Court Observation
I attended the court observation with the class on April 27th 2023, at the US District Court of the Eastern District of New York, near the college in downtown Brooklyn.
We saw two cases. The first one was USA v Belliotti. The second was USA V Acevedo. In the first one we seemed to be in the early stages. It was a drug trafficking case. The prosecution was doing a direct examination of a man who worked for the airline and was knowledgeable about the security systems they used, as far as employee access to different parts of the terminal. They had him authenticate various logs with dates and timestamps. The logs also indicated when someone entered a certain place or exited and he explained this to the jury. After each document was shown and authenticated, the government offered the document as evidence, with no objection from the defense. The defense probably already knew what they were going to submit as this would have been shared in discovery.
The second trial was a murder trial. The prosecutors were doing a direct examination of their witness. Evidence was presented in the form of a music video. The witness gave some context and background. It seemed to me that he knew the defendant personally and was being made to testify against him. The prosecutor had him talk about other people he knew, like his friend who objected to the witness liking another person’s social media post, and about his cousin Mark. The witness testified about certain places where people involved could be found, like the house they hung out at, or the parole office where people had to go to.
I found the first case interesting because of the details they had to go into. It seems tedious to confirm over and over again where someone was based on their ID and logs, but this sets the stage for what they are actually trying to say he did. I like this part where you build the foundation. A bunch of logs might make your eyes glaze over, but there is a story there and it is your job as the prosecutor to find it.
The second case made me wonder what kind of protection, if any, the witness was being offered or if he was even entitled to any sort of protection.The first thing he said as we walked in to the courtroom was that “telling” was one of the worst things that you could do and that is exactly what he was doing. I wonder if he had his own case that was being tried and perhaps there was a plea deal involved. He seemed to be a credible and compelling witness, just on my limited observation. If he was in the middle of his own case, then I also wonder if he was going to be sent back to the same jail as the defendant?
One thing I noticed in the two cases was that the attorney for the drug trafficking case seemed more serious, or maybe he was just nervous. Whereas the attorney for the second trial seemed a lot more relaxed as he asked his questions. I was also very curious to know who the men were in the court room for the second trial who were dressed in flannel. They all seemed to belong there but I couldn’t tell in what capacity since they were not in uniform but they gave a sense that they were there for a specific reason. I think in class, Professor Kouglin said they might have been US Marshals, if I remember correctly.
Using the music video as evidence is somewhat concerning to me, but I would have to do more research on it. I do not know if the video was useful because it showed a physical location or it showed that certain people knew each other. I don’t know about lyrics being used as evidence. I think it should go on a case by case basis. I don’t think a prosecutor would bring forth lyrics as evidence unless it was very compelling evidence, and if it was that compelling, then the artist is telling on themselves. But I go back and forth on it.
In this case, as a juror I would just be asking why are they showing the video? Because a lot of people say a lot of things in music but it isn’t necessarily true… however the witness did testify that (to paraphrase) “you’re rapping about serious stuff, so if someone takes your chain and you don’t do anything, it makes you look soft”. That is not a direct quote but he did say something to the effect of it. Which is probably what the prosecutor wanted- to speak to the frame of mind and motive, since not doing anything after someone snatched your chain would have been disastrous to your reputation, your career, your whole life! But again I don’t know about using lyrics or videos as evidence and I go back and forth. If the case is strong then there will probably be more evidence than just a song.
Overall, it was interesting to be a part of the trial process as an observer. It gave me a lot to think about.
