The Atlanta Academy presents

Lord of the Flies: A Mock Trial Project

The Setting:

Upon returning to school in 1955, the surviving boys from William Golding’s Lord of the Flies find their community in an absolute uproar. Their parents, teachers and religious leaders are demanding an explanation for the savage behavior on the island. Horrified over the seemingly senseless killing of Piggy and Simon, their families have filed a criminal complaint with the District Magistrate, naming Jack as the party responsible for their sons’ untimely deaths.

The Trial:

Due to the gravity of the charges, this will be a criminal/civil trial:

(1) sentencing could include either imprisonment and/or a monetary fine

(2) either the defendant (Jack) or plaintiff (the other boys) could be found partially right or partially at fault.

The plaintiff will be the state of England whose job it is to prove their case against the Defendant, Jack Merridew.

This will be a bench trial which means that a judge (not a jury) will weigh the strength of each case and decide if Jack walks away or suffers sentencing according to the weight of the evidence against him.

The Prosecution:

The DA’s office has appointed FOUR deputy district attorneys to prosecute the case.

Prosecution lawyers:

Maryclare Freeman (lead prosecutor)

Alex Burke (associate prosecutor)

Caroline White (associate prosecutor)

Anna Lad (associate prosecutor)

The following four arguments will serve as the backbone of the prosecution’s case (though others could be used):

1) Human beings are uniquely capable of acting selflessly and collaboratively, prioritizing the needs of the community and reasoned reflective thinking.

2) In a society, it is the responsibility of a leader to insure that all members restrain the inherent selfish and individualistic impulses that are harmful to the community.

3) The ends do NOT justify the means if achieving them is destructive to any other human being or aspect of the natural world.

4) If human beings choose to act selfishly and without careful consideration of the effects of their actions on his/her surroundings, they must accept personal responsibility for their transgressions regardless of the conditions of the environment in which they acted.

In preparing for the case, the prosecuting attorneys have gathered a team of expert witnesses, whom they believe will help prove their arguments. The complete list of witnesses includes:

Witness List (Prosecution):

Ralph – Jillian Jones Littlun – Harrison AndersonSam – George Moschella Naval Officer – Taylor KindredPsychologist (expert witness) – Precious Smith

The Defense:

The FOUR defense lawyers have entered a “not guilty” plea on behalf of Jack and will vigorously defend his innocence. They contend that in no way did Jack’s actions on the island contribute to the deaths of Piggy and Simon.

Defense lawyers:

Carolann Stout (lead defense attorney)

Kenneth Lemoine (associate defense attorney)

Madeline Black (associate defense attorney)

Kennedy Howard (associate defense attorney)

The following four arguments will serve as the backbone of the defense’s case:

1) Human beings are inherently selfish and competitive, prioritizing the needs of the individual and his/her passionate impulses.

2) In order to survive and thrive within or without society, each human being must act to preserve his/her own self and interests in spite of the effect on community.

3) Sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few; the ends justify the means if it is to insure the survival of the majority.

4) Nature does not have a conscience or rationale; therefore, humans are not always held accountable for transgressions committed in a hostile and/or wild environment.

In preparing for the case, the defense attorneys have gathered a team of expert witnesses – historical, scientific and literary - whom they believe will help prove their arguments. The complete list of witnesses includes:

Witness List (Defense):

Jack Merridew (defendant) – Mufaro GuzhaRoger – Olivia ColeEric – Makenzie CartwrightMaurice – Wyatt HillLittlun – Andrew Aaron

Additional Notes:

Jack is being accused of being RESPONSIBLE for the deaths of Piggy and Simon. He’s not being tried for actually killing them. Clearly he didn’t. But did his actions, choices, and status contribute to their deaths?

Each side may use one SURPRISE witness (MUST be cleared with your teacher!) – Not required. Note: No DEAD characters may return to the trial.

Each participant must wear a costume appropriate to the figure s/he is portraying.

Mock Trial Layout:

1. Opening arguments - prosecution2. Opening arguments – defense3. Prosecution witnesses/defense cross-examination4. Defense witnesses/prosecution cross-examination5. Closing arguments – prosecution6. Closing arguments – defense

Grading:

Individual: You will be responsible for completing a role during the trial. You will receive an individual TEST grade on your effort and effectiveness at completing that role.

Group: You will receive a team TEST grade on your effort and effectiveness during the trial. You must work as a team to ensure that you are prepared and professional during the trial.

The project is worth TWO test grades total.

Lawyers (Prosecution and Defense)

The lawyers are responsible to either a) prosecute or b) defend the defendant. Each side will be a small "Dream Team" of lawyers who will divide the duties. The duties involve: an opening statement, a closing statement, and cross-examination/questioning of the witnesses. Your legal team is a team and must divvy these jobs fairly. This is a collaborative effort: you will hand in one finished portfolio of your work together. Therefore, you need to make sure that you are all working! In addition, you cannot make up stuff. All evidence must come from the book, whether to defend or prosecute!

Job Requirements:

Submission of an outline of opening and closing statements. [Opening statement: What is your case? Why is that your case? How will you prove that case? Closing statement: What was your case? How did you prove your case? Why should the jury be influenced by your argument?] Outlines should be clear and easy to read. You should use legal terminology. Typed. (10 points)

Opening and closing statements (typed). Are they grammatically correct? Are your words definite, concrete, and exact? Are you representing your client or public in the best way possible? Are statements based on evidence from the book? Are reasonable inferences made? Do you cite and document the book if it is used? Is your argument compelling? (25 points)

Questions for each of the witnesses, including cross examination. Did you have at least three witnesses to cross-exam and two to question? Why did you take on these witnesses? Are your questions relevant? Do they rely on the book? Do these questions prove your witnesses reliability? Do the cross-examinations questions prove a witnesses unreliability? Are these questions relevant to the situation? Type questions. (35 points)

Use of Evidence. How much did you rely on the book? How different is your case from the book? How was the book used as evidence? Did you have outside evidence? Specialty witnesses? (i.e., psychiatrist). Did you introduce physical evidence? (You can create props) If so, please describe. (30 points)

Presentation. This includes behavior in the courtroom, preparedness, and how you worked with your team of lawyers. Did you dress the part? (30 points)

In-court notes. Are you listening to what your witnesses are saying and to what other lawyers (including your own) are asking? Any objections? Why? Are you listening to the judge? What do you think of these rulings in regard to your case? Each lawyer’s notes should be submitted in portfolio. (10 points)

Personal Reflection (each lawyer must do this). How did your case go? What do you feel about your witnesses? What would you have changed? Consider these questions. 200 word reflection. Typed. (10 points)

Total points out of 150.

Student Name Responsible for…Opening StatementQuestioning own witnessesQuestioning opposing witnessesClosing Statement

Rubric for Witnesses/Characters

The witnesses are characters. You must remain in character throughout the trial and must rely on evidence from the book! You must know your character inside and out as when you are being questioned, you must use information from the novel.

Job Requirements:

Character Sketch. Write a one page, double-spaced essay. Who are you? What is your character like? How will you portray him/her in court? Is this character solely based on the text? Did you add elements to the character? What are they? What is your character’s "voice"? Do you know your character well? What drives him/her? (45 points)

Affidavit. Write a one page, double-spaced recollection of everything your character witnessed and participated in while on the island. You must include only things your character witnessed first-hand. These documents can be used during the trial. (35 points)

Journal. Every day during the trial, you must keep a journal of events as seen through the eyes of your character. Include a personal reaction to each day of the trial. Do you understand the lawyers and what they ask of you and other witnesses? Is this going how you expected? Why? Keep notes taken during trial also in journal. The entire journal will be turned in with your character sketch at the end of the trial. (20 points)

Presentation. Did you know your character well? Were you able to answer without hesitation or fumbling for facts? Did you bring props? What makes you stand out from other characters? Did you collaborate well with lawyers? How did you react to cross-examination? Were your oral communications skills favorable? Did you dress the part? Did you remain in character? (50 points )

You will submit a binder/folder with your character sketch, one copy of your affidavit, and journal entries at the end of the project. Your presentation grade will be calculated by the teacher at the end of the trial presentation.

Total Points out of 150

Mock Trial Legal Terms1. Accessory after the fact: a term identifying a person who is aware that a crime has been committed and conceals, hides, assists, or protects a person who has committed a crime. 2. Accessory before the fact: a term identifying a person who plans or aides the commission of a crime but is absent when the crime is committed. 3. Armed Robbery: a term used to describe the felonious action of taking another’s personal property against their will by force and with the use of a deadly weapon. 4. Attorney: another name for a lawyer; an officer of the court. 5. Burden of proof: the duty imposed on the plaintiff or prosecution to prove the charges that have been brought against the defendant in a legal proceeding. 6. Conspiracy: two or more people who agree to join together to commit a crime. 7. Criminal Intent: the knowledge or awareness that one is committing a criminal act. 8. Criminal Law: the branch of law that deals with crimes and their punishments. 9. Cross-examination: the questioning of a witness by an attorney of the opposite side during a legal proceeding after the direct examination has taken place. 10. Defendant: the accused person in a criminal case or the person from whom damages are sought in a civil case. 11. Felony: a serious or major crime against the law. 12. Felony-Murder Rule: the rule which holds that if a homicide takes place in the commission of a crime, a person can be held accountable for the charge of murder. 13. Hearsay: some information or evidence that is second-hand experience, or not witnessed. 14. Judge: a legal person who is authorized to preside over, hear, or decide a case in court. 15. Jury: a number of individuals who are chosen to hear, determine the facts, and render a decision in a trial. 16. Objection: a point of order raised by a lawyer to an attempted statement, action of an attorney or judge in a trial. 17. Objection Overruled: the words used by a judge when he disagrees with a lawyer who raised an objection. 18. Objection sustained: the words used by a judge when he agrees with a lawyer who raised an objection. 19. Opening Statement: a speech made by an attorney to a jury or judge in order to give his explanation of the case. 20. Perjury: the willful giving of false testimony under oath. 21. Presumption of Innocence: the assumption that a person is innocent until proven guilty. 22. Reasonable Doubt: a term used to decide the kind and amount of uncertainty that a reasonable person might have in reaching a conclusion in ordinary matters; the reasonable doubt in the mind of a juror could justify an acquittal. 23. Testimony: an oral statement of evidence given by a witness, while under oath, during a court proceeding. 24. Verdict: the formal decision made by a jury, or judge, in a trial. 25. Witness: an individual who testifies, under oath, at a trial.

SIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE AND PROCEDURE

HANDBOOK FOR ATTORNEYS

These rules are designed to ensure that both parties in a dispute receive a fair hearing and to exclude any evidence deemed irrelevant, incompetent, untrustworthy, or unduly prejudicial. 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 or not the rule has been violated and whether or not the evidence must be excluded from the record of the trial.

Formal rules of evidence are quite complicated and differ depending upon the court in which the trial occurs. For the purposes of this mock trial, the rules of evidence have been modified and simplified below.

A. WITNESS EXAMINATION

1. Direct Examination (attorneys call and question witnesses)a. Form of questions: A witness may not be asked leading

questions by the attorney who calls him. A leading question is one that suggests to the witness the answer desired by the examiner, and often suggests, though not exclusively, a “yes” or “no” answer. These should NOT be used. Direct questions generally are phrased to evoke a set of facts from the witness. These SHOULD be used.

Example of a direct question: “Mr. Hudson, when did you first meet Jane Harris?”

Example of a leading question: “Mr. Hudson, you don’t have a steady job, do you?”

b. Scope of witness examination: Direct examination may cover all the facts, of which the witness has FIRST-HAND knowledge, relevant to the case.

c. Refreshing recollection: If a witness is unable to recall a statement made in the affidavit, or if a witness contradicts the affidavit, the attorney on direct may seek to introduce into evidence that portion of the affidavit that will help the witness to remember.

2. Cross-Examination (questioning the other side’s witness)a. Form of questions: An attorney MAY ask leading questions

when cross-examining the opponent’s witnesses.

Example of a leading question: “Mr. Davis, you’ve given a lot of thought to giving Mr. Hudson

information you that that would be helpful to him, haven’t you?”

b. Scope of witness examination: Attorneys may only ask questions that relate to matters brought out by the other side in direct examination, or to matters relating to the credibility of the witness.

Example: If the defendant in a car accident case never mentions damages to the car, then the prosecution cannot ask questions on cross-examination about the costs of the repair.

c. Impeachment: On cross-examination, the attorney may want to show the court that the witness should not be believed. This is called impeaching the witness. It may be done by asking questions about prior conduct or prior opinions of experts that may cast doubt on the credibility of the witness.

Example (prior conduct): “Is it true that you participated in beating up another student when you were in school?”

d. Re-direct Examination: If the credibility or reputation for truthfulness of the witness has been attached on cross-examination, the attorney whose witness has been damaged may wish to ask several more questions. These questions should be limited to the damage the attorney thinks has been done and should be phrased so as to try to “save” the witness’s image of truthfulness in the eyes of the court.

B. ADDITIONAL RULES OF EVIDENCE1. Opinions of Witnesses

As a general rule, witnesses may NOT give opinions. Certain witnesses who have special knowledge or qualifications may be qualified as experts. Before an expert can be asked for an expert opinion, the attorney doing the questioning must reveal and establish the expert’s qualifications and experience.

2. Relevance of EvidenceGenerally, only relevant testimony and evidence may be presented. (Example: The defense asks Mr. Hudson on cross-examination, “How old are you?” –This question is permitted only if his age is relevant to the case.)

3. Introduction of Physical EvidenceThere is a special procedure for introducing physical evidence during a trial. Below are the basic steps for introducing a physical object or document (including an affidavit) for identification and/or use as evidence.a. “Your honor, I ask that this affidavit be marked for evidence as

Petitioner’s Exhibit A.” (Show document to the court and hand to the bailiff for marking.)

b. (Show document to the opposing attorneys, who may make an objection to the offering at this time.)

c. (Show the document to the judge. Get a ruling from the court as to whether it will be admitted.)

d. (Show document to witness). “Mr. Davis, do you recognize this document which is marked Petitioner’s Exhibit A as the affidavit you wrote?” (The witness should say yes and identify the document. At this point the attorney may proceed to ask the witness a series of questions about Exhibit A.)

e. Hand the document to the judge.

C. OBJECTIONSAn attorney can object any time the opposing attorneys have violated the rules of evidence or examination. The attorney wishing to object should stand up and do so at the time of the violation. When an objection is raised, the judge will ask the reason for it. Then the judge will turn to the attorney who asked the question or submitted an item as evidence, and that attorney will usually be given an opportunity to explain why the objection should not be accepted (“sustained”) by the judge. The judge will then decide whether a question, an answer, or an item submitted as evidence must be discarded, because it has violated a rule of evidence (“objection sustained), or whether the question, answer, or item submitted to remain on the trial record (“objection overruled”).

Following are standard objections:

1. Irrelevant Evidence“I object, your honor. This testimony is irrelevant to the facts of this case.”

2. Leading Questions“Objection. Counsel is leading the witness.” (Remember this is only an objection during direct examination, not cross-examination.)

3. Beyond the Scope of Direct Examination“Objection. Counsel is asking the witness about matters that did not come up in direct examination.”

4. Opinion“Objection. Counsel is asking the witness to give an opinion.” (Opinions are only acceptable from expert witnesses)

5. Lack of Personal Knowledge“Objection. The witness has no personal knowledge that would enable him to answer this question.”

MISCELLANEOUS ADVICE FOR ATTORNEYS

1. Preparing Opening StatementsAttorneys should make effective use of time to outline the opening statements they will make. Because these statements focus the attention of the jury on the evidence which will be presented, it will be important for all attorneys and witnesses on one side to work in close cooperation. The attorney responsible for the opening statement should prepare a draft to be reviewed by the other attorneys on their team.

2. Developing Questions for Witnesses and Rehearsing WitnessesAttorneys should develop, in advance, questions to ask their own witnesses and literally rehearse the questions and responses with the witnesses.

Witnesses should study and be familiar with their affidavits (witness statements) so that their testimony will be consistent with those statements.

An affidavit can be used by the other side to impeach a witness who testifies inconsistently with that statement.

Attorneys must be familiar with all witness statements, on both sides, and study carefully additional research on key witnesses.

3. Preparing Cross-examinationAttorneys should divide into two pairs. One pair of attorneys should be construction questions and testimony for their own side, while the other attorneys should be thinking about how they will cross-examine the

opposing side’s witnesses. As mentioned, the purpose of cross-examination is to make the other side’s witnesses seem less believable.

Often it is wise to ask relatively few questions on cross-examination so that the witness will not have an opportunity to re-emphasize strong points

During cross-examination, the attorneys for the prosecution might try to suggest that the testimony of the defense witness is inconsistent. Visa versa for the defense.

Leading questions are only permitted in cross-examination.

4. Preparing Closing ArgumentsThe closing arguments are challenging, since they must be comprehensive and flexible presentations, reviewing not only the evidence presented for one’s side, but also underscoring the weaknesses and inconsistencies, which arise out of the trial proceedings, in the other side’s case. The strategy for closing arguments must take into account the possibility of unanticipated evidence or testimony on either side.

GENERAL ADVICE AND RULES OF ATTORNEYSPREPARATION, POISE, AND POLISH

IN GENERALMake certain your team is flawlessly organized before the start of the trial.

That organization will contribute markedly to making you look good.Behave and follow the rules. Do not shout or scream or consistently try to

embarrass either the attorneys or the witnesses for the other side.Be confident, poised, and relaxed. Use your voice effectively. Make sure

people can hear you, but do not shout.Be polite and deferential toward the judge.

OPENING STATEMENTYou will be limited to 5 minutes in length; make it 5 minutes in length, and

no more. Outline to the jury the evidence you plan to present and state your view of

the case. Grab the attention of the judge, but this is not the time to argue your case—

that comes in the closing argument, once you have presented all your evidence.

DIRECT EXAMINATION

You will have one hour to present your case, that is call ALL your witnesses.

Try to make the sequence of your witnesses as dramatic as possible. People tend to remember the first and the last things they hear, so start strong and finish strong.

Since your time is limited, do not waste time with irrelevant questions to you witnesses.

When you are examining book character witnesses, ask your questions chronologically so their testimony tells a story.

For expert witnesses (psychologist only), make sure their qualifications are clear to the jury; then ask for their expert opinions.

OBJECTIONSDo not make yourself look foolish and waste all of our time by objecting too

often. Save serious objections for when the attorneys on the other side are getting away with too much, when what they are doing is seriously damaging your case. Make sure that only one attorney for your side is responsible to objecting at any one time.

CROSS-EXAMINATIONYou will be limited to 2 minutes for cross-examination of each witness.Remember you can only refer to what was raised in direct-examination.

Remember the key is to discredit, not humiliate the witness.

CLOSING ARGUMENTYou will be limited to 6 minutes in length; make it 6 minutes, and no

more/less.This is key. Capably, and concisely as possible, sum up the case you have

presented, discount the evidence presented by the other side, and make a plea for a decision in favor of your client.

Prepare in advance, but adjust to fit the actual testimony—you may have to think on your feet.

Attorneys who might close must pay careful attention to all trial testimony.

THE WITNESS AFFITDAVITPreparing to Testify

REQUIREMENTS OF THE WITNESS AFFITDAVIT

1. The Witness Affidavit must be typewritten, Times New Roman, and double-spaced. It should be one page in length.

2. You must turn in 5 copies of the affidavit. (two for your lawyers, two for the opposing lawyers, one for you)

3. The affidavit should contain the following elements:A. Paragraph one: Introduction and background of the

witness

B. Paragraph two: Description of the witness’s experience and its relationship to this case:

Why are you qualified to testify? Expert witness: What makes you an expert?

C. Paragraph three: Detailed explanation of the witness’s experiences and views (facts ONLY; no opinions, unless you are an expert witness)

D. Paragraph four: Expert witness ONLY. The witness’s expert opinion on this case, based on information in the preceding paragraphs.

STRATEGIES FOR PREPARING THE WITNESS AFFIDAVIT AND TESTIMONY

1. Study thoroughly any parts of the book pertaining to your character. Use the text to help you write your affidavit so that your answers are consistent with the story.

2. Remember: the more you know and understand about the witness whose role you are assuming, the more effective you will be in standing up to direct questioning and cross-examination.

3. Look up photo from the film versions of your character. Consider costumes and props.

The witness statement is due on . No credit if late.

SIMPLIFIED STEPS IN A TRIAL

1. Calling of the case by the Bailiff“All rise. The court of is now in session. Honorable Judge presiding.”

2. Opening statements

First the prosecutor, then the defendant’s attorney will explain what their evidence will be and what they will try to prove.

3. Prosecution’s CaseWitnesses are called to testify (direct examination) and other physical evidence is introduced. Each witness called is cross-examined (questioned as to break down the story or to be discredited) by the defense.

4. Defendant’s CaseWitnesses are called to testify (direct examination) and other physical evidence is introduced. Each witness called is cross-examined (questioned as to break down the story or to be discredited) by the prosecution.

5. Closing statementsAn attorney for each side reviews the evidence presented and asks for a decision in favor of his or her client.

6. Deliberation and DecisionIn making a decision, the judge considers the evidence presented and then decides which witnesses were most credible, considering the burden of proof. Once the judge reaches a verdict he or she will read it in “open court.” Case closed.