|
After many weeks or months of these preliminary tasks, the prosecutor is ready for the most important part of his job: the “trial”. The trial is a structured process where the facts of a case are presented to a jury in a court of law and they decide if the defendant is guilty or not guilty. During trial, the prosecutor uses witnesses and evidence to prove to the jury that the defendant committed the crime(s), and the defendant, represented by an attorney, also tells his side of the s tory using witnesses and evidence. In our case, the prosecutor tried to convince the jury that the neighborhood boys beat the lost boys in violation of their civil rights. |
In a trial, the judge—the impartial person in charge of the trial—decides if and when certain procedures can be used or what evidence can be shown to the jury. A judge is similar to a referee in a game, he’s not there to play for one side or the other but to make sure the entire process is played fairly. |
| One of the first things a prosecutor and defense attorney must agree on when they arrive in court the day of trial are the jurors on the case. “Jurors” are selected by both sides to listen to the facts of the case and to determine if the defendant committed the crime. Twelve jurors are selected randomly from voter registration records of people living in the area around the courthouse. The jurors don’t know the prosecutor, the defendant, the defense attorney, or anyone involved in the case. |
 |
| The process by which jurors are requested to come to the courthouse to try a case is called “Venire,” and the actual jury selection process is referred to as “Voir Dire”. When selecting the jury, the prosecutor and defense attorney must avoid discriminating against any group of people. For example, the judge will not allow them to select only men or only women. A jury should represent all types of people, races, and cultures. |
 |
"Opening statements" allow the prosecutor and the defense attorney to briefly tell their account of the events. These statements usually are short, like an outline, and don’t involve witnesses or evidence. The prosecutor makes an opening statement first because the Government has the burden of proving that the defendant committed the crime. |
| Following opening statements, the prosecutor begins “direct examination” of his first witness. This is the prosecutor’s initial step in attempting to prove the case, and it can last from a few minutes to several days. During direct examination, the prosecutor can introduce evidence such as a weapon or something from the crime scene. [Example of a direct testimony transcript] |
| In our case, the first witness was one of the boys who was beaten and, during his testimony, the bat that was used to hurt him was introduced as evidence. “Introducing” the bat at trial as evidence establishes a direct link from the crime scene, were the bat was used, to the courtroom. This ensures that the evidence that a prosecutor uses to prove a defendant’s guilt is the same evidence that was used to committ the crime. |
 |
 |
Following the prosecutor’s examination of a witness, the defense attorney has an opportunity to cross examine or ask questions to the same witness. The purpose of "cross examination" is to create doubt as to the testimony of the witness. The defense attorney often tries to show that the witness could not have seen the crime as he testified, perhaps for example, because he wasn’t wearing his glasses, he was too far away, or he covered his eyes. [Example of a cross examination transcript] |
After the defense attorney cross examines the witness, the prosecutor asks the witness final questions to clarify any confusing testimony for the jury. This is called “redirect examination”. Once the process of direct examination, cross examination, and redirect of all the witnesses is complete, the prosecutor “rests” his case. At this time, the prosecutor usually feels confident that the witnesses’ testimonies and the evidence presented will prove the case. After the prosecutor rests, no more witnesses can be called to the stand or evidence introduced by the government.
Then it is the defense attorney’s opportunity to explain to the jury the defendant’s story, using his witnesses and evidence. The defense also has the option of not having the defendant testify. There is no burden upon the defendant to prove that he is innocent. It is the government's burden to prove the defendant committed the crime as detailed in the indictment. The fact that a defendant did not testify may not be considered by the jury as proof that the defendant committed the crime. If the defense does not put on any evidence, the jury cannot assume that the defendant is guilty simply because he/she did not put on a defense. The decision to put on a defense is solely up to the defendant and his/her attorney. However, often the defense will present its own\version of the case. |
| During direct or cross examination, either attorney can make an “objection” by explaining to the judge the reason for the objection. For example, a prosecutor or defense attorney may object to the wide range of the direct examination because it is beyond the knowledge of the witness, or the attorney may be arguing with the witness rather than asking questions, or the witness may be talking about things irrelevant to the case. An objection is an attorney's way of complaining to the judge that the other side’s attorney is not following the rules of the court. |
 |
| The judge decides the outcome of an objection, sometimes after allowing attorneys on both sides to comment before making a ruling. The judge either “sustains” the objection so that the action stops, or he “overrules” the objection and allows the action to continue. |
|
The steps of direct examination and cross examination are outlined below.
| Step 1: Prosecutor’s Direct Examination of First Witness
Step 2: Defense Attorney’s Cross Examination of First Witness
Step 3: Prosecutor’s Redirect Examination of First Witness
Step 4: Prosecutor’s Direct Examination of Second Witness
Step 5: Defense Attorney’s Cross Examination of Second Witness
Step 6: Prosecutor’s Redirect |
These steps are repeated until all of the prosecutor’s witnesses have testified. Then, after the prosecutor rests his case, the defense attorney begins the same direct examination of his own witnesses, with the above roles reversed, until all the defense’s witnesses have testified. |
 |
After the defense’s direct testimony and cross examination by the prosecutor of all the witnesses, the defense rests, and the prosecutor and defense attorney prepare for “closing arguments”.
Closing arguments are the final opportunity for the prosecutor and the defense attorney to talk to the jury. These arguments allow both attorneys to summarize the testimony and evidence, and ask the jury to return a verdict of guilty or not guilty, which is what the defense attorney will ask. |
| Following the closing arguments, the judge “charges the jury”, or informs them of the appropriate law and of what they must do to reach a verdict. [Sample jury instructions] |
 |
 |
Then the jury goes into “deliberation”, the process of deciding whether a defendent is guilty or not guilty. During deliberation, no one associated with the trial can contact the jury. If the jury has a question on the law, they must write a note to the judge, which he/she will read in court with all parties present. The jury members must make a decision on the guilt of the defendant as a group before they tell anyone who is not on the jury. This process can last as little as an hour or as long as several weeks. After they reach an agreement on a verdict, they notify the judge. |
Everyone is present in court for the “reading of the verdict”.
If the defendant is found “guilty”, a Marshal handcuffs the defendant and escorts him/her to prison. The United States Marshals Service is present during trial to protect the judge and prosecutors from potential harm.
If the defendant is found “not guilty”, he/she is usually free to go home. |
 |
|
