The prosecution charges that the defendant, Vladimir Ivanoff, is guilty of misdemeanor child abuse. Ivanoff was arrested after the principal of his son s school called the police to report that the boy was very upset and had told his second grade teacher that his father had choked him. The boy had deep bruises on his neck and a swollen lip. The prosecution explained that Ivanoff had brought his son to a nearby park the evening before his arrest, and had become frustrated when the boy repeatedly ran off and refused to come when he was called. According to witnesses, Ivanoff finally grabbed the boy around his neck, yelled at him in Russian, and dragged him back home. Once at home, Ivanoff continued to yell at the boy, and hit him three more times, bloodying his lip. The prosecution claims that the defendant is a short-tempered man who lost his patience and took out his frustration on his young son. The defense claims that the defendant did not abuse his son, but was simply punishing him for misbehaving at the park. Ivanoff is a recent immigrant, and explains that in Russia children are expected to obey their parents, and physical punishment is a socially acceptable way to deal with defiant or disobedient children. He that when the boy kept running off, he yelled at him and grabbed him by the neck. Ivanoff also admits that he slapped the boy at home, but he insists that he never punched or choked him. He explains that he disciplined my son the same way my father disciplined me.
The prosecution charges that the defendant, Matthew Clinton is guilty of battery with serious bodily injury. Clinton was the starting point guard on the high school basketball team, but the team had been struggling, and the coach decided to bench him in favor of André Barkley, a younger, less experienced player. Before the next game, Clinton approached Barkley in the locker room and began yelling at him. Witnesses explain that the frustrated defendant told Barkley that you black guys oughtta just play on your own fuckin team. When another teammate, Alex Smith, stepped between the two players, Clinton shoved him and told him to get out of the way. The prosecution claims that Smith then grabbed Clinton and tried to restrain him, but the defendant threw him off, pushed Barkley into a row of lockers, and ran out of the room. As a result of this fall, 2 of Barkley s teeth were broken and he was knocked unconscious. Barkley now suffers from a permanent 80% loss of hearing in his right ear as a result of this assault. The prosecution claims that Clinton has shown no remorse for his crime, and has even expressed to friends that Barkley only got what he had coming. The defense claims that Clinton was merely acting in self-defense, and that Barkley s injuries were accidental. Clinton was one of only three whites on the team and had been the subject of racist remarks and unfair criticism throughout the season from of his black teammates. Clinton claims that he was afraid during the altercation in the locker room. He admits he might have said something inappropriate to Barkley, but says that he was just frustrated and it was nothing worse than what he had heard from the rest of the team all season. Clinton claims that when another player then grabbed him from behind for no reason, he tried to break free and must have accidentally knocked into Barkley in the attempt to get out of the locker room. He explained that the reason he never apologized to Barkley in the hospital was that he knew no one on the team would ve visited him if he d been the one hurt, but he did say that it was a shame that Barkley had been injured so seriously.
The prosecution charges that the defendant, André Barkley is guilty of battery with serious bodily injury. Barkley was the starting point guard on the high school basketball team, but the team had been struggling, and the coach decided to bench him in favor of Matthew Clinton, a younger, less experienced player. Before the next game, Barkley approached Clinton in the locker room and began yelling at him. Witnesses explain that the frustrated defendant told Clinton that you white guys oughtta just play on your own fuckin team. When another teammate, Alex Smith, stepped between the two players, Barkley shoved him and told him to get out of the way. The prosecution claims that Smith then grabbed Barkley and tried to restrain him, but the defendant threw him off, pushed Clinton into a row of lockers, and ran out of the room. As a result of this fall, 2 of Clinton s teeth were broken and he was knocked unconscious. Clinton now suffers from a permanent 80% loss of hearing in his right ear as a result of this assault. The prosecution claims that Barkley has shown no remorse for his crime, and has even expressed to friends that Clinton only got what he had coming. The defense claims that Barkley was merely acting in self-defense, and that Clinton s injuries were accidental. Barkley was one of only three blacks on the team and had been the subject of racist remarks and unfair criticism throughout the season from of his white teammates. Barkley claims that he was afraid during the altercation in the locker room. He admits he might have said something inappropriate to Clinton, but says that he was just frustrated and it was nothing worse than what he had heard from the rest of the team all season. Barkley claims that when another player then grabbed him from behind for no reason, he tried to break free and must have accidentally knocked into Clinton in the attempt to get out of the locker room. He explained that the reason he never apologized to Clinton in the hospital was that he knew no one on the team would ve visited him if he d been the one hurt, but he did say that it was a shame that Clinton had been injured so seriously.
The prosecution charges that the defendant, Jihoon Kim is guilty misdemeanor hit and run. Kim made an illegal left turn and smashed into an oncoming car, leaving the other driver, Bruce Ackerly, minor injuries. The prosecution claims that Ackerly then got out of his car, which was severely damaged, and walked over to Kim s car and knocked on his window. Ackerly explains that when Kim rolled his window down, he asked for Kim s insurance information and said, What the hell did you think you were doing? Kim then responded in Korean and began gesturing wildly, according to Ackerly. The prosecution claims that Kim then climbed across the front seat, opened the passenger-side door, and ran away before the police arrived. The defense claims that Kim was scared and confused after the accident. He had only just received his driver s license, and was unfamiliar with traffic laws in America. When Ackerly approached Kim s car, he was belligerent and yelled, What the hell did you think you were you doing? I don t know why they even give you people licenses! according to two witnesses. After Ackerly banged on his window, Kim rolled it down and tried to apologize to Ackerly, though he admitted his heavy Korean accent and anxious state made him difficult to understand; he had heard about how violent Americans were, and he says he was afraid of the enraged Ackerly. The defense claims that Kim ran away because he was frightened and did not know it was illegal to do so.
The prosecution charges that the defendant, Korey Saunders, is guilty of seconddegree robbery. Larry Kozinski was driving at night in an unfamiliar neighborhood when he got a flat tire. As Kozinski walked to the nearest pay phone, he realized he was being followed by a group of several young men. After making his phone call, Kozinski was surrounded by 4 black men who taunted him and asked what he was doing in their neighborhood. When Kozinski tried to shout for help, Saunders put his hand over his mouth and pulled his head back by his hair. The other 3 men then ran off, leaving Kozinski alone with Saunders. The defendant then took Kozinski s wallet from his pocket and threw him down to the ground before running off in the same direction as the other men. After police arrived on the scene, they canvassed the area and arrested 4 young men. Kozinski could not identify the three men who had fled, but he successfully identified the defendant in a line-up the next day, and he identified Saunders voice as the one that had asked him why he was in the neighborhood. The defense claims that this is a case of mistaken identity. Saunders spent the evening in question with his girlfriend, and she can corroborate that fact. The defense intends to show that the 20 year-old Saunders has no previous criminal record, and had recently started a part-time job that provided him with a steady income for the first time in his life. The defense claims that Kozinski was understandably nervous during the attack, that he was under physical duress, and that it was too dark for him to have really seen the face of his assailant. The defense claims that Saunders was arrested only because he fit the general description of the suspect, and that the money found in his pocket at the time of his arrest was from his first paycheck, not from the wallet of the victim.
The prosecution charges that the defendant, Larry Kozinski, is guilty of seconddegree robbery. Korey Saunders was driving at night in an unfamiliar neighborhood when he got a flat tire. As Saunders walked to the nearest pay phone, he realized he was being followed by a group of several young men. After making his phone call, Saunders was surrounded by 4 white men who taunted him and asked what he was doing in their neighborhood. When Saunders tried to shout for help, Kozinski put his hand over his mouth and pulled his head back by his hair. The other 3 men then ran off, leaving Saunders alone with Kozinski. The defendant then took Saunders wallet from his pocket and threw him down to the ground before running off in the same direction as the other men. After police arrived on the scene, they canvassed the area and arrested 4 young men. Saunders could not identify the three men who had fled, but he successfully identified the defendant in a line-up the next day, and he identified Kozinski s voice as the one that had asked him why he was in the neighborhood. The defense claims that this is a case of mistaken identity. Kozinski spent the evening in question with his girlfriend, and she can corroborate that fact. The defense intends to show that the 20 year-old Kozinski has no previous criminal record, and had recently started a part-time job that provided him with a steady income for the first time in his life. The defense claims that Saunders was understandably nervous during the attack, that he was under physical duress, and that it was too dark for him to have really seen the face of his assailant. The defense claims that Kozinski was arrested only because he fit the general description of the suspect, and that the money found in his pocket at the time of his arrest was from his first paycheck, not from the wallet of the victim.
The prosecution charges that the defendant, Lance Phillips, is guilty of vandalism. Phillips sneaked into an old cemetery in a Jewish neighborhood and spraypainted red swastikas on several tombstones. Following anonymous tips, police obtained a warrant and searched Phillips bedroom, where they found a sweatshirt with red paint stains. In the garbage can next to Phillips parents house, police found three empty cans of the same color red as the one used in the vandalism. The prosecution claims that the defendant, who is 18 years-old, acted alone and caused over $1,000 in damage to the tombstones. The defense argues that Phillips was coerced into committing this crime. He was trying to join a gang with several of his high school classmates, and one of his initiation rites was to vandalize the cemetery. Phillips claimed that if he did not do as he was told, he would not have been allowed into the group and would have been subjected to verbal and physical abuse as well. Phillips explained that he had actually changed his mind about joining the gang, but was afraid to tell anyone because they would have beat him up. He explains that he did not know how much trouble his actions would cause.
The prosecution charges that the defendant, Tyrone Winters, is guilty of assault with a deadly weapon. Winters entered the admissions office of a prestigious law school and insisted on talking to Thomas Evans, the director of admissions. When he was told that Evans wasn t in, Winters pulled out a gun and said he wasn t leaving until he talked to him. Winters then held the receptionist in the office with him for an hour, then his patience ran out and he decided to look for Evans in another office. He forced the receptionist-- at gunpoint-- to go with him. They only got as far as the elevator before Winters was apprehended by campus police. The prosecution claims that Winters is a violent man who will strike again if set free. The defense claims that Winters meant no harm to anyone. His gun wasn t even loaded and he had no ammunition with him on the day in question. His application to the law school had been rejected even though he had previously been accepted for a minority internship at the law school as an undergrad. He had tried to get in touch with the admissions committee several times, but Evans consistently failed to return his calls or respond to his letters. Winters explained that he was the victim of anti-affirmative Action sentiment and had been rejected only because he was black and the school was biased in favor of white candidates. Winters was extremely upset that no one would explain his admissions decision to him, and he explained that he finally just lost it-- I didn t even know what I was doing, but I never would ve hurt anyone.
The prosecution charges that the defendant, David Winters, is guilty of assault with a deadly weapon. Winters entered the admissions office of a prestigious law school and insisted on talking to Thomas Evans, the director of admissions. When he was told that Evans wasn t in, Winters pulled out a gun and said he wasn t leaving until he talked to him. Winters then held the receptionist in the office with him for an hour, then his patience ran out and he decided to look for Evans in another office. He forced the receptionist-- at gunpoint-- to go with him. They only got as far as the elevator before Winters was apprehended by campus police. The prosecution claims that Winters is a violent man who will strike again if set free. The defense claims that Winters meant no harm to anyone. His gun wasn t even loaded and he had no ammunition with him on the day in question. His application to the law school had been rejected even though his father was a distinguished alumnus who donated a great deal of money to the school. He had tried to get in touch with the admissions committee several times, but Evans consistently failed to return his calls or respond to his letters. Winters explained that he was the victim of Affirmative Action and had been rejected only because he was white and the school was trying to fill quotas of minority students. Winters was extremely upset that no one would explain his admissions decision to him, and he explained that he finally just lost it-- I didn t even know what I was doing, but I never would ve hurt anyone.
The prosecution charges that the defendant, Sokheng Ou, is guilty of misdemeanor cruelty to an animal. Ou was given a puppy by a co-worker for a housewarming present. When he arrived home that day, Ou held the puppy down on his kitchen floor and hit it over the head several times with a frying pan. Ou then slashed its throat and began skinning the animal when police, who had been called by a neighbor, arrived and arrested him. The neighbor testified that he called the police because she had heard a dog yelping and several other odd noises coming from Ou s apartment, which is directly above hers. The defense claims that Ou did nothing wrong. He is a recent immigrant from Cambodia, where it is common for people to eat dog meat. Ou explains that it is a Cambodian tradition to welcome newcomers with the gift of a dog, which can then be eaten for the newcomers first meal in a new town. He claims that he slaughtered the puppy in the most humane and painless way possible, not unlike the way in which cows, pigs, and chickens are killed in American slaughterhouses. Ou explains that he was only following his own national custom and had no idea that this would offend other Americans.
The prosecution charges that the defendant, James Lewis, is guilty of possession of cocaine for sale. Lewis was arrested for selling $300 worth of powder cocaine to an undercover officer. The prosecution intends to introduce the prior record of the defendant, which includes two other drug-related arrests. Witnesses will testify that Lewis is well-known as a small-time drug dealer. The defense argues that the undercover officer entrapped Lewis into making the sale. Lewis was simply keeping the drugs for a friend, who was going to pick them up sometime that week. He admits that he knew that even possessing the cocaine was illegal, but he was only doing a friend a favor and had no intention of using or selling it. Lewis claims that the undercover officer approached him, told him he had heard he had some dope, and kept pestering him to sell him some. Eventually, Lewis agreed to take the officer to his house and sell him the drugs, but that was only because the officer threatened to call the cops and report Lewis for possession if he refused. Lewis said he was employed as a bank teller outside the city and didn t need to sell drugs to make money.
The prosecution charges that the defendant, Stuart Tillman, is guilty of assault and battery. Tillman was at a bar with several of his friends from work, celebrating his recent promotion. They were all drinking pretty heavily, and around 11:00, his co-workers began telling stories about Tillman s earlier days with the company. During this roast, Tillman s girlfriend, Tonya Simmons, stood up to make a toast. Simmons poked fun at Tillman for a few minutes and then began making jokes about his physique and sexual performance. The prosecution states that Tillman interrupted her by yanking her down by her dress. He then hit her with a closed fist across the face and she fell to the floor. At this point Tillman shouted at her, you know better than to talk that way about a white man in front of his friends. Simmons, who is black, suffered a sprained back from the fall caused by this assault. The defense claims that Simmons injuries are mostly due the fact that she had too much to drink that night. Tillman explains that he did take offense to the comments she made in front of his friends, and he did force her to sit down when he felt she was making a fool out of herself. He says that when she continued to ramble on he slapped her in order to sober her up. According to Tillman, Simmons fell to the floor because she was drunk and couldn t stay in her chair. Tillman does not deny shouting that she shouldn t say those things in front of his friends, and he explains that he acted the way any selfrespecting man would have.
The prosecution charges that the defendant, Joseph Tillman, is guilty of assault and battery. Tillman was at a bar with several of his friends from work, celebrating his recent promotion. They were all drinking pretty heavily, and around 11:00, his coworkers began telling stories about Tillman s earlier days with the company. During this roast, Tillman s girlfriend, Linda Simmons, stood up to make a toast. Simmons poked fun at Tillman for a few minutes and then began making jokes about his physique and sexual performance. The prosecution states that Tillman interrupted her by yanking her down by her dress. He then hit her with a closed fist across the face and she fell to the floor. At this point Tillman shouted at her, you know better than to talk that way about a black man in front of his friends. Simmons, who is white, suffered a sprained back from the fall caused by this assault. The defense claims that Simmons injuries are mostly due the fact that she had too much to drink that night. Tillman explains that he did take offense to the comments she made in front of his friends, and he did force her to sit down when he felt she was making a fool out of herself. He says that when she continued to ramble on he slapped her in order to sober her up. According to Tillman, Simmons fell to the floor because she was drunk and couldn t stay in her chair. Tillman does not deny shouting that she shouldn t say those things in front of his friends, and he explains that he acted the way any selfrespecting man would have.
The prosecution charges that the defendant, Andrew Munfro, is guilty of indecent exposure. Munfro was arrested on a public beach after he refused several requests from the lifeguard to put on a swimsuit. Munfro arrived at the beach completely naked and sat down next to a family with young children. When the parents complained to the lifeguard on duty, Munfro was asked to put on a suit and refused. When the lifeguard continued to ask him to clothe himself in accordance with the posted beach laws, Munfro became agitated, and started waving his arms and shaking his hips around for everyone to see, according to a witness. When police arrived on the scene, the defendant refused to cooperate and had to be subdued. The defense claims that Munfro was unaware of the state laws requiring him to wear a swimsuit on the beach. Munfro explains that where he grew up in Australia, no one ever wore a suit to the beach. He thought it was within his rights to refuse the lifeguard s requests, and he feels that there s nothing wrong with being naked-- anyone should be able to do it. Munfro claims that he would have cooperated if anyone had just asked him politely, and he says that everyone is making much too big a deal about the entire episode.
The prosecution charges that the defendant, Gerald Mason is guilty of arson. A church with a predominantly white congregation was burned to the ground, and investigators determined that someone had doused the building in gasoline and set it on fire. The prosecution claims that a man who lives next door to the church saw two black individuals snooping around behind the church the morning before the fire, and he identified Mason as one of the men. The prosecution also intends to reveal that Mason s fingerprint was found on a gas can located in the charred remains of the church. The defense argues that the prosecution s case is purely circumstantial. The witness can place Mason at the scene, but not during the time of the crime. Mason explains that he lives only 5 minutes from the church and often takes walks in that direction in the morning. The defense also claims that the fingerprint analysis of the can is inconclusive and that it cannot even determine for sure whether or not it was the can used to start the blaze. Mason has no prior record, and the defense says that he had no motive for committing the crime.
The prosecution charges that the defendant, Ted O Leary is guilty of arson. A church with a predominantly black congregation was burned to the ground, and investigators determined that someone had doused the building in gasoline and set it on fire. The prosecution claims that a man who lives next door to the church saw two white individuals snooping around behind the church the morning before the fire, and he identified O Leary as one of the men. The prosecution also intends to reveal that O Leary s fingerprint was found on a gas can located in the charred remains of the church. The defense argues that the prosecution s case is purely circumstantial. The witness can place O Leary at the scene, but not during the time of the crime. O Leary explains that he lives only 5 minutes from the church and often takes walks in that direction in the morning. The defense also claims that the fingerprint analysis of the can is inconclusive and that it cannot even determine for sure whether or not it was the can used to start the blaze. O Leary has no prior record, and the defense says that he had no motive for committing the crime.
The prosecution charges the defendant, Helen Lin, with one count of first-degree murder. Lin is accused of murdering her 6 year-old son, Charles, who lived in California with his father, Mark Torres. Lin and Torres were separated, and it was on a visit that Lin discovered that her mother-in-law, who had always been kind to her son, was dying of cancer. In addition, Charles told his mother that his father was having an affair with another woman. The prosecution claims that Lin was jealous and eager to get revenge on her husband, so she then cut the cord off a window blind and strangled her son to death, then slashed her own wrists. She was found unconscious and nearly dead hours later by Torres, who phoned the paramedics and police. The defense claims that Lin knew her son was treated badly by everyone except his grandmother because of his mixed race. When she learned that the grandmother was dying, she began to worry for her son s well-being; when she discovered Torres affair, she feared Charles would be looked down upon even more by the community. According to a cultural psychologist, the shame of being rejected in favor of another woman and the fear that her son would grow up with no status at all in the community were unbearable humiliations in the mind of the defendant, who was born and raised in China. The psychologist explains that Lin thought she was acting out of love, out of a mother s responsibility to bring her child with her when there is no way for the two of them to survive on this earth. Lin explains that the shame of being mixed race and of having a father who slept around with many women would have been too much for Charles to endure without the support of his loving grandmother. Lin says that she felt the only way out for either of them was to die.