A Mock Trial as a Final Exercise
in a Forensic Geology Course
Stephen C. Peters
Assistant Professor, Lehigh University
Course Scope
• First-year seminar
– 16 Students
– Majority are non-scientists
• Goal:
– Excite & engage students in natural sciences
• Format:
– Three-hour integrated lecture & lab held once
per week
Educational and Intellectual
Goals
• Investigate physical and chemical properties
of earth materials
• Quantitatively measure and describe earth
materials
• Relate materials to place and/or time
• Differentiate observations from inferences
• Integrate concepts to argue case
Geochemical Aspects
• Fusion techniques
– Melting point, crystal morphology, multiphase
determinations via precipitation
• Isotopic approaches
– Carbon, oxygen in organic materials e.g. narcotics
• Polarized light microscopy
– Color, refractive index, extinction, pleochroism,
birefringence, etc
• Microfossils, Rocks, Minerals, Sand, Soils, Fibers
Ammonium Nitrate
QuickTime™ and a
QuickTime™ and a
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture. are needed to see this picture.
are needed to see this picture.
Quick Time™ and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu
QuickTime™ and a
Photo - JPEG decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Movie courtesy of Tim Ku, Wesleyan University
Can you identify these items?
Can you identify these items?
Tylenol
DDT
Coffee Almond Fudge Crunch
Coca Cola
http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu
Trial Mechanism
• Questioning of expert witnesses
– Must know:
• Fundamentals of analyses
• Fallacies and assumptions
• What is diagnostic and what is not
• How to argue both sides
Procedure
• Prelude
• Evidence examination
• Discovery documents
– Expert witness testimony
– Arguments for the prosecution
– Arguments for the defense
• The Trial
Prelude
• Series of 5-6 press releases/updates
–
–
–
–
Scene description
Suspects apprehended
Evidence collected
Police interviews transcribed
• 56 items of evidence
– Chain of custody, sample handling, etc
Evidence examination
• Students given necessary equipment
– Microscopes, hot plates, reference materials
• Handed all of the evidence
• Instructors are available to answer questions
about techniques, but not to organize them
Evidence Type
EXPERT
WITNESS
DEFENSE
PROSECUTION
Amber & Diatoms
1
2
3
Sand & Microfossils
1
2
3
Witness takes stand
Prosecution - 5 minutes
Hair & Fibers
1 questions
2
Defense - 5 minutes questions
Microchemistry
Prosecution - 3 minutes
1 redirect
2
Fusion techniques
Defense - 3 minutes redirect
Rocks &Witness
Mineralsis excused 1
2
3
3
3
Grading
• Individual grade
– Discovery document
– Individual questions and answers during trial
• Group grade
– Teamwork, cooperation, preparedness, synergy
Unanticipated Outcomes
• Unclear which evidence should go to which
analyst
• Argument strategy and clarity are critically
important
• Some students were very impressive at
arguing case
• Defense too easy, prosecution too difficult
Feedback and Assessment
• Student debrief following jury verdict
– “It really pulled everything together at the end.”
– “Made us remember all that stuff from earlier in the
semester.”
– “Fun to do, but really (really) hard.”
– “Prosecution’s case impossible.”
• Questionnaire:
– Overall, how would you rank this activity (1-5)
– 88% = “5”, 12% = “4”
Credits & Acknowledgements
•
•
•
•
Scott Bair, Ohio State, “Science in the Courtroom”
Tim Ku, Wesleyan University, Forensic Geology
McCrone Research Institute, www.mcri.org
Sandi Connelly, Lehigh University, PhD Candidate,
Minor in Criminal Justice
• John Creeling, Southern Illinois Univ
• Ray Murray, Univ of Montana
Contact info: Steve Peters
scp2@lehigh.edu