2024 Mock Trial Finals

Carmel High School takes on Stevenson School for the Mock Trial Finals at the Monterey County Courthouse.

The Mock Trial Program is an exciting law-related educational program that introduces high school students (grades 9-12) to the American legal system. Mock trials are structured like "real" court trials and follow the same rules. The program pairs students with mentors from the legal community. Through one-on-one interactions with attorney coaches, a student's understanding of the law is greatly enhanced.Through role-playing, students gain an understanding of our judicial system--what roles judges, lawyers, juries and witnesses play in the system. Additionally, students develop critical thinking and public speaking skills and a working knowledge of our legal practices and procedures.

This Mock Trial is hosted by The Lyceum of Monterey County.

SPECIAL THANKS TO:
Monterey County Bar Foundation
Monterey County Bar Association
The Chapman Foundation
The Harden Foundation
The Monterey Peninsula Foundation
Yellow Brick Road Foundation

[Simonkonig]

I wish I would have been able to act in this trial as a student… this is next level education ❤

[JeanneFugate-ml]

As an attorney for 22 years, I cannot believe that these are high school students! These kids could skip law school and go right into practice. Awesome.

[imachavel]

This was a really good mock trial. I think the prosecution would lose on the appellate level for this case. I know this was a mock trial but LOL when I first watched this I was really upset at the judge on her ruling. To be honest this would for sure have a jury panel. The deliberation would take more than just a few seconds that the judge took in her procedure to decide on this ruling. I will give it this based on the details of this crime the evidence doesn't point to anyone else besides the defendant. Yet I do not believe that means that this is beyond A Reasonable Doubt I don't believe there was enough evidence to convict besides the fingerprints and his phone was nearby the scene. It was clear he had a shoulder injury and making a right-handed slash he would not have been able to hurt the victim the way he did. His fingerprints were on the weapon because he gave it to the person as a gift even the detective investigating the crime agreed with that. In fact as far as I can follow along it seems she actually proposed that in her investigation. The motive was very low. There were other people whose phones were nearby. The geofence was not done with the proper warrant as the defense pointed out. It seems to me the judge based on finding the defendant guilty more so on the evidence is not pointing to anyone else despite the stronger motive of other people and the fact that their phones were also nearby when the murder took place. We must remember in our legal system what beyond a reasonable doubt means. It was never verified the defendant was in the room during The Killing. No other evidence aside from what point did he gave the gift to this person that was a knife that was used to stab the victim pointed to the defendant having actually done the crime. This person did not confess and even the geofence done without the warrant did not show that he was actually in the room with his cell phone based on the geofence Data Tracking his cell phone. I don't have access to Lexis or Westlaw but I feel it would be easy to shepardize a case similar to this in which similar evidence such as fingerprints pointing to the person still led to an acquittal. Well how about OJ Simpson? In which much more evidence was pointing to his killing of Nicole Brown Simpson. Yet he was acquitted because it was not Beyond a reasonable doubt that he had done it. Not a very good sighting though is the facts and the details of the OJ Simpson case I believe are very different to this case. But I feel further shepherding would results in sightings in pretty good cases to compare that would acquit this person. A reasonable doubt means, well it means beyond a reasonable doubt. We must remember to keep fairness in the judicial system and to be aware of inconsistencies and errors in the legal system. In real life by imagine this being appealed. In real life I imagine the bar association doing an investigation on this judge and looking for previous inconsistencies in errors and bad rulings and possible mistrials that this judge would have a history of ruling over. Possibly she could be disbarred. You cannot retry a case based on Double Jeopardy but appealing because of a legal error means the trial was in error and the person can definitely have another trial. 😂 I will say this was a mock trial. Definitely this is the realism of this mock trial it looks and sounds so much exactly the way the two opposing counsels would argue their case and do lead examination and cross examination of the defendant and the witnesses that were subpoenaed and make their initial and closing arguments and go back and forth with the judge. I actually have an emotional reaction from watching this. Lol pretty realistic. Some high schools barely have extracurricular activities beyond music lessons. You can learn an instrument really well. And if you become famous enough you'll be a rockstar or something. But a high school with a legal program that teaches students legal procedure? Does it have engineering or architectural classes as well or biology or medicine classes? LOL people need to really consider taking their kid out of whatever high school they're in and putting them in this High School. Very realistic mock trial.

[zanerthecraner]

Just moved on the state. I’m in 7th grade

[jackymarcel]

Rodriguez Brian Taylor Shirley Lee Angela