In our Civil case, I am Jean Welby, who is paul welby’s mother and also the witness of the case. I am 46years old,a stay home mum,living in 1703. w. sesame street. If I need to rate myself for the effort I put into my role, I think I will rate for 4 because everyday, I actively participated in our group discussion and I had read my deposition and the whole story for a a lot of times ,highlighted plenty of important sentences/imformation which could help me for our trail.
Also, I prepared and wrote down the questions and answers that the plantiff attorney would ask me during the cross-examination. There is one thing that I am really proud of is that we finishd our whole trail in a right and fair process as well as I completed my witness job successfully. However,there is still one thing I need to do differently. When I was reading Jean Welby’s deposition, there was one slang in it, I should ask my American Friends the meaning of the slang instead of using my own way to understand it .
To be honest, this mock trail ,which I have never done before is really a good pratical experience for me. Through this imitation trail, I got a better,specific and deepen understanding about the trial and I learned about the leagal system in a more competitive manner. I feel I just experienced a real trail. It’s pretty cool ! Moreover,There are three things that I learned about the trail process from this experience that I didn’t know before I want to say. First, it is about the Baliff. Actually, before the mock trail, I never know there is baliff in the trail.
Life Changing Experience Death. To people it means many different things. Some people may not think anything of it, until it strikes close to them. I know before I had my father pass away, I never thought once about it. When I first heard of my dad dying, it made me way sad. I was ten or eleven, not old enough yet to understand, why someone would want to take their own life. I was crushed when it ...
But after experiencing, I know about that before every trail, we should have a baliff like Collin in our mock trail to ask every witness “do you swear to tell the truth,the whole truth, and nothing but the truth ,so help your god? ” And at the same time,witness should raise their right hand and put their left hand on the bible. Another thing is about the “redirect” and “recross”. During the redirect and recorss, attorneys should question their own/other witnesses again,but must remain with the scope of what was discussed in cross-examination/redirect.
Based on my knowledge about trail process , I didn’t know that the questions attorneys ask during the redirect and recross should be confined into the scope of what was discussed in cross-examination/redirect before. What I think is that attorneys can ask whatever they want to help their trail. The third thing I didn’t know before is about the leading questions. During our mock trail, we could always hear the attorneys will point the other sides’ attorneys didn’t ask the leading questions.
When attorneys question witnesses , they must use leading questions which will not involve their own opinions, will not influence the evidence presented and will let witnesses to say the whole storys about the case. In addition, I think our trail was fair. There are some reasons as follows. We strictly followed the right trail process. We had opening statements, direct and cross examination, re-direct ,re-cross, closing statements,jury instructions, and the final verdict. Also, in my opinion, the plaintiff in our civil case met the required standard of proof.
They did a good job on organizing and leading the group which include determine charges,accused and witness. They discussed with all the group members a lot and prepared a general plan to win the case. In our case, attorneys and witnesses work together very well,also you can see we have a lot of re-direct and re-cross going on which could provide more and more evidence to jurys. And all the questions that defense attorneys asked were all based on deliberation and deep discussion with group members . Also the questions they asked could help a lot to their sides.
For example, our defense attorneys ask the plantiff witness Paul Welby that “Have his parents talked about the safety rules of driving before? ” and “Did they know paul and Danny were drinking when they were out of the room? ”Also they asked the plantiff witness “police” that “Whether Danny wore seat belt or not in the car accident? ” These three examples all can help to build The Welbys image that they are very good people , they follow the rules and taught their son if he drinked too much, they could pick up him instead of driving by himself.
AP US HISTORY FREE RESPONSE QUESTIONS SINCE 1971 I. Colonial Time 1607 – 1775 1. Puritanism bore within itself the seeds of its own destruction. Apply this generalization. (74) 2. In the seventeenth century, New England Puritans tried to create a model society. What were their aspirations, and to what extent were those aspirations fulfilled during the seventeenth century? (83) 3. Between ...
Also they showed the jurys that Danny himself didn’t wear the seat belt when they were driving which directly caused himself serious injury . More importantly, they proved that Mr Welby and Mrs Welby couldn’t foreseen the outcome and injurys of Danny when they provided alcohol to Danny and Paul. According to the aboved reasons,the total money that Danny’s parents sued the welbys were so much and unreasonable. And Based on these information and reasons above, I disagree with the verdict. I think it should not be 50% ,50% for our both sides. We should get more than 50% support that the welbys should not pay Danny’s family that much money.