If you’re a member of the Prosecution, you will write 300 words or more for your journal,
laying out the best evidence to convict William Bradfield. If you are Defense, write 300 more
words laying out the best evidence to find him innocent. If you are on team Jury, you will do
300 words on each (600 total). Present your case as an extended argument, convincing
yourself (and your classmates) why whatever you believe is the objective truth.
Below is an optional set of instructions/prompts to help you build and organize your cases
for the journal and best practices, such as Prosecution offering discovery to the Defense.
Also attached is guides for Opening Statements and How to handle Objections. Email me if
you have any questions.
Pre-Trial Journal Prompt for the Prosecution:
1. Evidence Analysis (Pages 154-183):
o Read the relevant pages of the text and identify the following:
o What key pieces of evidence/witnesses from these pages are most crucial to
your case? List and explain why they are important to proving the defendant's
guilt.
o Are there any potential weaknesses/counterarguments related to the
evidence that you need to address preemptively?
o Identify any connections between pieces of evidence/witnesses that could
strengthen your argument or create a narrative thread for the jury.
o You must email a copy of this called “discovery” to the defense attorneys a
week before the trial.
Sample Answer
Potential Weaknesses and Counterarguments
The primary weakness is the credibility of Dr. Janet Holm. She is an accomplice (accessory after the fact) to the alibi fabrication, and the Defense will certainly argue she is testifying to save herself from prosecution.
Preemptive Address: We must argue that Holm's initial involvement was coerced and that her testimony, while compromised, is fully corroborated by the objective, unimpeachable physical evidence. Her testimony explains why Bradfield was at the scene (to orchestrate the murder), and the cell data proves that he was there.
The connection is Motive to Means. The Financial Records (pp. 154-159) create the powerful financial pressure (motive). This pressure led to the Orchestration (as described by Holm, pp. 165-168). Finally, the Cellular Data (pp. 178-183) proves the final act of Deceit, showing he was physically present to ensure the plan succeeded before attempting to cover his tracks.
Prosecution's Journal Argument for Conviction
Our objective is to demonstrate that William Bradfield is not simply a suspect; he is the architect of this brutal crime. We will present a tapestry of evidence so tightly woven that only one conclusion remains for the jury: guilt.
The evidence clearly establishes a motive of desperate greed. The financial records (pp. 154-159) show Bradfield was facing imminent financial ruin, with a half-million dollar debt due just two days after the victim’s death. More critically, these same records expose his calculated insurance ploy, where he stood to gain substantially from the victim’s passing just before the policy was set to expire. No reasonable person can deny the tremendous financial incentive Bradfield had to see the victim eliminated at that precise time.
This powerful motive is immediately connected to his means and orchestration through the testimony of Dr. Janet Holm (pp. 165-168). While the Defense will attack her credibility, we will present her as a reluctant witness who, after being threatened and coerced by Bradfield, has now chosen to tell the truth. Her account of Bradfield manipulating the alibi—an act of clear conscious guilt—is the crucial testimonial link that ties the motive to the execution.
The linchpin of our case, which renders any defense argument moot, is the unimpeachable cellular tower data (pp. 178-183). This digital evidence places Bradfield’s phone directly in the vicinity of the murder scene during the exact time the crime occurred, utterly demolishing his carefully constructed alibi. The cell data corroborates Holm’s testimony about the deceit and confirms the financial records showing his desperate necessity to be involved. Bradfield lied about his whereabouts, and the cold, objective technology proves it.