They all agreed he was not malingering this disease, they all agreed he had it since childhood, and they even all agreed that this disease affected his behavior on the day in question. This is agreed. This is the simple truth of the matter, it is the simple, cold, hard fact of this case. And that is what trials are about: the truth, and facts. We saw it when he complained to the police that Mr. Anderson was the devil and was trying to kill him. We saw it when he was in his slippers and bathrobe walking in 6 inches of snow, walking up the steps to Mr.
And we saw it when he bludgeoned that poor man to death. And this is very disturbing. We know it was for you. But this action was committed because my client had no idea what he was doing and thought Mr. Anderson was the devil. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is insanity.
Pure and simple. He had no motive to kill Mr. We have the insanity law for a reason. The state argues that my client is using this as an excuse. Anderson lives alone, in an isolated area. Does the state really think that this was all part of a plan? Remember that my client shared his paranoid delusions about Mr.
Anderson with everybody who would listen. Is that really what a sane man does when he is planning on committing a murder months later? Killian v. Fun for a year-old comes in many forms movies, the beach, bowling, or just hanging out with friends in front of the local Seven-Eleven. Jamie did not choose to do any of these. Jamie chose to play paintball. Now Jamie has a closed head injury. Did paintball proprietor Chris Schultz engage in negligent conduct that made the game unreasonably dangerous?
Did Jamie ignore posted safety instructions? Who is to blame? With permission from Iowa Mock Trial Program Brunetti It was the dawn of another day in the sleepy hamlet of Lakeville. All around town commuters were filling their travel mugs, while children readied their backpacks for school.
But there would be no school for Nicky Blanc or Jackie Potomski. Both lay dead on the basketball courts at Founders Park. Did Nicky single-handedly plan and carry out the murder of Jackie Potomski? Or, was Shawn Burnett the mastermind, manipulating Nicky to do the dirty work? Adapted from Constitutional Rts. Nationally, students have found themselves suspended or expelled for infractions as benign as bringing a butter knife to school, or pointing a fun-shaped chicken strip at someone during lunch.
But what if the threat came from a student with a disability? Under the amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, added in , procedures were established for schools seeking to discipline and remove a student with exceptional education needs EEN from this or her current educational placement or program. Adapted from the State Bar of Wisconsin.
Since grade school, his favorite part of any parade or halftime show was the beat of the drums. In the summer of , Chuck went to band camp on a mission… a mission to be accepted onto the line, and to enjoy all of the benefits of the increased social status that came with it. Chuck ended up dead after a fall from a foot clock tower. Case adapted from Street Law.
Under normal circumstances, non-point pollution is a serious problem, but at times, the problem can be exacerbated and can result in tragic consequences. A few days later three of the students became ill. William Mable, one of the students, died. Adapted from Wisconsin Case. Jamie Becker and Kim Hanks In the not-too-distant past, counterfeiting was a difficult and expensive endeavor. It required large printing presses and the ability to cut intricate designs by hand into metal plates.
Today it is much easier to create counterfeit bills. As thousands of teenagers discover every year, you can create fake money with a PC, a scanner and a color inkjet printer in about 10 minutes. You can also face very serious consequences.
Fearing a larger problem, Upham had all employees educated on methods to detect counterfeit bills. Or were they? Kris Hamburg. Lawrence and the Clearwater Police Department Evan Brooks, a year-old honors student at Clearwater High School, went shopping at the local grocery late one night. So late, in fact, that Brooks had to be asked to finish shopping so that the store could close.
What followed for Evan Brooks was almost six hours in police custody being searched, fingerprinted, and escorted to the courthouse in shackles.
After being release, Brooks spent an additional three to four hours in the hospital for pain and injuries sustained during the incident. Now Brooks is bringing a civil suit against the security guard, the store, and the police. Sometimes people in hindsight should have, or could have, handled the matter differently.
Rather we analyze what happened from the perspective of how things looked at the time to my client. But that is not the circumstance when my client used force, is it? The man came at my client in a dark alley behind a tavern, and no one knew or could have known his intentions.
And my client decided that he wanted to go home that night, that he wanted to survive. Self-defense is not just the stuff of law books. Self-defense is a defense that nature herself recognizes, a recognition really that any living creature is going to act, or react a certain way when faced with a threat.
No one walks up to police and prosecutors on the street and threatens them. No, it is people like my client Jacob Moore who get messed with, who get bullied. The nobodies of this world. But he stuck up for himself. He reacted. And now he is being judged. The jury system was intended to stick up for the little guy.
Our forefathers knew that someone or something had to serve as a buffer between the individual citizen and the powerful government. My client has no burden of proof, the state has to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. My client faces a serious offense. He is charged with a violent crime. His life is on the line. You think the police would have done a more thorough job in the investigation.
You really would. You would think my client would be entitled to a fair investigation before people would pass judgment on him. The police should have tried to find independent witnesses who were at the tavern that night.
They did not. How come none of the bartenders were subpoenaed? Instead the police relied on the word of the alleged victim and his friends. And you know the kind of people they are. None of their stories matched.
Half of them admitted to drug use on the night in question. Is that the type of scant proof that can send a man to jail? Hold the state to its burden.
0コメント