Name of the children's story or fairy tale upon which your trial will be based. Who are the major characters? What was the incident that will go to trial? (4 points)
help!!!
The children's story that will be the basis of the trial is "The Three Little Pigs." The major characters are the three little pigs, a big bad wolf, and a wise old mother pig. The incident that will go to trial is the destruction of the first two little pigs' houses by the big bad wolf, which resulted in the death of the two pigs. The surviving pig will be seeking justice for the loss of his siblings and the destruction of their homes.
Type of case - Civil or Criminal? Explain which and why. (4 points
The type of case that will be based on the story of "The Three Little Pigs" would most likely be a civil case. This is because the surviving pig is seeking justice for the destruction of his siblings' homes and the loss of their lives, which is more aligned with a civil matter related to property damage and possibly wrongful death. The case does not involve a criminal intent or illegal action by the big bad wolf, but rather focuses on the consequences of his actions and the resulting harm caused. Therefore, a civil case would be more appropriate in seeking compensation or resolution for the damages incurred.
Evidence that the plaintiff or prosecuting attorney will introduce, including witnesses: (4 points)
1. Witness testimony from the surviving pig detailing the events leading up to the destruction of his siblings' homes and their subsequent deaths at the hands of the big bad wolf.
2. Witness testimony from the wise old mother pig providing background information on the history between the pigs and the wolf, as well as the nature of the threat posed by the wolf.
3. Physical evidence such as the remains of the destroyed homes and any belongings left behind by the deceased pigs, to demonstrate the extent of the damage caused by the wolf's actions.
4. Expert testimony from a building construction specialist to analyze the structural integrity of the pigs' homes and assess the level of destruction caused by the wolf's huffing and puffing.
These pieces of evidence and witness testimonies will help strengthen the plaintiff's case and prove the extent of the damage and harm caused by the actions of the defendant, the big bad wolf.
Evidence that the defense attorney will introduce, including witnesses:(4 points)
1. Witness testimony from the big bad wolf detailing his side of the story and his perspective on the events that occurred, potentially arguing self-defense or a "misunderstanding" of the pigs' intentions.
2. Expert testimony from a wildlife expert or behavioral psychologist to provide insight into the nature of wolves and their instincts, potentially arguing that the wolf's actions were driven by natural predatory behavior rather than malicious intent.
3. Evidence of previous encounters between the pigs and the wolf to demonstrate a history of conflict or tension between the parties, potentially suggesting a pattern of provocation from the pigs.
4. Comparative analysis of the pigs' homes and construction materials to argue that the homes were not adequately built to withstand natural threats, potentially shifting some blame onto the pigs for their own lack of preparedness.
These pieces of evidence and witness testimonies will be used by the defense attorney to present their case and potentially mitigate or challenge the plaintiff's claims of wrongdoing on the part of the big bad wolf.
Jury's verdict: Tell how the jury finds in the civil or criminal case and justify the verdict. How was the burden of proof met or not met? (4 points)
In the civil case based on the story of "The Three Little Pigs," the jury finds in favor of the plaintiff, the surviving pig, and holds the big bad wolf liable for the destruction of the pigs' homes and the deaths of the two pigs. The burden of proof was met by the plaintiff through the presentation of witness testimonies, physical evidence of the destroyed homes, and expert testimony supporting the extent of the damage caused by the wolf's actions. The jury determined that the wolf's actions were not justified as self-defense and that the harm inflicted upon the pigs was intentional and avoidable.
Furthermore, the defense's arguments that the wolf's behavior was driven by natural instincts and that the pigs were partially responsible for their own lack of preparedness were not enough to refute the evidence presented by the plaintiff. The jury concluded that the wolf's actions went beyond natural predatory behavior and constituted wrongful harm towards the pigs. As a result, the jury found in favor of the plaintiff in the civil case, holding the big bad wolf accountable for the damages and losses suffered by the pigs.