Scribd
Upload
25 views2 pages

Global Cat Mock Trial Cat

Uploaded by

christianrpham
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
25 views2 pages

Global Cat Mock Trial Cat

Uploaded by

christianrpham
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

GLOBAL LITERACY MOCK TRIAL CASE

PART A
1.
As the defence counsel for John Hopper, my role is to ensure he receives
a fair trial and to protect his legal rights. I do this by challenging the
prosecution's case by questioning their evidence, cross-examining
witnesses, and presenting alternative explanations to my client’s
reasoning. In this case, my goal is to show that Hopper’s actions were not
criminal and had no intention to commit a crime, by trying to cause doubt
within the prosecutor’s claims. My goal is to receive a not guilty verdict
from the jury by pointing out the weaknesses in the case against John
Hopper. This case involves John Hopper and his girlfriend Wendy Lush.
Hopper allegedly entered his former friend’s house without permission to
retrieve his property which was a 1997 Because of how serious the crime
is, it is an indictable offence, and it will be heard by the District Court of
South Australia. The maximum penalty for aggravated serious criminal
trespass in a place of residence is Life imprisonment according to
https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/sa/consol_act/clca1935262/
s170.html#:~:text=170%E2%80%94Serious%20criminal%20trespass
%E2%80%94places,aggravated%20offence%E2%80%94imprisonment
%20for%20life.

PART B
As the defence counsel of John Hopper, I felt that the trial was quite
balanced on both sides with evidence and motive. Due to Hopper’s use of
the baseball bat, there is enough evidence of conviction and the verdict
him being guilty, while the true tension or problem was whether John
Hopper’s intention was innocent or unlawful. While Wendy Lush’s
involvement was more of a passive bystander or witness, not having the
intention of an aggravated serious criminal trespass as even the victim
agreed that she was an innocent person.

I believe that the verdict is fair to agree that John Hopper is guilty of the
crime, due to the evidence being in favour of the prosecutor. Such
evidence would include Chris Noble’s testimony explicitly stating that he
never gave John Hopper permission to enter his property, making Hopper
a trespasser, the possession of the baseball bat which although wasn’t
used as a weapon could be seen as an aggravating factor and the
testimony from Sargent Dibble, quoting “He was acting in a threatening
manner when I first arrived.” However, the defence argued that John
Hopper was retrieving his property and was using the bat in self-defence,
suggesting that his intent was not criminal. John Hopper should only have
a guilty verdict, if the Jury had beyond reasonable doubt that he had
committed the crime. I would give him 9 years of imprisonment, with a 5-
year period of a non-parole period, because while he had a weapon, he did
not physically attack Noble and had cooperated with the police officer
when he arrived. It is also unclear whether John Hopper had a criminal
history, what his age was and his personal circumstances that led to him
becoming violent and behaving like he was, so I cannot take these into
account. He also did not show remorse for his actions.

Overall, I felt that the mock trial was lacking in the interactive aspect due
to us not allowing to deviate or create our own dialogues and defences
from the script, making it boring with very little action, and many people
were reading very monotone or doing nothing at all. I believe that
Australia’s court system is very lenient towards their criminals, allowing
for rehabilitation to occur or keeping people with minor offences out of jail.
I do not inherently believe that this is a good decision or a bad decision,
because rehabilitation is important, but many minor offences stacked up
is not a good way to live.

NEWSPAPER ARTICLE
MAN FOUND GUILTY OF SERIOUS CRIMINAL TRESPASS IN ADELAIDE

Adelaide, 29th of April 2003


John Hopper, has been found guilty of Aggravated Serious Criminal
Trespass in a Place of Residence following a trial at the District Court of
South Australia. The jury delivered a unanimous verdict after four hours of
deliberation, convicting Hopper of unlawfully entering the Blaxton home of
his former friend, Chris Noble, brandishing a baseball bat to intimidate him
during a dispute over a football CD.

The incident occurred on the February 25, 2000, when Hopper,


accompanied by his girlfriend, Wendy Lush, entered Noble’s home without
permission. Noble testified that Hopper threatened him with the bat,
demanding the return of a CD commemorating the 1997 AFL Grand Final.

Hopper claimed he only entered the house to retrieve his property and
acted in self-defence, fearing Noble could become violent. However, the
prosecution argued that Hopper’s aggressive behaviour, with the
possession of the bat, showed intent to intimidate.

Lush, who was also charged, was acquitted due to the jury accepting the
defence that she had no intention of going there to commit a crime and
was under the impression that she was only there to pick up an item from
a friend.

John Hopper was sentenced to 9 years in prison with a non-parole period


of 5 years.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy