STEP 3: Justice League

• Engels
• Secundair onderwijs

STEP 3: Justice League

Learning about court in the US

1 ⁄ In the name of justice

Ex. 1

Explain what you see in the pictures. What are these attributes used for or a symbol of?

Ex. 2

Who is who? Combine.

judge

bailiff

plaintiff

defendant

defence attorney

public defender

prosecutor

jury

witness

expert witness

 the person accused of wrongdoing/the crime

the person who feels wronged and makes a legal complaint against someone else in court

 a legal official who accuses someone of committing a crime; they have the burden of proof, which means that they have to prove that the accused is guilty

a lawyer appointed by the court

a person who is llowed to give their opinion because of their knowledge or practical experience of a particular subject

a group of people that look at evidence and decide if the person is innocent or guilty

the person in charge of a trial; they decide the sentence

a person who says what they know about a legal case or a particular person

an official who is responsible for the security in the courtroom; they maintain order in the courtroom and remove disruptive people from the court

the person who has to prove the accused is innocent

Ex. 3

Who says what? You will get a set of phrases. Categorise them according to who says them in the courtroom. Choose from: judge, witness, bailiff, attorney, defendant.

Ex. 4

Who sits where? 

Tip: the plaintiff sits 

closest to the jury...

judge

witness

bailiff

defence attorney

state attorney / prosecution 

defendant

plaintiff

jury

spectators

Ex. 4

2 ⁄ A plea, please!

Ex. 1

The most important different steps in a trial are listed.

Link each step to the correct information.

opening statements

 arraignment and plea

 direct examination

cross examination

closing statements

 verdict and sentencing

A

B

C

D

E

F

 CORRECTION: Arraignment and plea happen before the trial begins

opening statements mark the start of the trial itself. 

1. arraignment = voorgeleiding
   
2. plea = pleidooi
   
3. opening statements = openingsverklaringen
4. direct examination = verhoor
5. cross examination = kruisverhoor
6. closing statements = slotverklaringen
7. verdict =  oordeel, vonnis
8. sentencing = veroordeling, strafoplegging           (Summary, p. 241)

chronological order of trial stages:

Arraignment (voorgeleiding) – The defendant is formally charged and enters a plea.

Plea (pleidooi) – The defendant pleads guilty, not guilty, or no contest.

Opening statements (openingsverklaringen) – The prosecution and defense outline their cases to the jury.

Direct examination (verhoor) – Each side questions their own witnesses to present evidence.

Cross-examination (kruisverhoor) – The opposing side questions the witnesses to challenge their testimony.

Closing statements (slotverklaringen) – The prosecution and defense summarize their arguments.

Verdict (oordeel, vonnis) – The jury or judge delivers a decision of guilty or not guilty.

Sentencing (veroordeling, strafoplegging) – If the defendant is found guilty, the judge imposes a sentence.

Ex. 2

Watch the following video about a famous court case.

a Complete the fact file.

b Put the following parts of the 

opening statement in the correct 

order.

a Complete the fact file.

b Put the following parts of the opening statement in the correct order.

Ex. 3

Watch the second video about another famous court case and answer the questions.

a Complete the fact file.

 b Why is Donald Williams a witness in this case?

c Why does he say: ‘I called the police on the police’?

d Which 2 kinds of questions does the attorney ask the witness?

e Why does the attorney ask the witness these questions?

b Why is Donald Williams a witness in this case?

b Why is Donald Williams a witness in this case?

He witnessed the death of George Floyd. He saw the police officer put his knee on Floyd’s neck, who was not resisting arrest.

 

c Why does he say: ‘I called the police on the police’?

c Why does he say: ‘I called the police on the police’?

He believed he witnessed a murder, and the murderer was a police agent, Derek Chauvin.

d Which 2 kinds of questions does the attorney ask the witness?

d Which 2 kinds of questions does the attorney ask the witness?

– yes/no questions: ‘At some point, did you make a 911 call?’ ‘Did you believe that the police were involved?’

– open questions: ‘Why did you do that?’ ‘Why didn’t you just talk to the police about it?’

e Why does the attorney ask the witness these questions?

e Why does the attorney ask the witness these questions?

He tries to get the information he needs from the witness.

Ex. 6

Shouting ‘Objection!’ in court is not enough if you don’t agree with the other party.

You have to clarify the reason for your objection as well.

a Put the correct reasons for objection above the explanations in the text. Choose from the box.

argumentative – asked and answered – hearsay – leading questions –

relevance – speculation – unfair/prejudicial – vague

What is the right order of subtitles?

1. Relevance-Leading question-Asked and answered-Vague-Speculation-Argumentative-Unfair/prejudicial-Hearsay
2. Relevance-Asked and answered-Speculation-Argumentative-Vague-Unfair/prejudicial-Hearsay-Leading question
3. Relevance-Unfair/prejudicial-Leading question-Argumentative-Asked and answered-Vague-Speculation-Hearsay
4. Relevance--Unfair/prejudicial-Speculation-Argumentative-Asked and answered--Vague-Hearsay-Leading question

Attorney during direct examination: ‘The car that you saw leave the scene of the robbery was blue, right?’ Instead, it should be asked like this: ‘What colour was the car that you saw leaving the scene of the robbery?’

is an example of:

1. Relevance
2. Argumentative
3. Asked and answered
4. Leading question

- Attorney: ‘Do you remember when my client wrote you a check for $10,000?’
− Witness: ‘No, that never happened.’
− Attorney: ‘You’re saying that he didn’t write you a check for $10,000?’
− Witness: ‘No, he didn’t.’
− Attorney: ‘I’m talking about last year, you remember, the check he wrote for you, right?’


is an example of:

1. Relevance
2. Argumentative
3. Asked and answered
4. Unfair/prejudicial

Asking how many sexual partners someone has had in a protection order case.


is an example of:

1. Relevance
2. Argumentative
3. Asked and answered
4. Vague

− Attorney: ‘You are not afraid of my client, correct?’
− Witness: ‘Yes, I am.’
− Attorney: ‘Oh come on, how can you be afraid of a guy who weighs 120 lbs when you
weigh 300 lbs?’
− Witness: ‘I am afraid of him no matter his weight.’
− Attorney: ‘Well, you didn’t look very afraid to me when you walked into court today.’

is an example of:

1. Relevance
2. Argumentative
3. Asked and answered
4. Vague

Attorney: ‘What do you think your sister was thinking when she left?’

is an example of:

1. Relevance
2. Argumentative
3. Asked and answered
4. Speculation

Evidence that one of the parties has been in jail before may be relevant, but that evidence may also paint the party in a bad light to the judge or jury.

is an example of:

1. Unfair/prejudicial
2. Argumentative
3. Asked and answered
4. Speculation

The opposing party asks: ‘Can you tell the court where you went earlier?’ After an objection, the question could be rephrased to say: ‘Can you tell the court where you went this morning right before you came to court?’
is an example of:

1. Unfair/prejudicial
2. Vague
3. Relevance
4. Asked and answered

A witness could not testify that they think a person left the house at 8:00 p.m. unless they actually saw the person leave the house, or they have some other valid basis for that belief.

is an example of:

1. Asked and answered
2. Vague
3. Hearsay
4. Speculation

Witness: ‘His sister told me that he has guns under his bed.’

is an example of:

1. Relevance
2. Vague
3. Hearsay
4. Argumentative

ODT - practice

Check 1: p. 243: ex. 1, 2, 4

Check 2: p. 248: ex. 1, 2, 3

Check 3: p. 256: ex. 1