Jury: Each member will research one tribe and gather information about their culture in pre-Columbian times.

Judge: Research legal procedures. The fairness and freedom material would be good resources for this task.

Prosecution: The team will gather information on damaging facts about Columbus. They will work together to develop a list of charges. They will plan their prosecution including opening arguments, witness list, closing arguments, etc.

Defense: Same task as the prosecution except they should collect evidence to show Columbus was a "man of his time" not personally responsible. He was working for the King and Queen. They were working for the Pope, who was following God's instructions. Also Ex Post Facto laws apply.

1. King Ferdinand would research that person and what he was like, how powerful he was, what he said to Columbus, and what orders he gave Columbus, etc.
2. If an Expert Witness on the Inquisition is included, that person would research the Inquisition to report how Spain viewed other people and religions.

Each side should have five witnesses. The other side must be told who the five individuals are and basically what they will be testifying about.

Allow time for gathering information. After the research is completed students on the jury, the judge, the bailiff, and court reporter will prepare reports on their subjects. The defense, prosecutor and witnesses will use their information to prepare their case.

Hand out Mock Trial Procedures to the defense and prosecution teams. Hand out Jury Observation sheet and checklist. Begin the trial following the mock trial procedures and sitting by the judge to help make decisions on objections

Trial Procedures include:
- Opening of Trial
- Opening Statement - List of Charges
- The Oath to Each Witness
- Direct Examination Both Sides
- Cross Examination Prosecution First
- Closing Argument
- Jury Deliberations
- The Decision
- Sentencing
- *Appeal * Done at a later date

At the conclusion of the trial the students will write a one page paper on whether or not they felt justice was done in this trial.

6. An alternate activity to this court system format could be a traditional American Indian way of resolving conflicts - a tribunal held by elders. Obtain information from local tribal elders or contact the Minnesota Council of Elders Mediation Panel.

VOCABULARY

RESOURCES

Bigelow, B. & Peterson, B. Rethinking Columbus: The Next 500 Years. Rethinking Schools. 1998.

Koning, Hans. Columbus: His Enterprise/Exploding the Myth, Monthly Review Press, 1991.

Fairness and Freedom: Courts as a Forum of Justice. Minnesota Center for Community Legal Education, Hamline University School of Law. n.d.

Loewen, James. Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong. Simon & Shuster Trade. 1996

ASSESSMENT TASKS

ENRICHMENT ACTIVITIES

LINKAGES - Communications, Social Studies
- Adapted from plans by Darrell Erickson, Robbinsdale Area Schools

Student Readings
19 Nazis Guilty at Nuremburg
Nuremburg, Germany, October 1946

The 11-month trial of Nazi war leaders is over. Out of 22 Nazis on trial, 19 have been found guilty of war crimes. Seven will go to prison and 12 will hang.

Judges from the U.S., England, France and Russia tried Nazi leaders for:

Allies found out about the Holocaust when their troops found Nazi concentration camps (prisons). Nazis sent innocent people there to be tortured and killed.

The Nazis starved their prisoners. They killed them with gas and burned the bodies in giant furnaces. They made some prisoners dig graves and then buried the prisoners alive in the graves.

Dateline article, publication date unknown

Hitler's campaign against the Jews went through a number of increasingly brutal states. The first stage came in 1933 when gangs of Nazis, prodded by the government, looted and boycotted shops and other businesses owned by Jews. The second state was the enactment of laws a few years later that disenfranchised all people who had "Jewish blood" - which included anybody with at least one Jewish grandparent. The third stage began in 1939 with mass arrests of Jews, soon followed by the establishment of concentration camps. In these wretched places, Jews were kept on a verge of starvation and forced to labor like slaves. The fourth stage began in 1941 after Hitler had sent his armies into the Soviet Union. He ordered that some of the concentration camps be converted into extermination camps. In these camps, the Nazis operated gas chambers and crematoriums to carry on the mass murders "efficiently." Even near the end of the war, German energies were systematically devoted to rounding up Jews and shipping them to their destruction.

The indifference of Roosevelt and Churchill to the fate of victims, including the unwillingness to bomb the death camps or the rail lines leading to them, stands as a lapse of Allied leadership. Nothing atones for the atrocities, but the Allies eventually put many Nazis on trial at Nuremberg for their various crimes and executed hundreds of them.

A report by the U.S. Army documenting the administration's case that President Saddam Hussein committed war crimes has been stuck in the Pentagon bureaucracy for five months, reflecting the administration's reluctance to pursue the issue, say Pentagon officials who want the evidence made public.

The document, compiled by two teams of Army lawyers working from Washington and Saudi Arabia during and after the Gulf War, concludes that Iraqi war crimes were "widespread and premeditated" during the invasion in August 1990 and the ensuing occupation.

"The principal responsibility rests with Saddam Hussein," the report states, adding that there is substantial evidence that all of the actions by the Iraqi military and security forces were carried out on Saddam's orders or with his approval.

One Pentagon official involved in the process denied that the Pentagon was refusing to release the report, saying it is "under careful review and on track."

But other officials, as well as some members of Congress, contend that there is little momemtum in the Pentagon or in the administration to focus attention on the issue, particularly because it also would focus attention on the fact that Saddam is still in power.

These officials want to see Saddam somehow held legally responsible for war crimes. Secretary of State James Baker and Defense Secretary Dick Cheney are said to be strongly opposed to any such initiative. "There are two schools of thought," said one administration official. "There are those who believe that bringing a war-crimes case against Saddam is the morally correct thing to do, because it further stigmatizes him and would never allow him to function as a normal leader. But the prevailing view is that this is not a matter of urgency."

The official said such a move could set what he called an uncomfortable precedent, because the administration might be called upon to pursue other dictators. "That's when a lot of people get cold feet," he said.

Reprinted with permission from the New York Times

Student Handout: Mock Trial Procedure

Participants: (it is helpful for students to have nametags)
Judge Bailiff (teacher can be used here)
Prosecution attorneys Witnesses for prosecution
Defense attorneys Witnesses for defense
Jury Court reporter
Representatives of the media (sketch artist, reporter)
Potential Prosecutors and Witnesses:

Taino Chief Sailors
King Ferninand Queen Isabella
Bartolome de las Casas

Judge may use a mallet Set classroom up as a jury or courtroom
Let students take notes during trial
Keep a timeline
Judge has final vote in the event of a tie

Bailiff: "Please rise. The court of is now in session, the Honorable presiding."
Everyone remains standing until the Judge is seated.
Judge: "Ms./Mr. (bailiff's name), what is today's case?"
Bailiff: "Your Honor, today's case is ."
Judge: "Is the prosecution ready? Is the defense ready?"
Attorneys: "Yes, your Honor." (Always say "your Honor" when speaking to the judge.)

1. Opening Statement - Prosecuting attorney introduces himself/herself and states what their side hopes to prove. Begin with "Your Honor, members of the jury," then state what the facts on your side will show and ask for a guilty verdict.

Defendant's attorney then says "Your honor, members of the jury," introduces himself/herself and explains the evidence on his/her side that will deny what the prosecution is attempting to prove. Ask for a not guilty verdict.

Attorneys: "Your Honor, members of the jury, my name is and I and my classmates are representing in this case. We intend to prove .

2. The Oath - All witnesses are sworn in before they begin answering questions. This is to remind them that they must tell the truth.
Bailiff: "Please raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the history truth, the whole history truth, and nothing but the history truth?"
3. Direct Examination - Prosecution asks its first witness to take the stand. Prosecutor asks the witness clear and simple questions that allow the witness to tell his/her side of the story in his/her own words. Witnesses may make up answers to questions that are not included in the witness statements or the witnesses may say "I don't know."

How do you know the defendant?
What do you know about the case?
What happened?
What do you remember?
What happened next?
Remember to ask questions that will let the witness tell the complete story.

a.
b.
c.
d.

4. Cross Examination - Defense attorney questions witnesses for the prosecution to try to prove that the witness is lying or can't remember. For example, the lawyer may ask, "Isn't it true that you really couldn't see because it was almost dark outside?"

Isn't it true that...
If possible, ask questions that call for a yes or no answer.

a.
b.
c.
d.

5. After all the prosecution witnesses have been questioned and crossexamined, the defense calls its witnesses and questions them under direct examination. Then the prosecutor cross-examines.
6. Closing Argument - Prosecuting attorney summarizes the testimony presented during the questioning in a way that will convince the jury to believe the prosecution's side of the case. Prosecution asks the jury to find the defendant guilty.
Defendant's attorney summarizes the testimony in a way that makes the defendant look not guilty. Defense then asks the jury to find the defendant not guilty.
Attorneys: "Your Honor, members of the jury, today you have heard testimony about


I would like to remind you of some important information that you should consider in your decision. These facts include

Please find the defendant ".

7. Jury Deliberations - After hearing the judge's instructions, the jurors meet to decide guilty or not guilty, and then give their verdict to the judge. Members of the jury should use the JURY OBSERVATION SHEET AND CHECKLIST, which they completed during the trial.

Leading questions: Prosecutors must allow their witnesses to tell their own story; they must not lead their witnesses through the story. Defense attorneys must follow the same rule when questioning their witnesses.
Immaterial and irrelevant: The information is not closely related to the case, and is therefore, not important.
Opinions and conclusions: Unless the witness is an expert, (such as a doctor testifying about medical issues) he/she should not give opinions or conclusions.
Nonresponsive answer: The witness is not answering the question asked. These are only a few objections. They are probably the most common ones used. These will adequately serve your needs
- Minnesota Center for Community Legal Education

Student Handout: Jury Observation Sheet and Checklist
The jury will determine whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty based upon the facts of the case, the credibility of the witnesses' testimony, and the law which applies to the case. Use this sheet to follow the proceedings of the trial. As the prosecution presents its case, record the legal arguments made by the attorneys, facts presented by the witnesses and your impressions of the credibility (believability) of the witnesses.
Prosecution
Prosecution's Opening Statement: What did the prosecution say it would try to prove in this case?