A Mock Trial as a Final Exercise in a Forensic Geology Course

Stephen C. PetersAssistant 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

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Ammonium Nitrate

http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu

QuickTime™ and aPhoto - 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?

Coffee Almond Fudge Crunch

Coca ColaDDT

Tylenol

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

Amber & Diatoms 1 2 3

Sand & Microfossils 1 2 3

Hair & Fibers 1 2 3

Microchemistry

Fusion techniques1 2 3

Rocks & Minerals 1 2 3

EX

PE

RT

WIT

NE

SS

DE

FE

NS

E

PR

OS

EC

UT

ION

Witness takes standProsecution - 5 minutes questionsDefense - 5 minutes questionsProsecution - 3 minutes redirectDefense - 3 minutes redirectWitness is excused

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 Petersscp2@lehigh.edu