Order of Trial
Prosecution = Blue
Defense = Red
1. Opening Statement Lawyer (2 min.)
2. Opening Statement Lawyer (2 min.)
3. Witness: Detective Sal Palmer
a. Direct Examination Lawyer (2 min.)
b. Cross Examination Lawyer (2 min.)
4. Witness: Martha Monroe
a. Direct Examination Lawyer (2 min.)
b. Cross Examination Lawyer (2 min.)
5. Terry Stein
a. Direct Examination Lawyer (2 min.)
b. Cross Examination Lawyer (2 min.)
6. Witness: Fran Nilva
a. Direct Examination Lawyer (2 min.)
b. Cross Examination Lawyer (2 min.)
7. Witness: Alex Chavez
a. Direct Examination Lawyer (2 min.)
b. Cross Examination Lawyer (2 min.)
8. Witness: Dr. Pat Bergen
a. Direct Examination Lawyer (2 min.)
b. Cross Examination Lawyer (2 min.)
9. Closing Statement Lawyer (2 min.)
10. Closing Statement Lawyer (2 min.)
11. Judges instructions to jury
*Objectionary Lawyers for both sides are not allotted any specific time slots-they object throughout the trial
Objectionary Rules
Objections are used to keep testimony that is harmful to one’s case off of the record. The judge has the final ruling on whether or not to allow the objection.
A proper objection is phrased in this way:
1. The attorney addresses the judge
2. The attorney indicates that he or she is raising an objection
3. The attorney specifies what they are objecting to
4. The attorney specifies the legal grounds that the opposing side is violating
For example: “Your honor, I object to that question on the ground that it is compound.”
There are 14 different grounds that an objection can be made on.
1. Facts in the Record: When a witness is asked to or reveals facts that were not provided in the witness statements.
2. Relevance: All evidence presented must be relevant to the trial. Also, details and essential facts of the case should not be confused in a way that makes guilt look more or less probable.
3. Foundation: Before a witness can testify to certain facts, it must be proved that they were in a position to know these facts.
4. Personal Knowledge: A witness must have personally witnesses an event to testify about it.
5. Character Evidence: Witnesses are not allowed to testify about a person’s character unless it is an issue.
6. Opinion/Speculation: Witnesses cannot base their opinions on anything but the evidence presented.
7. Hearsay: Witnesses cannot bring speculations they heard from others as evidence (ie, “Joe told me that George killed John” is hearsay, while, “I heard Joe tell John to dodge the knife,” is not.)
8. Leading Questions: Direct examiners cannot ask questions that suggest the desired answer.
9. Argumentative Questions: Examiners cannot ask questions that do not seek information, but that make the witness look unreliable.
10. “Asked and Answered”: Questions can only be asked and answered once.
11. Compound Question: Questions containing an “or” or “and” that joins two alternatives are forbidden.
12. Narrative: Questions that require a witness to generalize or tell a story are not allowed.
13. Non-Responsive Witness: Witnesses cannot purposely leave out important details that prevents evidence from coming forth.
14. Outside the Scope of Cross Examination: When attorneys are alloed a re-direct examination, they are confined to talk about issues brought up in the cross-examination.
Judges Instructions to Jury
Self-Defense
In the District of Columbia, the accused must have had reasonable belief, based on his/her situation, that his/her life was in imminent danger. The jury and judge are to put themselves in the defendant’s place and decide what was reasonable for that person to do at that time.
When the defendant in a homicide case claims that they were suffering from Battered Woman Syndrome, expert testimony is admissible in order to establish:
a. That the syndrome exists; also its definition/characteristics
b. That the defendant was suffering from the syndrome
c. That a person suffering from the syndrome would have had reasonable belief that would not have been reasonable at other times