PEOPLE v. BURGLE

THE CASE

The Citizen family, home from a fabulous vacation, arrive home

late at night. However, they come home to quite the welcome: a broken

window and a living room nearly clean of valuable possessions.

THE WINDOW

THE INVESTIGATION

Detective Kenneth Kopp is chosen to investigate this case. After investigation of the Citizen home and the

interrogation of Ms. Nadia Naybor, he finds evidence of

fingerprints and a suspicious-looking blue car, including the license plate information. He takes the information to the criminal investigation unit. After even further investigation, he finds a suspect: Ms.

Betty Burgle.

THE SUSPECT

THE LICENSE PLATE

THE ARRAIGNMENT

The arraignment takes place the morning after Betty

Burgle's arrest. Judge Joy Justice was present, along

with defense attorney Douglas Doubt. The charges are given – larceny and

burglary – and a date for the preliminary hearing: two weeks' time. Burgle is given a bail to pay. The bail is paid and Burgle promises to return to court in two weeks.

JUDGE JOY JUSTICE

THE PRELIMINARY HEARING

The two weeks are up. Burgle has paid her bail and showed up in Court. After both sides presents their cases, Judge Justice decides that there is, in fact, enough evidence to try Ms. Burgle. The trial will take place in three

weeks.

THE TRIALOPENING STATEMENTS

The two weeks were up. Burgle had paid her bail and

showed up in Court. The court's clerk, Donny

Dockett, announced the case as People v. Burgle.

District Attorney's opening statement was as follows:

“Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, what would you do if someone stole all your worldly possessions?”

DA PAULINE PROOFE

THE TRIALPROSECUTING WITNESSES

The prosecuting side brings witnesses first. Among them are

Mr. Citizen, who has been issued a subpoena to appear in court, Officer Kopp, and Ms.

Nadia Naybor. All three testify to prove Miss Burgle guilty. These witnesses are first

questioned by the prosecuting attorney, and then are cross-examined by defensive attorney Douglas Doubt. All witnesses take an oath to “tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.”

MR. CITIZEN

OFFICER KENNETHKOPP

MS. NADIA NAYBOR

THE TRIALDEFENDING WITNESSES

Then comes the defensive side. The only witness the

defendant could find was herself: Betty Burgle. She

testifies that at the time of the robbery, she was at home watching a popular game show. To verify this information, when the local TV guide is

checked, that particular show didn't air at that time.

However, since there was no one to verify the credibility

of the facts, no further questions were given.

DOUGLAS DOUBT

MISS BETTY BURGLE

THE TRIALCLOSING ARGUMENTS

DA Proofe again gives information, saying how clear it was that Burgle was guilty while Atty. Doubt argues that the whole case was pure

coincidence and that the evidence was insufficient.

THE JURYTHE PROCESS OF BECOMING A JUROR

Pedro Peer, being the first juror asked, is the

foreperson, or spokesperson of the jury. He had been issued a summons, and then went through the process of voir dire, in which the

possible jurors are questioned to ensure their

integrity. MR. PEDRO PEER

THE JURYTHE UNANIMOUS VERDICT

It is necessary to have a unanimous decision: guilty or innocent. Because there was no immediate unanimity, the jury had to continue to meet in private until it has reached the final decision. Peer gives the decision:

Miss Betty Burgle is guilty of robbery and larceny.

THE SENTENCE

After hearing the jury's decision, Judge Justice makes an appropriate

sentence. Burgle has been proved guilty of her

charges and is sentenced to time in jail. The case is dismissed with the whack of

the gavel.