Mock Trial Heads to Courthouse

Over the course of the last five months, the members of Mock Trial have worked extensively on preparing themselves for court. The case at hand revolved around the crucial aspect of first degree murder and whether a college honor society pledge master was responsible for purposely causing the death of a young, promising pledge student. In order to fully comprehend the details of the case, we organized ourselves into two groups. The first group consisted of three lawyers and three witnesses that represented the prosecution, meaning that this group of students argued for the conviction of the defendant. The second group of students was also composed of three lawyers and three witnesses. However, they served as the defense; they argued in favor of the defendant.



The first day of competition.

Both groups worked together to create expertly written cross and direct examinations. A cross examination is a series of yes or no questions inquired by the lawyer and delivered to the witness. The purpose of this questioning is to highlight imperative details of the case, which help to support the case of either the prosecution or defense. However, a direct examination is a questioning of a witness by the party that called him or her to trial and asks for more in depth answers. The Mock Trial team also spent copious amounts of time constructing opening and closing statements. An opening statement is a significant aspect of the trial because it is the ideal time to shed light on the strengths of that party’s case. A closing statement is also important to the verdict of the case because it is the only chance a respective party is allowed to reiterate their ideals and evidence regarding the case at hand. Following the creation of these documents the squad was only left with memorizing and rehearing their material.

On the day of the prosecution trial, the Mock Trial team entered the Montgomery County Courthouse looking fierce and ready to compete, wearing their best Western business attire and holding their leather notebooks.

Intimidation is a part of Mock Trial at the Bucks County Courthouse.

After a slight delay, the trial began well into the evening hours. I was one of the lawyers for the case in addition to Nancy C. ‘15 and Catie C. ’17, while the witnesses were Nichelle H. ‘15, Abby K. ’17, and Sarah G. ’16. Expert timekeepers Peyton W. ‘16 and Ashley S. ‘16 also aided the team. Although the opposing team representing the defense presented their arguments and evidence well, GA’s own prosecution were outstanding in their first ever actual trial. As a result of strong opening and closing statements, as well as excellent direct and cross examinations and flawless memorization, GA’s Mock Trial members were able to prevail by earning a verdict of guilty, winning the case! The team was also praised by the judge and jury for their excellence throughout.

One week later, we arrived at Montgomery County Courthouse yet again, this time with our defense members. The lawyers for the defense were Nichelle, Peyton, and Catie. The witnesses were Sarah, Ashley, and Abby. After a brilliantly fought case on behalf of the defense, the verdict agreed upon was ultimately guilty. However GA’s Mock Trial team only lost by two points on the scoring sheet! Although slightly disappointed, proud of this year’s work and looking forward to next year’s case!

~ Julia S. ‘18