On the prosecution side, they used information that had to do with Civil Rights, Natural Rights and what was morally correct. They used amendment 4, 5, 10 and 14 as well. There was information about an event that occurred a couple weeks ago about a young woman that was arrested and racially profiled as an illegal immigrant when she in fact was a US citizen. The witnesses for the prosecution were John Adams, James Madison and Raul Grijalva.
2. Summarize the facts of the case, as presented by the defense. Include relevant witnesses and testimony.
The defense argued that the case with using the new senate bill and saying that they were not racially profiling. There witnesses were the Arizona Senator and Governor as well as a worker from Ellis Island. They stated that the illegal immigrants were here illegally and should not be here because they must become citizens prior to coming here.
3. What was the most significant piece of evidence, in your personal opinion?
I think the most significant evidence was the story about the young woman who had been arrested when she was a legal citizen. That caused some tension and stress for the other team because they weren't really sure how to come back with that without saying it was racial profiling. They used the senate bill as their evidence and it was certainly good evidence.. but it made it worse for the opposite team at certain points. Some of the witnesses got a little caught up in what they were saying and the prosecution was able to get them to say what we wanted.
4. What was the most significant argument made, in your opinion?
The most significant argument had to do with the racial profiling. Being on the prosecution, we were able to get the witnesses on the defense to say what we wanted a lot of the times. The other team was saying that all illegal immigrants were dangerous and that was how we were able to decipher if they were illegal or not. At one point in time we actually got one of the other witnesses to say that they were profiling people to arrest. So the racial profiling was a very good argument many times throughout the trial.
5. What do you personally believe the correct verdict should be? Do you agree with the jury? Why or why not?
I'm a little torn between the issue. I don't think that illegal immigrants should be in the country unless they go through the process of becoming a citizen because that is what all of us here in America have done.. but then again in Arizona, the fact that they are racially profiling is unfair completely.
I think I deserve a 45 out of 50 points because I was a large contribution to the prosecution team. I researched a lot of information and I helped out with the questions and statements as well as played the role of James Madison. I thought that I did pretty good when I was on the stand. I think I could have done a better job with my answers though. We were on time constraint and I didn't get my questions sent to me until the last second so a lot of my answers were improvised on my behalf. I also helped a lot with some of the questions having to do with the cross examine as well as when the witnesses from the other team were called up for a recall.
I think I deserve a 45 out of 50 points because I was a large contribution to the prosecution team. I researched a lot of information and I helped out with the questions and statements as well as played the role of James Madison. I thought that I did pretty good when I was on the stand. I think I could have done a better job with my answers though. We were on time constraint and I didn't get my questions sent to me until the last second so a lot of my answers were improvised on my behalf. I also helped a lot with some of the questions having to do with the cross examine as well as when the witnesses from the other team were called up for a recall.
No comments:
Post a Comment