack/Jackie, I told him/her about my ultimate dream to open my own 84

convenience store in downtown Miltonville, on the square, maybe in that pizza place that closed down 85

a few years ago. It would be small but I could cater to the downtown folks and work in a coffee bar or 86

something for the night crowd. Jack/Jackie liked the idea and said s/he’d help me out by doing the 87

design work for free. S/He also said that if s/he ever hit the lottery with the pool, s/he’d invest in the 88

idea and become a silent partner in the store. That made me really excited. 89

90

9. Lane came in on Tuesdays and Fridays afternoons, just like clockwork, to buy tickets for the 91

WorkSpace lottery pool. A number of people play on Tuesdays and Lane always buys 10 draws. S/He 92

always plays the same set of numbers on one draw and lets the computer randomly pick the rest. I 93

asked Lane what those numbers were about and s/he said that they were a combination of lucky 94

numbers in some east Asian thing. Another time, I asked Jack/Jackie how the pools worked and s/he 95

said that there was a group of 4 or 5 people who would contribute $10 each per drawing. The $10 96

bought two tickets each. Everyone who played split the pot. I think they won a few hundred dollars a 97

while ago but they haven’t been lucky since. Lane has on scratch-offs but I don’t think that was for the 98

office pool. If someone did not have enough cash for a drawing, all s/he had to do was let everyone 99

know and they would still be counted in the pools. All you had to do was put the money in Lane’s 100

drawer in the lottery pool envelope as soon as you could to get square with the group. There were 101

fewer people who played the Friday game. 102

103

10. That Friday I sold Lane the winning lottery ticket, I remember thinking s/he came in earlier than 104

usual that day to buy the tickets. Gabriel/Gabrielle Wren was with Lane but s/he immediately ran over 105

to the pastry case to check out the fresh donuts. Lane came up to the cash register with a Canned Rage 106

energy drink and only had $20 that day for the lotto, a small amount, even for the Friday pool. Lane 107

asked for the tickets and mumbled to Gabriel/Gabrielle, “Feeling lucky today and if one of these babies 108

is a winner, only two of us gonna share, because Jack/Jackie’s note got lost and it serves ‘em right.” I 109

was shocked, my mouth dropped open, and I started to comment, when Lane laughed and said, “Just 110

kidding, everything’s good. Jack/Jackie just didn’t have the money to pitch in this week. I’m sure s/he’ll 111

pitch a fit if we win. No note, no cash, no play, no win. That’s how it works.” Gabriel/Gabrielle said 112

something to Lane about not having any cash for dinner and Lane said, “Again? You better hope these 113

tickets hit soon,” and that s/he was tired of subsidizing Gabriel/Gabrielle all the time. Lane paid for 114

the drink and they left through the doors going outside. 115

116

11. Saturday morning when I arrived at the store, I received a call from the Lotto Authority notifying 117

me that Friday’s winning ticket had been sold at our store. I was ecstatic because I knew we would 118

receive a big bonus for selling that ticket. Oddly enough, Lane showed up that morning and asked for 119

a printout of Friday’s winning numbers and nothing else. S/He did not buy coffee or even a soda and 120

completely ignored me when I asked him/her what brought him/her in so early on a Saturday morning. 121

Lane was always a bit high strung and hyper, but s/he had never been rude to me before. Of course, 122

32

Statement of Kerry Chatham

once the Lotto Authority called, I put two and two together and figured that Lane and them must have 123

been the big winner. On the following Thursday, I saw Lane on the News at Noon, smiling like the 124

Cheshire Cat holding onto a $120,000,000 check at the Lotto Authority’s offices in Atlanta. Lane was 125

all alone, no Gabriel/Gabrielle, no Jack/Jackie. 126

127

12. About 9:30 the Monday morning after the drawing, I saw Sonny/Sunny Rawlings, the WorkSpace 128

manager, almost leading Jack/Jackie down towards the food court area from the office. Jack/Jackie 129

looked really upset, almost angry, and was talking really loud, saying stuff like, “I’m gonna get it, I’m 130

telling you. That snake cheated me for the last time. S/He’s going to pay, one way or the other!” 131

Sonny/Sunny was trying to calm him/her down. They disappeared for about 10 minutes and I saw 132

Sonny/Sunny walk back. Lee Fannin came in around then and poked around the back with the fountain 133

drinks for a bit, then left. S/He never said anything to me but looked like s/he didn’t know what s/he 134

should do. A few minutes later, Jack/Jackie stormed past, back towards WorkSpace. 135

136

13. A little bit later, Jack/Jackie showed up at the store, angry and distraught. Jack/Jackie was 137

adamant that s/he had contributed to the lottery pool for Friday and that Lane was cheating him/her 138

out of his/her share. I told Jack/Jackie what Lane said that Friday when buying the tickets and this 139

upset him/her even more. Jack/Jackie said that Lane bought the tickets earlier than usual that day, but 140

s/he put money for Friday’s pool in Lane’s desk with a note on it back on Wednesday. I referred 141

Jack/Jackie to a local Miltonville attorney so s/he could get legal advice on what to do next. I haven’t 142

seen or heard from him/her since. I hate to sound cliché but what happened to Jack/Jackie just proves 143

that money is the root of all evil. 144

__________________________

Kerry Chatham

SIGNED AND SWORN to me on September 1, 2018.

______________________________

C.M. McCormack, Notary Public

WITNESS ADDENDUM

I have reviewed this statement, given by me on the date above, and I have nothing of significance to

add at this time. The material facts are true and correct.

Signed,

___________________________ ______________________

Kerry Chatham Date

Kerry Chatham

Kerry Chatham Morning of Trial

33

Statement of Lane Shutze

STATEMENT OF LANE SHUTZE

1. I’m an architect by trade. I don’t have a pocket protector or a pencil behind my ear, but I must 1

admit I drive a Subaru hatchback and I have more Moleskine notebooks than is necessary or prudent. 2

You see, I got into architecture to make the world better. I’m an ideas person, and yes, an idealist. 3

Before the recession, I was part of a mid-sized boutique firm specializing in sustainable, responsible 4

design. We created beautiful, safe, LEED-certified schools, libraries, and event spaces—places 5

communities could gather in comfort and style. I was a cultural curator. 6

7

2. Now, at age 33, I am everything I hate: a lackey for greedy developers who maximize profits at 8

any expense. Instead of independent and creative thinking, I’m working for soul-crushing big corporate 9

clients to generate mediocre shopping malls, uninspired office parks, and scurrilous “mixed use” 10

developments. No matter how much panache I try to give these middle class graveyards, the powers-11

that-be always object. Less style! More utilitarian! Cheaper! If it weren’t so lucrative, I’d tell them 12

where they can put their next strip mall. Sadly, principles don’t put food on the table, and I’ve got a 13

spouse and two daughters so I have to bring home the organic, preservative-free bacon. At least I am 14

freelancing, so I am available if the right client with vision comes along. 15

16

3. Since I needed a physical location, I rented a desk at WorkSpace in Carley Corners Village. 17

Sonny/Sunny Rawlings keeps the coffee hot and the lights on, but otherwise keeps to him/herself. It 18

is nice enough there, and the people get along. We are the Kelley’s Heroes of the business world – a 19

group of miscreants that have very little in common, aside from the almighty dollar. There’s a real 20

hodgepodge of professions here, so there is very little direct competition. Well, I guess you might call 21

Jack/Jackie Hutchinson “competition,” but Hutchinson is only an architectural designer. Seriously, 22

anybody who doesn’t have the guts to sit for Boards shouldn’t be able to call themselves anything with 23

“architect” in the name. It is really like comparing the Atlanta Braves and the Savannah Sand Gnats. 24

We do have a few things in common, but Hutchinson plays “A” ball while I compete in “The Show.” 25

What really chafes me are the clients who do not know the difference, and go to someone like 26

Hutchinson to save a few bucks. I’ve lost some clients to Hutchinson myself. It feels like s/he is taking 27

money out of my own pockets. 28

29

4. I ran into Gabby Wren in the middle of 2017. I remembered him/her from my days at the 30

Savannah College of Art and Design. It was great to catch up with Gabby – it reminded me how much 31

I really missed the shop talk you have with someone in your own profession and not just a wannabe. 32

Gabby was going through the same thing I went through when I first set out on my own, so I suggested 33

WorkSpace. Between you and me, I did check to see if we had the same potential client base before I 34

mentioned it. After I found out Gabby would not be my direct competition, swipe right! I welcomed 35

him/her to the building. It would be good to have a kindred spirit there, instead of the “architect lite” 36

who always had something to prove. 37

38

34

Statement of Lane Shutze

5. I tend to get along with most of the people at WorkSpace. Gabby and I have fallen into a lunch 39

group with Sonny/Sunny Rawlings, the office manager, Lee Fannin, who does some kind of leaf sales 40

thing, and Hutchinson. Everyone usually meets up for lunch when they’re in the office and uses the 41

group to shoot the breeze throughout the day. 42

43

6. To keep things marginally interesting around WorkSpace, I am the “commissioner” of the office 44

Fantasy Football league, sports tournament pick’em pools, and the bi-weekly lottery. For Fantasy 45

Football, it is understood that I WILL bench your players if you haven’t paid up by the end of week 46

one—no grace period. A week of benchwarmers will severely hurt your chances of getting your name 47

engraved on the Merit Exempt Fantasy Football League Champion trophy, a beautiful sterling silver 48

exact replica of the Lombardi trophy. Not to brag, but since its inception in the 2008 season, a mere 49

nine seasons ago, my name graces the trophy four times. 50

51

7. I used to play some video poker down at Lucky’s, the “neighborhood” convenience store. Just for 52

fun, of course. I heard later that some of the employees got in trouble for giving cash payouts on those 53

machines. Everyone who plays those knows that’s not legal. After all that happened, I did try to joke 54

around about with Kerry Chatham, the day shift manager but s/he didn’t seem to appreciate my 55

particular brand of humor. Too soon? 56

57

8. I support accessible higher education through my regular contributions to the Georgia Lotto. Did 58

you know that by law, one-third of the money goes to fund the HOPE scholarship? I’m so dedicated I 59

never cash out—I either win big or eventually lose everything, just like the Mega Pick slogan says. I 60

often use winning scratch-offs to buy a round or two of sodas at the Square Soda Fountain on 61

Wednesdays, or to settle up other debts. Every Tuesday and Friday, my fellow philanthropists and I 62

pool our donations together and roll the dice. Tuesday is the BigBucks drawing and Friday is Mega 63

Pick. Each person puts in $10. Each $10 gets us two picks, or lines. I always play the same numbers on 64

one of the lines each time. 4, 8, 15, 16, 23, and 42. I knew they’d hit one day. Fannin got bent out of 65

shape that I was playing them for the group. S/He said they were his/her numbers from China and I 66

shouldn’t be using them for personal benefit. I apologized and everything, just to get him/her to shut 67

up about it. The rest of the picks will typically be Quick Piks for the five main numbers and the Mega 68

Ball/Power Ball. Every now and then, I’ll pick a Mega Ball/Power Ball number for good measure. I don’t 69

waste money on the multiplier thing, at least with the office picks. We started doing the Tuesday 70

BigBucks drawings back when it was the only multi-state lottery in Georgia. Then, when Georgia got 71

into the Mega Pick game, we added that as an option. Everyone in our group plays the BigBucks 72

drawings on Tuesdays pretty consistently. Fridays aren’t as consistent except for Gabby and me. We’ll 73

usually get one or two others each week but a few people only play on Tuesday. I guess they’re saving 74

their $10 for the weekend. 75

76

9. We do have rules for playing. For the office lotto entries, I keep one of the aforementioned 77

Moleskine notebooks in my desk drawer. I use that to record each drawings’ contributions. To avoid 78

mix-ups from one drawing to the next, I only take money for the next upcoming game. Only US legal 79

tender will do; I’m not about that Venmo/Apple Pay/PayPal life. If someone is going to play, they have 80

35

Statement of Lane Shutze

to give me their money by lunchtime on the day of the drawing. That way I can go get the tickets 81

shortly before the balls start rolling down the chutes. I prefer people to physically hand me their 82

money with a Post-It note on it with their name, since it is so much safer and prevents so many 83

arguments. I will then immediately put their name in the notebook. When I enter the contribution, I’ll 84

hand them the Post-it back with a red check mark on it. I always use my red Staedtler Triplus Color 85

323 marker. That set is great and a lot of architects use them for their detailed drawings, even for my 86

stupid strip malls. That check mark is their confirmation that I got it and that their name is in the book. 87

I put the date I get the money so if there’s question, there’s a record on my end. If I am not at my desk, 88

occasionally someone will leave their money under my collector’s edition X-Wing figurine that sits next 89

to my perfect attendance certificate from 3rd grade with the Post-It note on it with their name and 90

date. I’ll check mark the note and put it on the contributor’s desk, letting them know I got it. Them 91

putting it there runs the risk that the money could get lost or stolen, sure, but if someone is so 92

impatient that they can’t wait for me to get back to my desk, that is their call. If someone does this, 93

I’ll put an asterisk in the notebook. 94

95

10. We only had one time where someone put money on my desk and it turned up “missing.” It was 96

a Tuesday game, and we ended up hitting a $500 jackpot. I went into WorkSpace the next day with 97

the good news, and told the other four people who played that we were getting $100 apiece. That’s 98

when Lewis Medlock, who runs a whitewater rafting tour company, said that he chipped in the day 99

before. He explained that he put the money under the X-Wing and left a pink Post-It on it. I asked if he 100

got the Post-It back with a check mark on it, and he hung his head. I showed him my notebook, and 101

his name was not in it. He said it must have been stolen. The other four winners and I went to a 102

conference room and had a confab. After a bit of an argument, we decided to cut him in. After all, he 103

was a regular player, and his explanation was theoretically possible (although it had never happened 104

before). The dissenting vote was Hutchinson, who just could not believe that the money was stolen. 105

Hutchinson grew up in a small town, probably the type where no one ever locked their doors at night. 106

S/He’s in the big city now. Stuff happens. You can’t always trust everyone around you. Medlock’s name 107

wasn’t in the book which means he never turned in his money. That was the day all the winners 108

received $83.33. Well, I kept the .02 left over…for administrative fees. 109

110

11. Sometimes, people don’t have their $10 cash to put in on the day of the drawing. I don’t take 111

IOUs on a regular basis, and then, only for certain players. Usually, someone else will spot them and 112

it’s up to them to collect. Hutchinson was the one who always seemed short on cash. I let him/her get 113

by on an IOU a couple of times but after having to hound him/her for several days to get square, I cut 114

him/her off. S/He seemed to take it personally. The week of the winning drawing, Hutchinson must 115

have really needed the money, because s/he kept asking Gabby or me to cover him/her. Gabby was a 116

little more generous and covered him/her for Tuesday, but I wanted no part of keeping Hutchinson in 117

the game on my dime. I have no idea if Hutchinson ever paid anybody back for the cover. Besides, 118

Hutchinson constantly bad-mouthed the game, saying I was unlucky and I was the reason we always 119

lost. Every time Hutchinson brought it up, I’d just say, “$83.33” and walk away. It was only a matter of 120

time before we hit it big. 121

122

36

Statement of Lane Shutze

12. During the days leading up to the June 29th Mega Pick drawing, WorkSpace was pretty vacant. I 123

can’t tell you if Hutchinson ever came in at all…I try not to bother myself with his/her whereabouts. 124

Gabby gave me $10, and I put his/her name in the book. I can positively say that Hutchinson never 125

handed me $10 for the lottery. No money ever appeared under my X-Wing either, except Fannin’s 126

money for the following Tuesday. It was there a little before lunch on Wednesday. I processed it usual 127

and put the note on Fannin’s desk that afternoon, along with a reminder about jumping a drawing 128

with the payment. The noonish deadline came and went, so I went to lunch with Sonny/Sunny. 129

Sonny/Sunny ended up paying for lunch, but that was because I left my wallet in my desk. I bought 130

lunch a few weeks ago, so I think we’re even. 131

132

13. Before we headed out to lunch, Hutchinson came up and said something about being smart in 133

picking the numbers. Again with the “Lane is unlucky” bit! I told him/her that s/he was welcome to 134

come along and give some advice on what numbers we should use but s/he didn’t say anything except, 135

“I’m tired of giving you my $10 and never getting anything out of it.” I told him/her that that’s the 136

nature of gambling and that no one makes you play. S/He then accused me of messing around with 137

the money each week and that “you probably go spend it on the video poker machines, asking Kerry 138

to give you money again for your winnings. I’m surprised the Lotto Authority didn’t do anything to you 139

after you were caught last year.” I was dumbstruck. Was Hutchinson the one that tried to get the Lotto 140

Authority to investigate me? I knew someone had filed a complaint with them and I had to answer 141

questions and do an audit with the Department of Revenue. It was a HUGE pain. They even got my 142

firm to send in W-2 information over the past three years. I was so mad I stared Hutchinson in the eye 143

until s/he blinked and then turned and walked away. I wasn’t real talkative at lunch. 144

145

14. When it came time to buy the tickets, it was just me and Gabby. I’m glad Hutchinson didn’t try to 146

tag along to pick numbers. We decided to get the tickets at Lucky’s and then grab a drink at Rieke’s. 147

While in line, Gabby asked if Hutchinson had chipped in, and I said no. I really don’t remember saying 148

anything else…it was such an inconsequential conversation and Hutchinson was such an 149

inconsequential person. I gave Chatham the lotto play-slip asked him/her for a bag of Chester’s Fries 150

– you know, the poor man’s Flamin’ Hot Cheetos? Sadly, s/he was out. We picked up the tickets and 151

went to happy hour for drinks and free appetizers. 152

153

15. The rest, as they say, is history. 154

155

16. I will always remember where I was when the term “sore loser” was redefined: Monday morning 156

at WorkSpace, when Hutchinson acted like a total graceless fool over my jackpot. As is typical in the 157

sore loser textbook, s/he cycled through all the stages of a poor sport: shock, disbelief, denial, anger, 158

bargaining, bitterness, blaming everyone else, accusations of cheating, cries of unfairness, gnashing of 159

teeth, and finally, this absurd lawsuit. The punting of the trash can was a nice touch to the fit 160

Hutchinson threw. S/He even decapitated a bobble head with the can. It was quite awesome. I have 161

no idea where this Post-it note came from that Hutchinson claimed s/he found. Someone cleaned up 162

the mess Hutchinson made and put everything in a different trash can since Hutchinson destroyed 163

Gabby’s. Fannin says s/he saw Hutchinson rooting around my desk a little after the drama and got 164

37

Statement of Lane Shutze

excited about finding something, running to Sonny/Sunny with it. Hutchinson never said anything to 165

me or Gabby about it until it came up in this lawsuit. It didn’t even have my check mark on it, so it 166

proves I never received it. Hutchinson probably made it him/herself. I do know that when I got back 167

to my desk later on Monday, after Hutchinson had left, I found my lottery notebook and Staedtler 168

pens out of place. The notebook lives in the top right-hand drawer and the pens are in the cabinet 169

above the desk in a case. The notebook and some of the pens were on my desk, not where I left them. 170

171

17. Gabby and I decided we should go ahead and claim the money before Hutchinson did anything 172

stupid or this went public. Gabby asked that I claim the prize and petition the Lotto Authority to let 173

him/her stay anonymous, then distribute it 50/50. Before I was able to pay Gabby his/her share, I was 174

hit with this lawsuit and had to pay the money into the registry of the court. 175

176

18. Of course the Monday-morning quarterback wished s/he had gotten his/her money in now that 177

we hit it big—but that is not how it works! You snooze, you lose, and Hutchinson snoozed and lost. 178

S/He DID NOT put in money before this drawing. I’m sure of it. I didn’t get that note, I didn’t mark that 179

note, and I didn’t toss that note. I understand being disappointed, but them’s the breaks. There was 180

no conspiracy, no grand scheme to fleece him/her out of winnings—and I owe him/her NOTHING. Ever 181

heard of Occam’s razor? The simplest explanation is usually the right one. The more assumptions you 182

have to make, the more unlikely an explanation. Jackie acts like I KNEW we were going to hit the 183

jackpot, and intentionally left him/her out. What am I, some evil sideshow clairvoyant? I gazed into 184

my crystal ball and predicted the future? Preposterous. The truth, the simplest explanation, is s/he did 185

not contribute and has no claim to the prize. Hutchison pity party of one, your table is now available. 186

__________________________

Lane Shutze

SIGNED AND SWORN to me on, September 17, 2018.

______________________________

C.M. McCormack, Notary Public

WITNESS ADDENDUM

I have reviewed this statement, given by me on the date above, and I have nothing of significance to

add at this time. The material facts are true and correct.

Signed,

___________________________ ______________________

Lane Shutze Date

Lane Shutze

Lane Shutze

Morning of Trial

38

Statement of Gabriel/Gabrielle Wren

STATEMENT OF GABRIEL/GABRIELLE WREN

1. My name is Gabriel/Gabrielle Wren, but people just call me Gabby. Ever since I was young, I 1

enjoyed building things. My beach sand castles would last for days (the secret is the proper water to 2

sand ratio). There were so many crates of Legos in my parents’ attic from my childhood, when they 3

sold the house they just left them for the next owner rather than try to move and store them. 4

5

2. Naturally, this led to architecture. I received my Masters at the Savannah College of Art and 6

Design, and interned with Yin & Yang Design Studio for three years. Once I took my boards and became 7

licensed myself, I decided to go out on my own. That is when I learned the biggest secret they keep 8

from you in architecture school – you can do most of this from your apartment and in your pajamas. I 9

wasn’t a huge social butterfly growing up, so the solitude never really bothered me. That’s because I 10

had Rags. My dog was my loyal companion, until that fateful day. You see, Rags loved to play fetch 11

with a tennis ball. One day he was pestering me to throw it, and I was really busy. He wouldn’t take 12

“no” for an answer, so I picked up the slobbery ball and blindly threw it as hard as I could. All I wanted 13

to do was get him out of the room so I could finish my project. Well, it took an unlucky ricochet and 14

went out the open window, Rags faithfully following it. I like to think he got the ball before it went 15

down all three stories. I still can’t look at a can of Penn Champ XDs without getting a little teary-eyed. 16

17

3. The loss of Rags forced me to reevaluate my solitary ways. I also came to realize I needed some 18

sort of public presence – a place to meet with clients, suppliers, builders, etc. Luckily enough, that’s 19

when I ran into Lane Shutze at Nick & Nat’s Pizzeria by the Square in July of 2017. I remembered Lane 20

from the architecture program back at SCAD. S/He was a year behind me, but we did roam the same 21

halls. Lane told me about a new workspace concept over at Carley Corners Village, conveniently called 22

WorkSpace. It seemed like a good deal, so I met with Sonny/Sunny Rawlings to look it over. It wasn’t 23

anything fancy, but it looked like it would serve a business purpose so I signed up for a permanent 24

desk, closer to the coffee bar. The standing desk I had as my home office fit perfectly, so I brought it 25

in to use here. Turns out being in this environment also helped me with my social skills, which were 26

seriously lacking upon my arrival. 27

28

4. WorkSpace had a friendly bunch of people there. We all got along just fine, which surprised me a 29

bit since the only thing most of us had in common is that we all needed some sort of office space. I 30

think it had to do with the open floor plan. Of course, it didn’t hurt that very few people’s businesses 31

were in direct competition with each other. Sure, Lane and I were architects, but we drew from 32

different client pools. With so much in common, Lane and I hung out more and more (both at 33

WorkSpace and after), and soon became best friends. Sure, Lane is an acquired taste, but who isn’t? I 34

did notice that Lane and Jack/Jackie Hutchinson didn’t socialize that often. Jack/Jackie is an 35

architectural designer, and is probably Lane’s more direct competition in the office. I asked Lane about 36

it and s/he said that Jack/Jackie had some sort of mysterious grudge against him/her. Lane is always 37

teasing Jack/Jackie about being an “architect lite,” and accusing Jack/Jackie of architect envy. Also, 38

Lane said that Jack/Jackie believed Lane to be unlucky, and that’s why the office pool was never 39

39

Statement of Gabriel/Gabrielle Wren

successful. Jack/Jackie seemed like a nice person to me, so I just chalked their abrasiveness towards 40

each other to each person’s eccentricities. Nobody likes everybody, right? 41

42

5. First Monday Mixers were a blast. My confidence was growing with each party, opening up and 43

getting to know the fellow space sharers. This is also where having a friend like Lane really pays off. 44

Lane really works the room, speaking with just about everybody and always having something nice to 45

say. This is where I learned about the office lottery pool. I’m really not the gambling type, but it seemed 46

like a good way to participate in a group activity. Lane explained that s/he organized the office pool to 47

play the Tuesday BigBucks and Friday Mega Pick games. Although the Tuesday game wasn’t 48

mandatory, everybody played. Friday, however, was played less frequently by some people. Lane 49

collected all the money and kept a notebook of who paid and when. Lane was also in charge of buying 50

the tickets at Lucky’s from Kerry Chatham. Lane told me about one time when everyone but one 51

person paid in for a Tuesday ticket. The ticket was a $500 winner, so Lane still split the proceeds with 52

everybody who played and the one person who didn’t, mainly because he was a regular but had forgot 53

to turn his money in or something. Lane said Jack/Jackie seemed especially perturbed about the extra 54

person getting the money...knowing Lane, I’m sure there was some sort of scene. Anyway, I trusted 55

Lane, so I decided to play. 56

57

6. Collections were easy for the first Tuesday lottery of the month because Lane would get all the 58

money at the First Monday mixer. After that, it all seemed a little bit loosey-goosey. If Lane was at 59

his/her desk when the player came by, the money was taken and the entry was immediately made in 60

the notebook in his/her desk drawer. If Lane wasn’t there, the player would drop off the money in the 61

desk drawer where Lane kept the notebook with a sticky note. Lane would give the note back showing 62

that it had been recorded. Then, on Tuesday and Friday afternoon, Lane would go to Lucky’s and buy 63

the tickets. 64

65

7. The system did have a few hiccups. Every so often, Jack/Jackie would drop money off but not stick 66

around to make sure his/her name was put in the book. Instead, Jack/Jackie would put a Post-it note 67

on the money and leave it under the space fighter Lane had on his/her desk. Also, some players might 68

not have the cash on hand, be sick, out on business, etc., and Lane or I might cover their contribution. 69

However, we never covered someone without being specifically asked, and we were always paid back. 70

I can think of a time or two that I tossed in $10 for someone but forgot to get Lane to put their name 71

in the book. Since we didn’t win during those weeks, it was much ado about nothing. I also started 72

semi-regularly going with Lane to buy the tickets at Lucky’s, more on Fridays than Tuesdays because 73

we would head down to Rieke’s for a drink afterward. We would also pick up some scratch-off tickets 74

for ourselves, but I am positive that none of the pool money was ever spent on those tickets. 75

76

8. Jack/Jackie was a player, but I wouldn’t call him/her a “regular.” Jack/Jackie seems to be out of 77

the office more so than most, and would occasionally ask me to cover that week’s contribution. To my 78

knowledge, Jack/Jackie never asked Lane to cover – ever. Jack/Jackie is really an uptight person, and 79

worries about things too much, so it seemed odd that Jack/Jackie would play the lottery at all. Once 80

or twice, s/he would drop off the contribution, and walk away (there was never very much 81

40

Statement of Gabriel/Gabrielle Wren

conversation between the two). Lane would then look right at me and put the $10 in his/her wallet, 82

chuckling and rubbing his/her hands together like some silent movie villain. I am positive Lane was 83

joking, though, because the money seemed to be there when we went to buy the tickets. Jack/Jackie 84

did ask me to cover him/her for the Tuesday (the 26th) drawing but never did pay me back before the 85

weekend. 86

87

9. The morning of June 27th was clear and sunny, with the fresh warmth of a full-summer day; the 88

flowers were blossoming profusely and the grass was richly green. That day I did overhear Jack/Jackie 89

talking with Lee Fannin, about mid-morning, about how large the Mega Pick prize was getting, and 90

talking about what Jack/Jackie could do with all that money, maybe buying a house on Easy Street on 91

the west side. Jack/Jackie actually took out a $10 bill and put it on his/her desk under a paperweight. 92

I assumed it was for that week’s lottery, but it could have also been for lunch. I was a bit put off since 93

s/he obviously had the money but didn’t pay me back from Tuesday’s game. After all, Lee was making 94

the food run for lunch. I do not recall seeing Jack/Jackie anywhere near Lane’s desk that day, but I 95

really wasn’t watching out for him/her. Like I said, my desk is by the coffee bar. Lane rents a larger 96

desk at the other end of the space in the cubicle section. 97

98

10. Imagine how confused I was on Friday morning when I overheard Jack/Jackie and Sonny/Sunny 99

chatting about the Friday game in the coffee bar. Jack/Jackie was talking like s/he had not contributed 100

yet, saying things like s/he needed to contribute, and stuff about Lane’s luck. I had assumed that 101

Jack/Jackie chipped in on Wednesday, but after hearing that conversation I was not so sure. I thought 102

to myself that noon was fast approaching and Jack/Jackie needed to get with Lane before lunch. 103

104

11. Later that day, Lane came up to me around closing time and asked if I wanted to go buy the tickets. 105

I was up for it, so we headed over to Lucky’s. Lane pulled out the money, and s/he only had $20 – 106

enough for four tickets. I know I put my $10 in, and I figured Lane had chipped in...where was 107

everybody else’s money? It seemed like a shallow pool but like I said, Fridays weren’t the big game 108

everyone played, even though this Friday’s drawing was for $120 million. I thought back to what I 109

heard Jack/Jackie say earlier in the week, so I asked Lane if Jack/Jackie had contributed. Lane shrugged 110

his/her shoulders and mumbled something like “it serves them right” and maybe something about 111

him/her being “subsidized”? I don’t know what s/he said...s/he could have been asking Chatham for a 112

bag of Chester’s Fries. You know, the flaming hot kind? S/he didn’t wind up getting a bag, so I suppose 113

the convenience store was out. Lane bought the tickets and we went down to Rieke’s. 114

115

12. We were at Rieke’s at just before eight o’clock when they draw the numbers. Neither one of us 116

were paying much attention until the third number popped out, 15. Lane took out the ticket and stared 117

silently. When all the numbers were drawn, it looked like you could have knocked Lane over with a 118

feather. S/He silently showed me the ticket – we won! I may have screamed a little, but Lane quickly 119

hushed me. S/He whispered that we needed to be nonchalant, since the ticket was as good as cash 120

until it was redeemed. Rieke’s isn’t a seedy place by any means, but I saw the point. Lane agreed to 121

put the ticket in a safety deposit box first thing the next morning. We were both rich! Now that I think 122

about it, I’m not sure why I picked up the tab that night. 123

41

Statement of Gabriel/Gabrielle Wren

124

13. Lane beat me to WorkSpace Monday morning and must have shared the good news, because it 125

seemed like everyone knew that one of the Friday tickets won the jackpot. People were standing 126

around the coffee bar area, congratulating Lane left and right. Jack/Jackie came up to me and started 127

chatting, and said something about what s/he's going to do with the money. This was quite surprising, 128

but I learned two things. First, Jack/Jackie thought s/he chipped in for Friday’s tickets. Second, Lane 129

hadn’t told anyone that s/he and I were the only players. In fact, it looked like Lane hadn’t told anyone 130

that I had played in the first place. It kept me out of the limelight, so I was ok with it. I didn’t know 131

what to say and kept my mouth shut. Jack/Jackie went up to Lane like they were best friends, shaking 132

his/her hand saying, “Congratulations! We did it!” Lane grinned and said, “Thanks. What did we do?” 133

Jack/Jackie looked confused for a second when Lane said, “Oh, the lottery? Yeah, I guess we did. At 134

least Gabby and I did. No one else put their money in.” There came the limelight. 135

136

14. Thankfully, I was forgotten pretty quickly; as soon as Jack/Jackie realized that s/he wasn’t in on 137

the ticket, s/he exploded, getting up in Lane’s face and screaming about being cheated out of his/her 138

cut. Lane almost grinned at him/her when s/he caught on to the drama. This set Jack/Jackie off even 139

more. Jack/Jackie ripped open Lane’s desk drawer and snatched the notebook out, ripping through 140

the pages to the Friday entries. Then, not seeing his/her name, was silent for a minute before glaring 141

at Lane saying “I paid my $10 and you know it. You pocketed my money so I wouldn’t be able to win! 142

You’ve always been a cheat!” S/He then clinched his/her fists, and with steam about to come out of 143

his/her ears, took a couple of steps and kicked my trash can so hard it cleared the cubicles next to my 144

desk, bounced off the top of a wall of Rachel Jackson’s cubicle on the far side, decapitating her Lil’ 145

Nemesis T bobble head along the way. It then ricocheted up and crashed into the office wall above 146

another cubicle, landing with a clang in the aisle next to Lane’s desk, knocking his/her trash can over 147

too. Stuff flew out of my trash can all over the floor as it sailed and bounced through the air. Lane’s 148

looked like it exploded. As shocking as it was, it was also pretty impressive. Sonny/Sunny had to get in 149

between Lane and Jack/Jackie to calm him/her down. Lee started cleaning up all of the stuff from my 150

trash can and put it all in another can since mine was trash itself. As Sonny/Sunny pulled Jack/Jackie 151

away, Jack/Jackie kept glaring at Lane saying, “I’m going to get my third, you rotten low-life!” Lane 152

couldn’t wipe the grin off his/her face for a while. 153

154

15. Lane and I agreed that s/he would go cash the ticket in at the Lotto Authority office and keep me 155

as an anonymous second player (saving me from all the publicity), and then Lane would get me my 156

half. Lane cashed in the winning ticket, but Jack/Jackie filed this lawsuit before I could get my half. 157

Now I’ve been dragged into all this mess, and my business has started to suffer because of being 158

associated with this workplace rift. I get Lane’s point, but seriously – I’d be happy with a third, if that 159

would make all of this go away. There’s enough to go around. 160

42

Statement of Gabriel/Gabrielle Wren

_____________________________

Gabriel/Gabrielle Wren

SIGNED AND SWORN to me on, September 13, 2018.

______________________________

C.M. McCormack, Notary Public

WITNESS ADDENDUM

I have reviewed this statement, given by me on the date above, and I have nothing of significance to

add at this time. The material facts are true and correct.

Signed,

___________________________ ______________________

Gabriel/Gabrielle Wren Date

Gabriel/Gabrielle Wren

Morning of Trial Gabriel/Gabrielle Wren

43

Statement of Lee Fannin

STATEMENT OF LEE FANNIN

1. My Name is Lee Fannin, and I’m the founder of Leaf Anon®. I realized, from tiring personal 1

experience, that customers don’t like raking, bagging, and carting-off leaves; I discovered, from 2

listening carefully, that customers would buy the locally-sourced compost I could make from all the 3

leaves (and other carry-away items) on a spare tract of land my family is holding for development. It’s 4

always nice to get paid both ways. But the real money –the “soon” part of “anon”– was when I saw 5

persons coming to my dump for out-of-season leaves for decorations, store displays, whatever. 6

7

2. Now (at least until the new tariffs put me out of business), I have supply chain from the Orient 8

(low labor costs) to deliver artificial foliage on-demand. As you can guess, the back-room, in both 9

businesses, isn’t here, but an office is essential: a public footprint, a place to line up business and keep 10

track of accounts. I out-source most of the billing, as I do answering the phone, labor and shipping, 11

but I still need an office for myself. The WorkSpace site has been ideal; I’m in and out, but there most 12

of the day. I helped organize –and now I participate in (but mostly on Tuesdays, not Fridays)– the 13

gambling pool as a way to socialize with my various office-mates; I don’t have big expectations of a 14

profit –they didn’t build Vegas nor Macau off giving gamblers an even break– or... well, perhaps I 15

should say that I didn’t. Now, after this, I dunno... 16

17

3. I have one of the window offices on the perimeter of the open, shared space – I need somewhere 18

to keep my files, you see– and I am generally in the office: first, to handle business with local customers 19

and businesses on local time; then second, to take advantage of the night-to-day zone difference 20

between here and my suppliers overseas. I don’t have a dog – I have a bird, and Tweets is fine at home 21

alone with the Internet (so far as I can tell)– so I’m not at Delaney’s, but I do use the time between 22

work demands to run my domestic errands and make out-of-office appointments. That is why I make 23

a point of socializing with the other businesses which share the space, and I’ve become a regular for 24

the Tuesday lotteries –BigBucks– but not a pretty frequent participant on Fridays’ Mega Pick. I’m not 25

getting any of the big windfall here, but that doesn’t really matter to me; unlike the architects, I’m not 26

impatient to quit my job and become a client rather than a professional. 27

28

4. On that point, some of the others are correct about the “usual suspects” occasionally covering for 29

one another when one of us can’t make it into the office –that’s happened to me, on both sides of the 30

coin– but there really has to be, per an unspoken rule, some overture of interest, at least for Fridays 31

since only some of us play regularly. Tuesday’s lunch tends to be the most vigorous in terms of 32

camaraderie where those of us who are playing and those who are simply emotional piggy-backers 33

get together to ruminate over the pending draw: really milk it, and tease one another – mostly Shutze, 34

our “commissioner”– about superstitious lucky and unlucky numbers, even though the pick is 35

computer generated by the software at the Lucky’s convenience store terminal. Usually, there’s a 36

point in the discussion where you can ask somebody to cover your contribution for you if you find 37

yourself short on cash. Shutze doesn’t take guarantees. An additional element of chance with the pool 38

is the X-Wing model on Shutze’s desk for when s/he’s out doing site-work (or whatever those 39

44

Statement of Lee Fannin

architects folks do on building projects to make sure the structure doesn’t turn into the Towering 40

Inferno or the Leaning Tower of Pisa. I don’t know where Shutze goes when s/he’s out of here). The 41

element of risk being that your money is out in the open for any casual passerby to see. Shutze’s desk 42

being in a cubicle adds a touch of security but the walls give one cover to do a quick snatch-and-grab 43

without others possibly seeing. 44

45

5. At least for me, playing the pool really is about the social aspect: communication, trust and 46

relationships. It’s worth a weekly investment of $10. I don’t –well, I didn’t– have any magical thinking 47

about hitting it big and quitting (what else would I do, go home and groom the parrot twelve hours a 48

day?) Sixteen hours across the Pacific to consult with my environmental “partners” in humid and 49

smoggy cities? It might be nicer, flying First Class (or even private), but I really hate to travel, and I’ve 50

already had all the exotic cuisine my bowels can handle. No, back to nature: I’ll stay home and tend to 51

the Leaf Anon® recycling pits –at least composting is eco-friendly! Of course, I’ve noticed that some of 52

the players are less practical than I am. I guess that’s at the root of the current hard feelings –dreams 53

smashed and all– but it’s stupid not to be content with playing for the fun and camaraderie of it. In 54

retrospect, the ticket won, but what were the odds? 55

56

6. So, if you want to play, you need to turn in your money or ask somebody else to do it for you by 57

lunchtime of the day of the drawing. Well, this got to be another unspoken convention on days when 58

Shutze was off doing whatever s/he did out of the office: you could drop a note at Shutze’s desk asking 59

for a credit, so if you didn’t have a Hamilton in-hand, you’re promising that you’re good for it later. 60

But it was expected that you’d settle-up promptly afterwards; this was supposed to be about fun and 61

camaraderie, and carrying deadbeats week after week isn’t conducive to that, even at only ten bucks 62

a pop. 63

64

7. I didn’t learn until about two months before the big win that Shutze had been playing the same 65

set of numbers for a while: 4, 8, 15, 16, 23, and 42. You wouldn’t think this was a big deal except those 66

numbers came from my study of an old, obscure Chinese numerology belief I learned from one of my 67

Chinese suppliers while in Guangzhou a number of years back. Math is a part of the natural world in 68

many forms. Once you know where to look and how to see it, you find numbers and math all around 69

us. The numerology belief is the idea that certain combinations of numbers in specific orders explain 70

various things in the world. This group of numbers is found to have a positive trait in nature. I explained 71

this theory to the group at lunch one day and Shutze must have taken them from there. I confronted 72

Shutze about it and s/he apologized and said that if the numbers ever did get drawn, s/he’d give me a 73

small, perhaps 1 percent, cut of his/her winnings. 74

75

8. Dealing with the Asian markets, especially on the local level, is a bit different than business in the 76

States. The government is much more involved with things, as are the various local “organizations” 77

that tend to run these municipalities outside– or perhaps underneath –the government’s view. 78

Competition in everything is much tighter over there with so many people competing for the same 79

resources, so it usually takes a bit more financial liquidity to provide to the right people to make your 80

needs win priority. In addition, being in a business that is cyclical with the seasons, there are natural 81

45

Statement of Lee Fannin

ebbs and flow to supplies. A couple of years of drought also pinched my suppliers, so I had to spend 82

more to replace the lost bulk. To do business, you have to embrace the local requirements to win, and 83

keep, the contracts. It’s the cost of doing business. What may be frowned upon here is everyday life 84

over there. It is what it is and the world’s economy is the better for it. 85

86

9. The week of what turned out to be the big drawing, I knew I was going to be out of the office back 87

on the farm and wasn’t planning on playing Friday’s Mega Pick. We had seen large jackpots before, so 88

it wasn’t out of ordinary for Friday to be a lesser-played drawing. I planned on staying late on Tuesday 89

to catch up on things and make some phone calls to my suppliers in China –international business is 90

never easy. I knew it was going to be a long night. 91

92

10. My overnight quickly bled into Wednesday morning, and the next thing I knew people were 93

arriving for work. I was there to see the custodians come through doing their nightly cleaning Tuesday 94

evening. (However, I did notice that a few things I had thrown away overnight were still in my bin 95

Monday morning when I got back, so it seemed that they were either out the rest of the week or 96

missed my office. I don’t think I locked the door but I would imagine they would have the master key.) 97

I had to stay a lot longer than I planned due to some Chinese holiday making it hard to get ahold of 98

people. I packed up to leave, exhausted from the marathon work session. Besides, I still have trouble 99

adjusting to the time zones. I didn’t know if I was going to be back in the office before next Tuesday, 100

July 3rd, so I graced Shutze’s Rebel Alliance paperweight with the bill (for next Tuesday, not this coming 101

Friday) while I had it, along with the requisite Post-It note stating my intentions and apologizing for 102

being early. Just to be safe, I put another note in the notebook itself, so Shutze would be sure to see 103

my payment. As I was flipping to the Tuesday list, I glanced at that Friday’s list out of simple curiosity. 104

I didn’t see that anyone had put in for Friday yet, as best I recall. And there wasn’t anything under the 105

paperweight. As I was exiting the building, I saw Lane heading towards the office, so I felt better that 106

s/he would find my money sooner rather than later. 107

108

11. On the way out, I struck up a conversation with Jack/Jackie Hutchinson at his/her desk. We talked 109

about all sorts of things – the weather, the ever-increasing Friday lottery jackpot, my lack of sleep – 110

and Jack/Jackie said something about what s/he could do with all that money and how glad s/he was 111

to be in the pool, that s/he made sure to give the money directly to Lane early this time. My sleep-112

deprived brain really didn’t think to question it, but it sounded like Jack/Jackie was playing the Friday 113

lottery but from what I had seen, s/he hadn’t put his/her money in yet. I didn’t think to mention that 114

I had not seen his/her name in the notebook but s/he had until noon Friday to get it in. I was out for 115

the rest of the week. 116

117

12. Early on Monday, I did find my note with the red check on my desk for the next day’s drawing, 118

with an addendum from Shutze admonishing me to not make donations too early. Before Shutze came 119

in, I did check the book to see that Lane had filled it in for my usual Tuesday play (I’d been tired, in the 120

wee hours, and if you’re not just a little paranoid, you’re probably not the conscientious 121

businessperson your customers want to rely upon). Again, I don’t recall seeing Hutchinson’s name for 122

the previous Friday. 123

46

Statement of Lee Fannin

124

13. Of course, once Shutze did show up at WorkSpace, with Wren happily tagging behind and grinning 125

like the Cheshire Cat –both of them really, but Wren sort of smirks (think of Peter Lorre) while Shutze’s 126

smile looks ghoulish (think of Secretary of State John Kerry or that description of Robert Peel: “The 127

Right Honourable Gentleman's smile was like the silver plate on a coffin."), so I only credited Shutze 128

with actually grinning– things got a bit hotter. Both of them had good reason to chortle a bit at their 129

amazing good fortune and (beyond that first blush of non-player’s remorse) I was happy for them, and 130

sorry to anticipate their leaving our little band. At first, Jack/Jackie was all in on the festivities until 131

s/he seemed to talk to Wren about the ticket. His/Her mood changed in an instant, like realizing you 132

missed out on the jackpot by one little ball falling with the wrong number. That’s when Jackie lit up: 133

questions about his/her share; demanding to see the notebook, and fluttering the pages looking for 134

his/her name; insisting that, “of course” s/he had paid the bet on Wednesday, insisting that s/he had 135

put it under the paperweight, even stating that s/he and I had talked about it all Wednesday morning 136

before I left, wanting me to be a witness to the intent. As happy as I was for them, – the rest of us 137

around the open space were– I could see that things could become unpleasant between Shutze and 138

Hutchinson, so I ducked out of there. 139

140

14. I stopped at Lucky’s on my way, to get something or other (which I forgot to do, I realized later), 141

and they were much too ebullient at their bonus for selling the winning ticket to explain to me exactly 142

what happened with the numbers-pick and the ticket sale. They sell so many losing tickets that I guess 143

it’s sort of forgettably robotic for them until a jackpot hits, then it’s all fantastic in the recall. I went 144

back to the office after giving Jackie time to get the emotions out and came in to see the mess in the 145

cubicle section, with a crushed trash can and debris all over the floor and on cubicle desks. There was 146

a deep gash in the concrete wall above the cubicles. Wren said that Jackie went off and punted the 147

can in anger and Sonny/Sunny had to drag him/her out to get away from Shutze. I picked up all of the 148

debris from Wren’s trashed trash can and put it in the can from an empty cubicle. I placed the new 149

can outside Shutze’s desk, next to his/hers. I don’t recall anything specific that was in the scattered 150

debris, especially any pink paper, but I was more focused on being the helpful one and moving the 151

group along back to comradery again. 152

153

15. A bit later, Jackie came back in looking embarrassed but still fuming. I came out of my office to 154

check on him/her but found him/her looking all around Shutze’s desk area, as if searching for 155

something. I went back to my desk to give him/her space when I heard Jackie yelp “Aha! I knew it!”, 156

clutching a pink sticky note in his/her hand. S/He ran to Sonny/Sunny’s office and said, “I knew he was 157

a cheat! Here’s my note from Wednesday. I’m gonna get my money now!” S/He turned heel and left 158

for the day. I couldn’t see what was on it but it must have been important. After all of the drama, I 159

couldn’t focus, so I went home...and sulked a bit, I confess. 160

__________________________

Lee Fannin

Lee Fannin

47

Statement of Lee Fannin

SIGNED AND SWORN to me on, October 8, 2018.

______________________________

C.M. McCormack, Notary Public

WITNESS ADDENDUM

I have reviewed this statement, given by me on the date above, and I have nothing of significance to

add at this time. The material facts are true and correct.

Signed,

___________________________ ______________________

Lee Fannin Date

Lee Fannin Morning of Trial

48

Ten

ant

Entr

ance

Wo

men

’s

Ro

om

Men

’s R

oo

m

IT

Pri

nte

r/

Co

py

Ro

om

Smal

l C

on

f.

Smal

l C

on

f.

Smal

l C

on

f.

Smal

l C

on

f.

Smal

l

Co

nf.

Larg

e C

on

f.

Larg

e C

on

f.

D2

D D

esk

Lock

ers

Ph

on

e C

ub

bie

s

Off

ices

Kit

chen

Co

ffee

Bar

Rec

epti

on

Cu

bic

les

Day

-to

-Day

Des

ks

Ded

icat

ed

Des

ks

Mu

lti-

spac

e R

enta

l In

div

idu

al

Ren

tals

Wo

rkS

pa

ce

Mai

n e

ntr

ance

to

CC

V

SR

LF LS

GW

JH*

*Hu

tch

inso

n’s

des

k lo

cati

on

fo

r th

e w

eek

of

Jun

e 2

5-2

9.

EXH

IBIT

1

The

two

-let

ters

in

dic

ate

th

e lo

cati

on

o

f ea

ch w

itn

ess’

des

k.

49

Food Court

Del

aney

’s

do

g p

ark

Delan

ey’s

Wo

rkS

pa

ce

CostClub

Dill

ard

’s D

en

Of

Das

tard

ly

Dee

ds

Do

nn

er’s

P

arty

Su

pp

ly

Axe

s an

d

Ale

s

MJ

Sulli

van

Rea

l Est

ate

Nat

ion

Ran

ch

Ho

me

| Li

fe |

Au

to

Ori

n S

criv

ello

, DD

S

Bo

b’s

Co

un

try

Bu

nke

r

8-Tr

acks

Re

tro

M

usi

c Fo

rmat

P

od

cast

Co

urt

St

ud

io R

enta

l

Oys

ter

Vis

ion

Mo

rgan

, Fo

y, &

N

uge

nt,

Esq

.

Un

iver

sity

of

Tucs

on

– M

ilto

nvi

lle C

amp

us

Tsar

bu

cks

1st B

ank

of

Milt

on

Luck

y’s

Gra

b

and

Go

Rie

ke’s

Sp

ort

s B

ar

Vla

d’s

Ro

man

ian

Ea

tery

M

ilto

n C

ou

nty

B

ar A

sso

ciat

ion

No

rth

Entr

ance

Sou

th

Entr

ance

Delan

ey’s

Wo

rkS

pa

ce

Whirley Ball, Laser Tag,

Escape Room EYE-MAX® Mov i e T he a t re s

Terrace Level

Gro

und Level

Carle

y Co

rners

Villa

ge

ATM

Dir

ecto

ry

Secu

rity

Esca

lato

r

Elev

ato

r

Res

tro

om

s

EXH

IBIT

2

50

Soft Drink Coolers | Fountain Drinks

Co

ffee

Fro

zen

Yo

gurt

Vid

eo P

oke

r M

ach

ines

Sto

rage

R

oo

m &

O

ffic

e

Spo

rts

Dri

nks

|

Wat

er

| Beer Coolers |

Lott

o

Slip

s

Can

dy

Can

dy

Ch

ips

Snac

ks

Roller Food C

ash

re

gist

ers

Lott

o

term

inal

Scratch offs

Co

ffee

se

rvic

e

Mag

azin

es |

Fr

oze

n D

rin

ks

|

General Merch.

Insi

de

entr

an

ce

EXH

IBIT

3

Fresh Pastries and Donuts

Refrigerated sandwiches, etc.

51

pick

Play big, win big!

visi

t lo

tter

ygeo

rgia

.co

m ∙

vis

it lo

tter

ygeo

rgia

.co

m ∙

vis

it lo

tter

ygeo

rgia

.co

m ∙

vis

it lo

tte

ryge

org

ia.c

om

∙ v

isit

GEORGIA LOTTERY

GEORGIA LOTTERY

PRINTED: FRI JUN29 18 15:19:32

PB

A. 08 42 43 48 50 QP 02 QP

B. 04 08 15 16 23 42

C. 02 18 25 37 68 QP 19 QP

D. 19 21 33 39 48 QP 07

POWER PLAY – NO

FRI JUN29 18

1326172 $20.00

WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH $120 MILLION?

PLAY MEGAPICK TODAY!

BIG BUCKS JACKPOT (TUES): $28 MILL

MEGAPICK JACKPOT (FRI): $120 MILL

EXHIBIT 4

52

Fri. 6/22 Mega Pick $95 mil.

Lane – 6/22 Hutch – 6/21*

Gabby – 6/22

Fri. 6/29 Mega Pick $120 mil.

EXHIBIT 5

53

EXHIBIT 6

54

Lee Fannin

Sorry for being

early!

- July 3

EXHIBIT 7

55

IN THE STATE COURT OF MILTON COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA

JACK/JACKIE HUTCHINSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO: 2019-MT ) LANE SHUTZE, ) ) Defendant. )

THE CHARGE OF THE COURT [Not to be read in open court]

Pleadings You have been considering the case of Jack/Jackie Hutchinson v. Lane Shutze. You have heard the

evidence and the allegations of the parties, and I will not repeat them here. It is now my duty to instruct

you on the law which you will use to render a verdict in this case.

Burden of Proof; Generally; Preponderance of Evidence, Defined Plaintiff has the burden of proof, which means that the plaintiff must prove whatever it takes to make

out his/her case, except for any admissions by the defendant. Plaintiff must prove his/her case by what is

known as a preponderance of the evidence, that is, evidence upon the issues involved which, while not

enough to wholly free the mind from a reasonable doubt, is yet sufficient to incline a reasonable and

impartial mind to one side of the issue rather than the other.

Your verdict will only deal with liability – the issue of damages will be reserved for a later time.

Evidence; Generally Your oath requires that you will decide this case based on the evidence. 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 any exhibits admitted during the trial, as well as stipulations of the attorneys. Evidence

does not include the complaint, answer, opening or closing remarks of the attorneys, or questions asked

by the attorneys.

Conflicting Evidence; Reconciliation Any conflicts in the evidence are to be reconciled wherever possible. All witnesses are presumed to

speak the truth and, if possible, you should not attribute a false statement to any of them. If you find that

this cannot be done, then you should believe the evidence that is most reasonable and believable to you

and decide the case by the preponderance of the evidence as you find it to be.

Circumstantial Evidence; Direct Evidence Direct evidence is evidence, which immediately points to the question at issue. Indirect or

circumstantial evidence is evidence, which only tends to establish a fact; it must be such as to reasonably

56

establish that fact rather than anything else. The comparative weight of circumstantial and direct

evidence on any given issue is a question of fact for you to decide.

Stated differently, direct evidence is the testimony of a witness who has seen or heard the facts to

which the witness testifies and which, if believed, is sufficient to prove or establish these facts.

Circumstantial evidence is the testimony of a witness who has seen or heard the facts to which the

witness testifies where from such facts, if believed, you may find other facts to exist, which are

reasonable and believable to you in the light of your experience.

Where circumstantial evidence is relied upon to establish a fact or theory, it must be such as to

reasonably establish that fact or theory rather than anything else.

Admissions An admission is a statement by a party, which tends to aid the cause of the opposing party. All

admissions shall be carefully considered.

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 The jury must determine the credibility of the witnesses. In deciding this, you may consider all of the

facts and circumstances of the case, including the witnesses’ manner of testifying, their intelligence, their

means and opportunity of knowing the facts about which they testify, the nature of the facts about which

they testify, the probability or improbability of their testimony, their interest or lack of interest in the

outcome of the case, and their personal credibility as you observe it.

Witness, Impeached by To impeach a witness is to prove the witness is unworthy of belief. A witness may be impeached by:

a. Disproving the facts to which the witness testified;

b. Proof of general bad character;

c. Proof that the witness has been convicted of a crime involving dishonesty or false statement; or

d. Proof of contradictory statements, previously made by the witness, as to matters relevant to

the witness's testimony and to the case.

If it is sought to impeach a witness by "b," "c," or "d," above, 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:

a. First, whether any such statements were made;

b. Second, whether they were contradictory to any statements the witness made on the witness

stand; and

c. Third, whether it was material to the witness's testimony and to the case.

57

If you find that a witness has been successfully impeached by proof of previous, contradictory

statements, you may disregard that testimony, unless it is corroborated by other creditable testimony,

and 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 Statements You may determine whether there was evidence that a witness testified falsely about an important

fact during the course of the trial as opposed to some other time before this trial. In doing so, you may

make a determination whether the misstatement was because of an innocent lapse in memory or an

intentional attempt to deceive. You should consider all the facts and circumstances of any prior

statements.

Witness, Supported In determining the credibility of any witness whose credibility has been attacked as I have described

above and any testimony by him or her in court, you may consider, where applicable, evidence offered to

support the credibility or believability of any such witness testified.

Single Witness; Corroboration The testimony of a single witness, if believed, is sufficient to establish a fact. Generally, there is no

legal requirement of corroboration of a witness, provided you find the evidence to be sufficient.

Contracts; Definition A contract is an agreement between two or more parties for the doing or not doing of some specified

thing.

Contracts; Essentials To constitute a lawful contract, there must be parties able to contract, a consideration for the

contract, the agreement of the parties to the terms of the contract, and a lawful subject matter.

A consideration is valid if any person who promised is entitled to a benefit or any harm is done to one

who receives the promise.

Contracts; Assent; Generally The consent of the parties is essential to the validity or enforcement of a contract, and until both

parties have agreed to all its terms, there is no contract. Until the contract is agreed to, a party may

withdraw an offer or bid or proposition.

Form of Verdict If you believe from a preponderance of the evidence that the plaintiff is entitled to recover under the

contract, you would find for the plaintiff and the form of your verdict would be: "We, the jury, find for

plaintiff and against defendant on the issue of liability."

If you believe from a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant is entitled to recover, you

would find for the defendant and the form of your verdict would be: "We, the jury, find for defendant and

against plaintiff on the issue of liability."

58

Verdict in Writing Whatever your verdict in the case, it must be agreed to by each juror, it must be in writing, dated and

signed by your foreperson, and it must be returned and read in court. You may write your verdict on the

back of plaintiff's petition.

Unanimous Verdict Your verdict must be unanimous. If you cannot unanimously agree on a verdict, the judge is required

by law to declare a mistrial and retry the case before another jury. Jurors should carefully consider all the

evidence in the case, consult with one another, and deliberate with a view toward reaching a unanimous

verdict, consistent with your consciences and oaths as jurors.

Avoid premature fixed opinions. Do not hesitate to reexamine your views and change your opinions if,

after fair and impartial discussions and deliberations with your fellow jurors, you are honestly convinced

that your opinion should be changed. However, no juror is required to surrender an honest opinion

differing from that of another juror merely for the purposes of reaching a unanimous verdict.

Court Has No Interest in Case I want to emphasize that anything the court did or said during the trial of this case was not intended

to, and did not intimate, hint, or suggest to you which of the parties should prevail in this case. Whichever

of the parties is entitled to a verdict is a matter entirely for you to determine, and whatever your verdict,

it must be agreed upon by all of you.

The court's interest in the matter is that the case be fairly presented according to law and that you —

as honest, conscientious, impartial jurors — consider the case as the court has instructed you and return a

verdict that speaks the truth as you find the truth of the case to be.

Jury; Final Instructions 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 view. 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 convinced

that it is wrong. However, you should never surrender honest convictions or opinions in order to be

congenial or to reach a verdict solely because of the opinions of the other jurors.

You may go now to the jury room, but do not begin your deliberations until I send you the pleadings

and exhibits, which I will do shortly. Then you may begin your deliberations.

59

2019 RULES OF THE

GEORGIA HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION

These rules are in effect October 1, 2018 through September 30, 2019.

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

60

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 mock trial “region” must consist of at least five teams. 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 competition will proceed under “emergency circumstances” and the scoring will be conducted 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 mock trial “district” must consist of six teams. (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 competition and win the title of “District Champion” in 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 will then be offered to the 4th place team from the other region,

61

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 “Region Champion”, withdraws from the GHSMT 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 “District Champion”, that team will forfeit the title and 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 witness’ statement. 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 long as any response is consistent with the witness’ statement or affidavit and does not materially affect the witness’ testimony.

(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 witness’ statement, the answer must be consistent with the statement and may not materially affect the witness’ testimony or any substantive issue of the case.

(c) Attorneys for the opposing team may refer to Rule 4 in a special objection, such as “unfair extrapolation” or “This information is beyond the scope of the statement of facts.”

(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 offending team’s overall points 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 student’s race, religion, ethnicity, sex, physical attributes, or 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 student’s actual race, religion, ethnicity, sex, physical attributes, or disability at trial, but both will be confined to the case’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 term “school” includes traditional schools, charter schools, on-line or virtual schools, and other state- or school system-sanctioned academies, and “school organization” includes entities that provide accredited or approved educational instruction for

62

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 “sponsoring school” or “sponsoring team”) -- 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 their consent to the student’s participation as a team member; and a certification that the student fully meets the sponsoring school’s admission requirements and its governing interscholastic eligibility rules, that the student’s participation will not discourage 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 student’s requested participation meets the above criteria, is not the result of unfair “recruiting” and will not result in an unfair advantage to the other mock trials teams in the state such that the student’s participation 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 organization’s team.

(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(g).

(f) Official/Competing and Non-Competing/Additional Team Members—These fourteen team members are designated as “official/competing” team members; all other student participants are designated “non-competing/additional” team members. All official/competing and non-competing/additional team members must sign the Code of Ethical Conduct form (see Rule 7(m)). 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.

63

(g) Squad Composition—Each team will field two squads: prosecution/plaintiff (“P”) and defense (“D”). Teams will designate each squad’s official/competing team members by their signing the Code of Ethical Conduct form as a member of one of the two trial squads. Each trial squad will have a maximum of seven competing team members each (3 serving in attorney roles, 3 serving in witness roles and 1 alternate—see Rule 12). Each team must supply one timekeeper per squad in each Round of competition. These timekeepers may be drawn from a pool of up to four non-competing students; this pool will sign the Code of Ethical Conduct as “Timekeepers”. Timekeepers for a team may keep time for either squad throughout the competition day and are not limited to one squad. (Refer to Rule 7(j) if a team is unable to fill the timekeeping spots.)

1. 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). i. 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.

ii. 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. 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).

(h) 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 (i.e. no alternates are available), 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.

(i) 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 alternates or dedicated timekeepers and would move forward in accordance with Rule 7(j). In the case of the team only having 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 Defendant/Defense’s courtroom to play those roles.

(j) Submitting to Time Kept by Opposing Team—If the team does not have enough students to provide dedicated timekeepers per Rule 7(g), the 7th official/competing team member of the squad (the alternate) will then act as timekeeper for that round. This student will be listed as

both an alternate and timekeeper on that squad’s Trial Squad Roster form for that round.

1. If the team is unable to provide any timekeepers (in one or both courtrooms), it must submit to the times called by the opposing squads’ timekeepers.

2. 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.

(k) 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 be chosen so that the phrase, “[insert name] Mock Trial Team,” symbolizes both the team and the dignity 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: “school,” “high,” “academy,” “institute,” “campus,” or “center.”

(l) 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 business days before the team’s scheduled competition date. Team member changes will not be permitted at the competition site.

(m) 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.

(n) 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

64

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, 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 Competition 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.

65

(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 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 Committee (the “Panel”) for an initial evaluation 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 24 hours of the Panel’s decision.

(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) Should a majority of the Governing Board’s voting 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

66

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.

Rule 12. Team Duties

(a) Official competing team members must handle all aspects of the trial during a competition round, including any rules disputes (see Rule 34) at the conclusion of the trial round.

(b) The alternate from each squad may be substituted into one of the 6 speaking roles between rounds, but may not be used on the team’s other squad at any point during that level of competition.

(c) 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.

(d) Opening Statements must be given by both sides at the beginning of the trial.

(e) Closing Arguments must be presented by both sides at the conclusion of the defense’s case in chief. The Prosecution/Plaintiff gives their closing argument first but may reserve all or a portion of its closing time for a rebuttal.

(f) The attorney who will examine a particular witness on direct examination is the only person who may make the objections to the opposing attorney’s questions of that witness’ cross examination. and The attorney who will cross examine a witness will be the only one attorney permitted to make objections during the direct examination of that witness.

(g) The attorneys who make the opening statement or the closing argument during a trial round are the only people who may make an “objection” to an opponent’s opening statement or closing argument, as outlined in Rule 50(a).

(h) 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 you promise that the testimony you are about

to give will faithfully and truthfully conform to the facts and rules of the mock trial competition?”

(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 Prosecution/Plaintiff’s rebuttal is not limited to the scope of the Defense’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 witness please state your name for the record?” 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) Per Rule 7(g), each team must attempt to supply two timekeepers per round, one for each squad. Timekeepers are not official/competing team members and, except for exceptions covered by Rule 7(h), cannot be used as substitutes between rounds. These designated timekeepers are the only non-competing team members who may act as timekeepers throughout the duration of that level of competition. Timekeepers may keep time for either squad and may switch between squads between rounds.

(b) Time limits are mandatory and will be enforced. (c) 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.

(d) Time does not stop for introduction of evidence. (e) 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 “time has expired,” to bring the matter to the judge’s attention.

(f) At the end of each task during the trial presentation (i.e. at the end of each opening, at the end each witness

67

examination, at the end of each cross examination and at the end of each closing argument) if there is more than a 15 second discrepancy between the teams’ 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.

(g) 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 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 Plaintiff/Prosecution’s case may not be 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 direct the presiding judge’s attention to the applicable rule, and must be raised at the time of the presiding judge’s alleged departure from the rules. 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 by the teams’ timekeepers shall not be considered 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.

68

(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 an opponent’s performance with another team 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 bar” and will be handled in accordance with 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.

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 edition of the mock trial manual, which includes orientation materials and a bench brief and a briefing in a judges’ orientation.

(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 proceedings upon the panel member’s return 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 term “ballot” will refer to the decision made by a scoring judge as to which team made the best presentation in the round. The term “scoresheet” 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 earns the highest points on an individual 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 (8.5”x14”) on which they may 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/or the accuracy of a team’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 five steps; three by the scoring evaluator and two by the scoring Coordinator:

1. Speaker Points—The scoring evaluator will record a number of speaker points (1-10) for each section of the trial.

2. 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.

3. Tie Breaker—The scoring evaluator will circle the squad that should receive the tiebreaker in the event that the Final Point Total is tied. In the event the ballot is tied, the scoring Coordinator will award the designated squad an additional point to break the tie. At this point, the scoring evaluator will turn the ballot in to the Scoring coordinator for calculation.

4. Sub-Total—Once the ballot is completed by the scoring evaluator, the scoring Coordinator will total the sum of each team’s individual speaker points and place this sum in the Sub-Total box.

5. Final Point Total—The scoring Coordinator 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. In the event of a tie, an additional point will be awarded to the squad designated as the tiebreaker by the scoring

69

evaluator. The team with the highest number of points in the Final Point Total box receives the ballot from that scoring evaluator.

(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 Scoring coordinator shall average the scores of the scoring evaluators present at the specific round to achieve the required third score. This third averaged score shall equal one-half the sum of the other two scoring evaluators’ total scores for Plaintiff/Prosecution and Defendant/Defense.

1. Fractions will be rounded to the nearest higher whole number.

2. 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 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.

(d) 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, continue with the calculation of the ballot, 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 scoring judges’ votes a team earned in preceding 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 points of that team’s opponent in each 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 results of the performance of each team’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) In head-to-head matches at the Regional Competition (the semi-final round (when utilized) and championship round) and at the District Competition (all rounds), the rounds stand alone, with each team beginning with a clean slate. If the two teams in an affected 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 round. Only in the extremely rare event that this point-spread total also results in a tie, Rule 28 would be invoked in its entirety, thus evaluating the teams’ 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 Coaches’ 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 70

school team will be matched randomly with the P and D squads from two other school teams. School team matches (or “team to team” matches—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 scores will be totaled for each team’s Plaintiff/Prosecution and Defendant/Defense 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 round’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), in each round’s match only. Ties will be broken following the procedures outlined in Rule 28 (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 neither of a region’s teams will 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 regional level will meet that region’s champion while the team who finished 2nd 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 ballot total from the team’s three (or four in 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 average ballot total from the team’s

71

three (or four in the case of a semi-final round at the regional level) regional competition rounds calculated prior to the first round of the district competition in the same manner as outlined Rule 30(c)(1). This ballot 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 advancing teams will be matched against the second seeded Regional Champion team and the lower ranked of the two advancing 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.

(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 winning teams’ ballots and points of that same round. 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 coordinator’s attention during the competition day by 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 hearing on the dispute, providing each team’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

72

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 and provide a summary of each team’s argument. 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.

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 tournament’s communication’s center, whereupon 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 leadership, determines that an “outside the bar” rules 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

73

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.)

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 witness’ answer 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 now hand you what has been marked as Exhibit

No.___ for identification.” 6. Ask the witness to identify the exhibit. “Would you

identify it please?” 7. Witness answers with identification only. 8. Offer the exhibit into evidence. “Your Honor, we offer

Exhibit No.___ into evidence at this time. The authenticity of this exhibit has been stipulated.”

9. Court: “Is there an objection?” (If opposing counsel believes a proper foundation has not been laid, the attorney should be prepared to object at this time.)

10. Opposing Counsel: “No, your Honor,” or “Yes, your Honor.” If the response is “Yes,” the objection will be stated on the record. Court: “Is there any response to the objection?”

11. Court: “Exhibit No. ___ is/is not admitted.” 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) “Objections” during Openings/Closings: No objections may be raised during opening statements or during closing arguments. If a team believes an objection would have been proper during the opposing team’s opening 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 and may say, “If I had been permitted to object during [opening statement or closing argument], I would have objected to the opposing team’s statement that ________________.” The opposing team is allowed a response. The presiding judge will not rule on the “objection.” Presiding and scoring judges will weigh the “objection” 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 an

74

opponent’s allotted cross examination time, 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 cross examination make an “objection” to “excessive/intentional evasiveness/non-responsiveness” on the part of that witness. If an attorney makes this mock trial “objection”, he or she may stand at the end of his/her cross examination and ask to be recognized by the presiding judge saying, “Your honor, I object to the excessive/intentional evasiveness/non-responsiveness displayed by Witness X. I believe his/her sole purpose for using this tactic was to use up my allotted time during cross examination.”

(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 consider the “objection” at their discretion when 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 the cross examination, regardless of an “objection” 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.

75

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 civil actions and proceedings…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.

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. Evidence of a person’s character or

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

defendant’s pertinent trait, and if the evidence is admitted, the prosecutor may offer evidence to rebut it;

b. a defendant may offer evidence of an alleged victim’s pertinent trait, and if the evidence is admitted, the prosecutor may:

i. offer evidence to rebut it; and ii. offer evidence of the defendant’s same

trait; and c. in a homicide case, the prosecutor may offer

evidence of the alleged victim’s trait of peacefulness to rebut evidence that the victim was the first aggressor.

3. Exceptions for a Witness. Evidence of a witness’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 other

act is not admissible to prove a person’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 evidence of a person’s character or character trait is admissible, it may be proved by testimony about the person’s reputation or by 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. When a person’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 instances of the person’s conduct.

Rule 406. Habit, Routine Practice

Evidence of a person’s habit or an organization’s routine 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 another purpose, such as proving a witness’s bias or prejudice, negating a contention of undue delay, or proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution.

76

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

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 another purpose, such as proving a witness’s bias or proving 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 knowledge may consist of the witness’s own testimony. This rule does not apply to a witness’s expert testimony under Rule 703. (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,

administered in a form calculated to awaken the witness’ conscience and impress the witness’ mind with the duty 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 attack the witness’s credibility.

Rule 608. A Witness’s Character For Truthfulness or Untruthfulness

(a) Reputation or Opinion Evidence. A witness’s credibility may be attacked or supported by testimony about the witness’s reputation for having a character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, or by testimony in the form of an opinion about that character. But evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the witness’s character for truthfulness has been attacked.

(b) Specific Instances of Conduct. Except for a criminal conviction under Rule 609, extrinsic evidence is not admissible to prove specific instances of a witness’s conduct in order to attack or support the witness’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 witness’s character for truthfulness.

Rule 609. Impeachment by Evidence of a Criminal Conviction

(a) In General. The following rules apply to attacking a witness’s character for truthfulness by evidence 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 — or the witness’s admitting — 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 since the witness’s conviction or release from 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.

77

(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. an adult’s conviction for that offense would be

admissible to attack the adult’s credibility; and 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.

Rule 610. Religious Beliefs or Opinions

Evidence of a witness’s religious beliefs or opinions is not admissible to attack or support the witness’s credibility.

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 facts or matters contained in the witness’ statement, 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 be necessary to develop the witness’ testimony). 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 Memory

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. Witness’s Prior Statement

(a) Showing or Disclosing the Statement During Examination. When examining a witness about the witness’s prior statement, a party need not show it or disclose its contents to the witness. But the party must, on request, show it or disclose its contents to an adverse party’s attorney.

(b) Extrinsic Evidence of a Prior Inconsistent Statement. Extrinsic evidence of a witness’s prior inconsistent 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 (b) does not apply to an opposing party’s statement 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) rationally based on the witness’s perception; (b) helpful to clearly understanding the witness’s testimony

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 an Expert’s Opinion Testimony

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.

78

Rule 705. Disclosing the Facts or Data Underlying An Expert’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. “Statement” means a person’s oral assertion,

written assertion, or nonverbal conduct, if the person intended it as an assertion.

(b) Declarant. “Declarant” means the person who made the statement.

(c) Hearsay. “Hearsay” means a statement 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-Witness’s Prior Statement. The declarant

testifies and is subject to cross-examination about a prior statement, and the statement:

a. is inconsistent with the declarant’s testimony and was given under penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding or in a deposition;

b. is consistent with the declarant’s testimony 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. An Opposing Party’s Statement. 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 made by the party’s agent or employee on a matter within the scope of that relationship and while it existed; or

e. was made by the party’s coconspirator during and in furtherance of the conspiracy.

The statement must be considered but does not by itself establish the declarant’s authority under (C); the existence or 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 statement of the declarant’s then-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 relates to the validity or terms of the declarant’s will.

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 matter was fresh in the witness’s memory; and

c. accurately reflects the witness’s knowledge. 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 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 office’s activities; 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

79

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:

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 authority by the expert’s admission or testimony, by another expert’s testimony, or by judicial notice.

If admitted, the statement may be read into evidence but not received as an exhibit.

21. Reputation Concerning Character. A reputation among a person’s associates or in the community concerning the person’s character.

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 declarant’s statement because the court rules 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 statement’s proponent has not been able, by process or other reasonable means, to procure:

a. the declarant’s attendance, in the case of a hearsay exception under Rule 804(b)(1) or (6); or

b. the declarant’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 statement’s proponent procured or wrongfully caused the declarant’s unavailability as a witness in 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 declarant’s death to be imminent, made about its cause or circumstances.

3. Statement Against Interest. A statement that: a. a reasonable person in the declarant’s position

would have made only if the person believed it to be true because, when made, it was so contrary to the declarant’s proprietary or pecuniary interest or had so great a tendency to invalidate the declarant’s claim 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 declarant’s own birth, adoption, legitimacy, 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 with the person’s family that the declarant’s information is likely to be accurate.

5. Not Applicable. 6. Statement Offered Against a Party That Wrongfully

Caused the Declarant’s Unavailability. A statement offered against a party that wrongfully caused — or acquiesced in wrongfully causing — the declarant’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.

80

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 declarant, inconsistent with the declarant’s hearsay statement, 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.

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.

81

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 Rule 15) 3. Each team may use up to four unique individuals to keep time throughout each level of competition. (see Rule

7(g)) 4. NOTE: If a team does not provide their own student timekeepers, that team must submit to the time kept by

their opponent’s timekeeper in the trial round. (see Rule 7(j)) 5. 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(j))

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. It is suggested that to keep track of which stopwatch is for which side, label the stopwatches “P” and “D” and keep the “P” stopwatch on your left and the “D” stopwatch on your right.

9. 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(d)).

10. Practice timekeeping duties during team rehearsals before competition day. 11. 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. One set of “Time Remaining” cards printed on yellow paper or card stock d. One “Time 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 by

recording “a,” “b,” or “c” in the space below the task number—“a” would signify the first attorney, “b” the second, and “c” 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.

5. Rise when the judge and jury enter the courtroom and then be seated when the presiding judge grants permission.

82

During the Trial Round 1. Timekeepers for both squads in a competition round will work together as a neutral “timekeeping team” to

insure that time is kept accurately and fairly for both sides in the round. 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 include but are not limited to, “May It Please the Court…”, or “Your Honor, ladies/gentlemen of the jury…” (for openings/closing) or “Please state your name for the court…” (for examination questions)—NOT when an attorney responds to a presiding judge’s inquiry as to whether 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 when an attorney says, “Objection, Your

Honor…”. Timekeepers will re-start time, after the presiding judge’s ruling, when the student 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 beginning of each side’s opening statement b. At the beginning of each side’s direct examination time block c. At the beginning of each side’s cross examination time block d. At the beginning of each 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 not reset stopwatch to zero at the end of the P’s closing argument, since the timekeeper may need to resume the P’s closing argument 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 table) to their own team independently of the opposing team’s timekeeper at any time during the trial.

83

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(f)) 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 presiding judge’s attention and state: “Your honor, under Rule 15(f), there is a time discrepancy of more than 15 seconds.”

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 team’s stopwatch indicates that the P team has 2 minutes left in the direct examination block and the D team’s stopwatch indicates that time has expired for the P team in the direct examination 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(e))

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 obtain the presiding judge’s attention and turn in the time sheet before the presiding 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 an “inside the bar” dispute is raised at the conclusion of the trial round, a presiding judge may 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.

84

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

85

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.

86

Explanation of the Performance Ratings Used on the Mock Trial Ballot

Evaluators are encouraged to look for and consider the points on the “What to Look For When Scoring Teams” table on the next page. This is a comprehensive look at what may be expected at each stage of the trial. A student’s score should be reflective of how well they have mastered these goals.

The text of this table is included on the backside of the green scratch sheet Evaluators will have during the trial.

The “Scoring Matrix” on the following page includes a table outlining the differing point categories to be used by Evaluators. This will be included in the deliberation room with the scoresheets. 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. The overall score for each speaking role is a culmination of the student’s performance that may include bits from two different categories on the Matrix. The Evaluator makes the final determination as to where the performance gained and/lost points. The Evaluator is NOT scoring the legal merits of the case.

Rules Violations: 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 and/or Team Points. Penalties will not be indicated separately on the ballot. Please see Rule 27 for the treatment of rule infractions.

Individual Scores: On a scale of 1-10 (with 10 being the highest), rate the performance of each student in the categories on the ballot. Each category is to be evaluated separately. DO NOT GIVE FRACTIONAL POINTS.

Team Points: After scoring speaker points for individuals, award 1-10 points to each team as the team award. These points are subjective and the amount awarded is at the discretion of the evaluator. Each scoring evaluator should consider “5” as the average team award, with reductions made for team penalties and additions for outstanding team performance. Ties are NOT ALLOWED for the Team Points. Please see Rule 27 for the treatment of rule infractions. Evaluators may consider the following elements when awarding team points:

- As a whole, the team presented an effective case. - As a whole, the team members showed an understanding of the rules of the competition, the

modified federal rules of evidence, the applicable law and the facts of the case. - As a whole, the team presented their case within the letter and the spirit of the mock trial rules,

all trial strategies used were ethical and the team adhered to the Code of Ethical Conduct. - A cohesive theme of the case was used throughout each portion of the trial presentation - Each member of the team was able to present information in a logical and articulate manner. - As a whole, the team seemed poised, knowledgeable and well prepared. - Witnesses responded to questions accurately, within the scope of the information contained in

their witness statement and related exhibits, and attorneys did not ask witnesses for information outside the scope of the appropriate case materials. See Rules 3 & 4

- Team members directed comments to the appropriate audience - judge, jury or witness - with good eye contact. The team’s demeanor was positive and all members observed proper courtroom decorum at all times.

- There was minimal reliance on notes throughout the entire presentation. - Appropriate time limits were followed in each portion of the trial.

The team with the largest number of total points on the scoresheet wins the evaluator’s ballot. The team with the largest number of ballots per courtroom wins the courtroom. Scoring evaluators are reminded to sign the ballot.

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.

87

WHAT TO LOOK FOR WHEN SCORING TEAMS

ATTORNEYS

Opening Statement

Provided overview on the witnesses and their testimony, evidence, and how it will prove the case Introduced a theme/theory of the case Outlined the burden of proof Requested relief (what the side is asking the court to decide) Non-argumentative

Direct Attorney/ Examination

Asked properly phrased open ended questions that allowed explanation or description of the situation Sequenced questions logically Did not ask questions that required any unfair extrapolations Laid foundation for witness testimony Elicited relevant, important evidence from witnesses Continued with consistent theme/theory of the case Provided proper objections during opposing team’s cross-examination Utilized objections to move the case forward and not just to throw the other side off their game Made/defended objections utilizing rules of evidence or the rules of the competition Recovered well after objections Adjusted to judges’ rulings Addressed actual testimony Followed proper protocol for introducing exhibits Demonstrated an understanding of the rules of competition and evidence Limited re-direct to scope of cross-examination On re-direct, rehabilitated witnesses

Cross Attorney/ Examination

Continued with consistent theme/theory of the case Provided proper objections during opposing team’s direct examination Made/defended to objections utilizing rules of evidence or the rules of the competition Utilized objections to move the case forward and not just to throw the other side off their game Recovered well after objections Adjusted to judges’ rulings Addressed actual testimony Elicited facts favorable to the attorney’s case Asked properly phrased questions that weakened the testimony given during direct examination Used appropriate leading questions suggesting a “yes/no” answer Attempted to appropriately control the witness consistent with the judges’ rulings Properly impeached the witness, if needed, without appearing to harass or intimidate Followed proper protocol for introducing exhibits Demonstrated an understanding of the rules of competition and evidence Limited re-cross-examination to scope of re-direct examination

Closing Arguments

Incorporated what transpired during trial Summarized the evidence with reasoned arguments Outlined the strengths of his/her side’s witnesses and the weaknesses of the other side’s witnesses Discussed relevant exhibits when appropriate Theme was carried through to closing Refers to jury instructions or other legal standards when necessary Asked for the verdict, including a request for relief, and explained why the verdict was justifiable Effectively answered and rebutted opponent’s case

WITNESSES

Performance

Presented an interesting and authentic character Played up the strengths of his/her statements and adequately explained the weaknesses Understood the facts of the case and the exhibits Provided logical testimony Sounded spontaneous and not memorized Did not give excessively long or non-responsive answers on cross-examination Portrayed a consistent character under cross-examination Maintained factual position under cross-examination Did not offer answers that included any unfair extrapolations Recovered well after objections Remained in character when not on the witness stand

*** Do NOT reward excessive interruptions and/or obstructionist behavior. *** Do NOT reward unfair extrapolations.

88

SCORING MATRIX

ATTORNEYS WITNESSES

1 –

3

Ine

ffe

ctiv

e

Case/rules/legal issues not understood Trial procedures not understood Delivery not persuasive or articulate Script/notes was total relied upon No questions/arguments moved case forward Asked questions intended for an unfair extrapolation No understanding of making/responding to objections No understanding of how to recover from objections Eye contact not made Voice weak, unclear or inaudible Failed to consider other team’s presentation

Witness statements and exhibits not understood Responses not thorough, persuasive, or natural Responses not consistent with facts Consistently went materially outside case materials No understanding of how to recover from objections Eye contact not made Voice weak, unclear or inaudible Deliberately attempted to waste opposing counsel’s time Performance was not credible or convincing

4 –

5

Po

or

Case/rules/legal issues poorly understood Trial procedures slightly poorly understood Poise and delivery needed work Script/notes was highly depended upon Few questions/arguments moved case forward Asked questions intended for an unfair extrapolation Struggled to make/respond to objections No understanding of how to recover from objections Little eye contact made Voice often difficult to hear Failed to consider other team’s presentation

Witnesses statements and exhibits poorly understood Responses felt generic and/or scripted Responses sometimes inconsistent with facts Materially went outside case materials more than once No understanding of how to recover from objections Little eye contact made Voice often difficult to hear Deliberately attempted to waste opposing counsel’s time Performance was passable, lacks depth

6 A

vera

ge (

Pro

fici

en

t)

Case/rules/legal issues fairly understood Trial procedures fairly understood Delivery had some hesitation/stumbles Script/notes used occasionally Questions/arguments moved case forward Questions asked called for no unfair extrapolation Missed appropriate opportunities to object Recovered adequately after objections Eye contact maintained some of the time Voice sometimes difficult to hear Minimally responsive to other team’s presentation

Witness statements and exhibits fairly understood Performance was somewhat credible and convincing Some responses felt scripted Responses consistent with facts Materially went outside case materials once Recovered adequately after objections Eye contact maintained some of the time when appropriate Voice sometimes difficult to hear Answers most cross questions responsibly

7 –

8

Ve

ry G

oo

d

Case/rules/legal issues well understood Trial procedure understanding was very good Delivery was persuasive Script not used, reacts to the moment Notes only used for issues raised during trial Questions/arguments moved case forward Questions asked called for no unfair extrapolation Objections/responses were appropriate Recovered well after objections Eye contact mostly maintained Voice was clear, audible, and confident Adjusted case other team’s presentation

Witness statements and exhibits well understood Responses mostly felt spontaneous and not memorized Responses consistent with facts Did not materially go outside case materials Rarely went outside scope of case materials Recovered well after objections Eye contact mostly maintained when appropriate Voice was clear, audible, and confident Answers most cross questions responsibly Performance was mostly credible and convincing

9 –

10

Ou

tsta

nd

ing

and

Su

pe

rio

r

Case/rules/legal issues excellent understanding Trial procedure understanding was superior Delivery was compelling Script not used, reacts to the moment Notes only used for issues raised during trial Questions/arguments were compelling Objections/responses were appropriate and mastered Superior recovery after objections Questions asked called for no unfair extrapolation Eye contact maintained Voice was clear, audible, confident and with conviction Excellent responses to other team’s presentation Compelling trial presentation Took command of courtroom, but not overbearing

Witness statements and exhibits excellent understanding Performance felt spontaneous and natural Responses consistent with facts Did not materially go outside case materials Superior recovery after objections Eye contact maintained when appropriate Voice was clear, audible, confident and with conviction Answers most cross questions responsibly Took command of courtroom, but not overbearing Performance was compelling

89

90

Contact the Mock Trial Office for More Information

Michael Nixon, Director 404/527-8779

mocktrial@gabar.org www.georgiamocktrial.org

Sponsored by the Young Lawyers Division

of the State Bar of Georgia