I'm the attorney for defense and my client has been charged with attempted school bombing. The case is between her and the general public. One of the prosecution's witnesses is a boy who harrassed her and some evidence points to the fact that he might have set her up.
Am I allowed to, in the opening statement, talk about how the prosecution's witness may have set her up, or should I just focus on defending my client?
2007-01-06 14:50:35 · 7 answers · asked by fire 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
You can do pretty much anything you want in your opening statement.
It's not unusual to lay out in advance the line of defense you're going to take so the jury can watch and listen for you make your main points as you go. But be aware -- it also prepares the prosecution for what you're going to be doing.
2007-01-06 14:56:47 · answer #1 · answered by Mark H 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A good lawyer never misses the opportunity to tell the jury her theory of the case: your logical, believable story of what happened. You want to give the jury a framework for the evidence they will be hearing; a framework that fits the story you're going to tell. One caution: you have to decide at this point whether you'll be able to impeach or discredit the government's witness. If you don't think you can, don't mention him. (It's good practice not to and there are rules against this)
However, since this is a high school assignment, it's safe to assume that you'll be able to cast some serious doubts on his credibility.Why? They wouldn't have this character in your moot court problem otherwise!
Go with this answer -- make it a story -- and with MLaw on the specific points.
2007-01-06 22:49:03 · answer #2 · answered by Red Herring 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As far as an opening statement, you should just focus on defending your client, claiming they are innocent and reminding the "jurors" that the prosecution must prove BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that your client is guilty. Then proceed to tear the witnesses apart. :o)
2007-01-06 17:17:10 · answer #3 · answered by Kenneth C 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are entitled to bring any issues of doubt of your client's guilt into the trial. If the prosecution attorney objects, the judge will rule on the matter.
2007-01-06 14:53:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Talking about how she may have been set up IS part of her defense. Bringing it up mid-trial might seem unethical. You need to tell the jury FIRST what you intend to prove and then prove it. Think of it as a debate. Introduce your main points and then, throughout the trial, go into greater detail.
2007-01-06 14:56:44 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You could, but I wouldn't recommend it. If you did, it would give time for the prosecution to come up with a good defense for the cross-ex. I would just explain that the allegations may not be trustworthy.
2007-01-06 14:54:38 · answer #6 · answered by eric 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well yea..if ders evidence pointing to him den sure, anything to convince the jury from the beginning
2007-01-06 14:55:44 · answer #7 · answered by *^*nyqt*^* 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋