Spence News

Spence Wins First Mock Trial

The Spence School’s mock trial club won its first case against SAR Academy on February 28, 2017, at the Manhattan Criminal Court.
 
Robin Berkman v. County of Dover focused on a fictional incident in which a convenience store clerk was shot and robbed. Robin Berkman, who lived nearby the store, was the prime suspect. After receiving a confidential tip, gathering evidence and conducting a polygraph test that led to Berkman sobbing and apologizing that the event had happened (though not confessing), Detective Leslie Smith arrested Berkman. Berkman was found guilty and sent to prison. However, he maintained his innocence and contacted the Actual Innocence Association for help. Eventually, Berkman was found innocent and was released from prison. He subsequently filed a lawsuit for malicious prosecution against the county.
 
The Spence School’s team served as the county’s defense with Elan B. ’18, Charlotte R. ’20 and Chloe V. ’18 serving as the lawyers and Jade K. ’19, Elizabeth Z. ’18 and Daijah G. ’20 serving as witnesses. Six other Spence students attended to support their classmates and to take notes for the next trial, where the team will represent Berkman. Also in attendance was Assistant District Attorney Courtney Groves ’91, who serves as one of the alumnae advisers along with Blair England ’91.
 
At one point during the trial, SAR’s team brought Berkman to the stand and Spence got the chance to cross-examine him. Elan shot question after question at him and deftly did not allow him to elaborate beyond yes or no answers to the frustration of the student portraying Berkman. Meanwhile, the judge presiding over the mock trial, Barbara Katsos, Esq., smiled discretely, took notes and later complimented Elan.
 
SAR’s team argued that Detective Smith had two other leads she could have pursued. Also, there was evidence that Detective Smith hated vandalism and had said, “We should do whatever it takes to get their rear-ends off the street.” Because Berkman had been previously charged on several occasions with possession of graffiti instruments, SAR's team said that Detective Smith held a bias against Berkman. SAR's students brought up the broken windows theory, which states that preventing or punishing people for small crimes such as vandalism could help deter more serious crimes.
 
However, the Spence students argued persuasively that Detective Smith had acted in good faith, had probable cause to arrest Berkman and did not maliciously prosecute him. They noted that Detective Smith’s confidential informant had told her that the person involved in the robbery and attempted murder was named Robin. Detective Smith also testified that she found Berkman suspicious because of his regular contact with the police in an effort to help investigate the crime. In addition, Berkman had repeatedly said “I’m sorry” during the polygraph test, which the polygraph examiner found incriminating. In closing arguments, the defense noted that the burden lay with the plaintiff to prove malicious prosecution, and it had failed to do so.
 
“Detective Smith did not have malicious intent to arrest Robin Berkman,” Chloe said in her closing arguments for the defense. “She was trying to help the community by putting a dangerous criminal in prison. She, nor the county, should be convicted for goodwill. While it is true that Robin Berkman was convicted of a crime, when he was actually innocent, innocence is an insufficient bias to warrant a jury finding of malicious prosecution.”
 
After both teams made their closing arguments, Katsos gave some feedback to the students, including that they should all slow down.
 
“I know you’re nervous,” she said. “But I have news for you—attorneys who do this are nervous too, and they have to learn to slow down too.”
 
Katsos singled out one of the SAR students to compliment her closing arguments and said it reviewed all the necessary elements of malicious prosecution well. 
 
“That was an excellent closing statement, I have to say,” Katsos said. “You made all the points that needed to be made.”
 
Katsos also praised Elan’s cross-examination skills.
 
“One of you did cross very well – Elan,” Katsos said. “The object of cross is: Don’t let them speak. It’s not up to me—it’s up to you as an attorney. …The point of cross is just to get the yes or no answers and nothing else.”
 
Ultimately, Katsos ruled in favor of the Spence students.
 
“I had to rule for the defense on this one,” she said. “But you were pretty close.”
 
The Spence School’s next mock trial will be Tuesday, March 7, 2017.
 
Brooke H. ’18 and Elan serve as the senior heads of the mock trial club. Academic Dean and Head of the History Department Doug Brophy and Grade 12 Dean and English teacher Kelly Jewett are the mock trial club’s faculty advisors.
 
Back
A K-12 independent school in New York city, The Spence School prepares a diverse community of girls and young women for the demands of academic excellence and responsible citizenship.

212-289-5940


© 2023 Spence School