The trial, The People vs. Jack Merridew is taking place in Port Washington, New York. Jack is being prosecuted for the murders of Piggy and Simon as well as the attempted murder of Ralph. I will get all sides of the story by interviewing members of the jury the Judge and of course Jack. Technically, I will attempt to tape the trial from different angles so the audience will feel like they are there. I will follow the jury into deliberations so the viewers will see the justice system at work. Reality television at it’s best.

Perhaps, you are thinking, why do I want to have this children’s court drama taking up a prime time spot? This cases viewing is necessary for one main reason. This might be the case that settles the old argument;” Is man born good and taught to be evil?” The answer could be settled by looking at boy’s behavior when they first arrived at the island. The jury will have the opportunity to discover how civilized children from a good home could become savage carnivores on the Island. Perhaps the jury will been able to conclude if man is innately good or evil. We will have to see what unfolds.

From a business point of view, ratings should soar since this is the first time HBO will have a live court case on television. I think the popularity of this case and the book as well as the young age of the accused should bring definite high ratings. I hope you will accept my offer to finance this project and broadcast it on HBO. If we do work together I can guarantee, it will be a great success Sincerely, Matt

The Mock trial of The People vs. Jack Merridew took place on Friday October 25, 2002. The case based on the novel Lord of the Flies by William Golding, is prosecuting Jack Merridew for the murder of Piggy, Simon and the attempted murder of Ralph. Jack is also being charged for theft of Piggy’s glasses. All of this criminal activity occurred while the boys were marooned on a deserted island following a plane crash. The courtroom was the perfect setting to explore the inside of the boy’s heads. Each class member took a role in the trial from Judge to sketch artist adding to the opportunity for an official trial. Some characters were more convincing than others.

The character of Piggy was very believable in my opinion. He was dressed for the part in a small cap and a pillow stuffed in his shirt which made him look like a fat little boy. The boy portraying Piggy seemed very familiar with Piggy’s attributes both physically and mentally. When questioned by the prosecution, Piggy admitted to a conflict with Jack’s because of Jack’s lack of morals. Piggy’s character did seem afraid of Jack and he hoped that they would get along because he anticipated being on the Island for a long time. The Piggy character did make me certain of Jack’s guilt. I like how he was portrayed but if I was given the opportunity to act in that role I would have been a little angrier than the Piggy character was. After all, he was looking at his murderer. Overall, I would say that the portrayal of Piggy was good.

The jury of three, which was made up of a World War II nurse, a housewife and a businessman was also very good. Again, I felt that they were all prepared for the trial, dressed appropriately. The nurse was in uniform, including her black bag and stethoscope. The housewife was creatively dressed, since he had no dress, he used a black garbage bag with holes for the head and arms. In addition, he wore a pair of clip on earrings and a necklace. The businessman had a collared shirt, black pants with slicked back hair. When they first entered without any notes or papers I thought they were unprepared but as the case proceeded I realized that they will all very attentive and took plenty of notes. When it was time for the verdict, it was a 2 to 1 vote against Jack. The businessman felt that Jack was not proven guilty since there was no physical evidence tying him to the murders. He did find him guilty of the robbery of Piggy’s glasses and the attempted murder of Ralph. I agree with the decision of the businessman. Even though we know Jack murdered the people, it was not proven by the lawyers; therefore Jack should not have been found guilty of murder. Fortunately for Piggy and unfortunately for Jack, justice did prevail and the two other jurors convinced the businessman to switch his opinion. The final verdict was 70 years in jail for Jack.

In my role as the video engineer, I interviewed three to four people, the Judge, two jury members and one of the prosecuting attorney’s. I found the jury member to be the most interesting. He was upset by the Judges lack of knowledge of the law. He felt that part of the reason that Jack was found innocent is because the Judge did not use his power correctly. He felt that certain comments should have been stricken from the record or over ruled and I agree with him. I felt there were times that the witness was being lead and the Judge should have controlled that. When I interviewed the Judge, he felt that the trial went well and he was pleased with the verdict.

The court case of People vs. Jack Merridew was concluded by a guilty verdict of Jack following a split jury decision. Jack will now spend seventy years for the murder of Piggy, Simon and the attempted murder of Ralph. I think most people in the class enjoyed the experience. . I enjoyed the trial but if I had the option to do it again I would have liked to take a more active role, like the Judge or the jury.

The trial Jack Merridew vs. The People went very well according to most who witnessed it, but not to this particular observer.

I went into the case having read the book knowing that Jack Merridew had murdered both Piggy and Simon. Unfortunately I don’t think that the case was proven beyond reasonable doubt. The lawyers proved that he stole the glasses but there was no evidence of murder. If I was the lawyer I would have focused more on the murder and less on the robbery. I would have interrogated Jack on his relationship with Piggy and Simon. I would have asked Jack questions like “Were you in the choir? What was your position in the choir?” This line of questioning would have established the conflict between Ralph and Jack as leaders. This conflict between Jacks tribe and Ralph’s group is what eventually lead to the murders. I don’t think that this line of questioning was perused enough to reach the correct verdict.

The Mock Trial of People vs. Jack Merridew was very fun. I think that the students enjoyed it but having read the book I think that the lawyers should have been able to make the jury reach a unanimous decision.