Lesson Title: Defining
Reasonable Doubt
Course: Eleventh/Twelfth
Grade Social Studies Elective (“Law and You”)
Unit of Study: We
the Jury
Abstract
Students create an initial definition of “reasonable doubt”
that will guide them through this lesson. This lesson meets a core social
studies goal to prepare young people to become responsible citizens by
understanding their role in the judicial system, the central concept of
“innocent until proven guilty,” and the responsibilities of serving as a juror.
The lesson begins with a discussion of current event legal cases that students
have brought from home, and follows with a group review of legal cases chosen
from the textbook. The students offer comments on their current event cases and
state whether they think the defendant is innocent or guilty, and the reasons
why. The teacher then leads a group activity that analyzes a specific case,
engaging the students in a discussion about the attributes of reasonable doubt.
The teacher then assigns students to small groups to review another case from
the textbook and identify how the case meets or fails to meet the definition of
reasonable doubt, using the attributes identified in the group discussion. All
groups evaluate the same case. Some groups present their analysis to the rest
of the class. The concept of reasonable doubt is integrated into several
homework assignments.
Objective(s)
- Students
will develop generalizations pertaining to the definition of reasonable
doubt by interpreting information from a variety of legal cases, both
current and historical (Social Studies Content Standards V.1.HS.3 Michigan
Curriculum Framework).
Key Concepts
concept – ideas constructed in our minds, categories that
help us assimilate new information
civil case – crime against an individual, prosecuted by an
individual (generally by hiring their own attorney), where the parties are not
always entitled to a jury trial, and the plaintiff must prove their case based
on a “preponderance” (e.g., more than 50%) of the evidence; only monetary
damages apply
reasonable doubt - the hurdle beyond which the prosecution must jump in order to convince
a jury of a defendant’s guilt, or, as endorsed by U.S. Supreme Court Justice
Ginsburg, “…proof that leaves you firmly convinced of the defendant’s guilt.”
Instructional Resources
Ehrenfreund, N., Treat, L., (1992) You’re the
jury, New York, NY: Henry Holt & Company.
High Court Warns About Test for Reasonable Doubt. ‘Lectric
law library. Retrieved October 21, 2002 from the World Wide Web: http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cri09.htm
Sequence of Activities
This lesson takes place after students have been assigned
the task of locating a current event news story about a legal case of interest
to them. The concept of criminal vs. civil cases will have been introduced.
Students will have brought their current event to class, along with a one-page
write-up consisting of three components: summary (including identification of
case as criminal or civil), key issues, and questions that may have arose as a
result of reading the current event. The current events will be a weekly,
graded assignment, designed to raise the quality of social studies education by
rooting lessons and concepts in authentic situations, while permitting students
to chose topics of interest. It will also encourage our future citizens to
become consumers of current event information, via hard copy periodicals and
newspapers, or their electronic equivalents.
- The
teacher reviews a current event legal case from an Internet source
(display the news article on the class video monitor). Engage students in
a general discussion about the case. Ask students to talk about their
current event cases.
- Introduce
the idea of facts. Inform students that facts are the lowest level of
knowledge, and generally are meaningful only in a specific context, and
use evidence from the current event legal case as examples of facts.
- Introduce
the concept of concept. Inform students that concepts are ideas
constructed in our minds, rather than facts that can be perceived by our
senses. Explain that concepts are categories that help us assimilate new
information, organize experience, and make meaning. Provide examples of
concepts as categories (e.g., body of water, liberty, criminal case, civil
case), and ask for examples of category members that both fit the class
and that do not fit the class. For examples of criminal and civil law
category members, ask students to identify their current event case as a
member of one category or the other.
- Explain
that all members of a concept category share characteristics in common,
called critical attributes. Give examples of critical attributes for both
criminal and civil cases, and members of each category.
- Explain
to students that the class will develop a definition of the concept of reasonable
doubt, using current event cases, as well as cases from We the Jury,
and that the students will have a homework assignment related to this
definition.
- Explain
the legal concept of reasonable doubt and its application in criminal
cases. Review the Supreme Court’s 1994 ruling (High Court Warns About Test
for Reasonable Doubt) on acceptable (constitutional) and unacceptable
(unconstitutional) instructions from judge to jury regarding reasonable
doubt. Write the attributes of reasonable doubt on the board, in table
form, by listing what the Supreme Court ruled as acceptable (e.g., “proof
that leaves you firmly convinced of the defendant’s guilt”), and what the
Supreme Court ruled is unacceptable (e.g., “not a mere possible doubt”).
- Hand
out a case from We the Jury, State v. Mayfield (A state
trooper accused of strangling a young woman with a rope and throwing her
body over a bridge). Explain that this is an actual case. Discuss the case
with the class, and ask the class to vote on how they would rule. Discuss
the reasons for their vote, and ask them to identify attributes of
reasonable doubt from the case, such as:
- insufficient
quantity of evidence
- lack
of trust over source of data and evidence
- suggestion
that people have tried to distort the evidence
- possibility
of more than one logical alternative interpretation
- logical
inferences from data that is not persuasively unique
- generally
doubtable to reasonable people
- statements
or claims about which open-minded, reasonable people are not sure
Add, delete, and modify critical attributes in the
table on the board as the discussion proceeds.
- Ask
the students to brainstorm about other attributes of reasonable doubt, and
add to the list on the board. Ask the students to indicate if their
current event cases are good examples of reasonable doubt, and list on the
board. Students will probably develop these attributes over the course of
reviewing several different cases, so it is not expected that they have a
complete definition at this point.
- Divide
the class into small groups. Hand out another actual case from We the
Jury, or utilize a current event case that has sufficient examples of
reasonable doubt. Ask the students to read the case and determine if it
meets the criteria of reasonable doubt. Each group will report its
position to the class, and modifications to the table will be made as
appropriate.
- For
homework, assign the following:
- Students
will write a one-paragraph description of reasonable doubt (due the
following class period).
- Students
will design a MS Word chart (copying the template already on the board
and presumably in their class notes) that correlates reasonable doubt
attributes with the cases discussed in class. This assignment will be
emailed to the teacher within one week. This table will be updated
throughout the unit and ultimately incorporated into the mock newspaper.
Assessment
- Informal
assessment will be based on classroom observation of student ability to
identify attributes of reasonable doubt in their current event cases, the
textbook cases, and class discussions
- Initial
formal assessment will be based on one-paragraph description of reasonable
doubt and review of the MS Word chart.