Please help with schoolproject

Hello everyone,

I need some help for a school project. Two classmates and I have to write a couple of court cases. We have to test these cases with people preferably over the age of 50, although feedback from everyone is heavily appreciated.


For anybody taking the time for this, we really appreciate it.
Please message me if you have any questions.

I'll put the cases here:
CASE 1
The plaintiff
The state of Missouri
The plaintiff’s attorney
Kris Moster, attorney general, Missouri

The defendant
Tyrone Simmons
The defendant’s attorney
Paul Gallagha, Gallagha and Rowan, Missouri

Charge filed by
The state of Missouri


Details of the charge
The plaintiff claim that the defendant is guilty of assault.
The defendant claims he is innocent.


Background
The defendant Tyrone Simmons lives in Springfield, Missouri, and on July 17, 2016, was building a wooden fence around his front yard. At about 13.00 p.m. his neighbour Derek Abbot came home and confronted Tyrone Simmons, saying he was putting the fence on Derek Abbot’s property and not his own. The discussion drew out Crystal Abbot, Derek Abbot’s wife, who called the police.
At this point we have contradictory statements of what actually occurred, but the evidence shows that Derek Abbot drew his gun, a Springfield XD-S and pointed the weapon at Tyrone Simmons and told him to “get down on the ground”. At this point the police came who then arrested Tyrone Simmons. Both Tyrone Simmons and Derek Abott have multiple bruises with Tyrone Simmons having a black eye and Derek Abott a broken nose.


Attorney statements
Plaintiffs’ attorney
At trial, the state’s attorney, Kris Moster, attorney general of Missouri, argued that the statements of the witnesses and the police report are enough to conclude that Tyrone Simmons had attacked Derek Abott.

Defendant’s attorney
At trial, the defendant’s attorney, Paul Gallagha of Gallagha and Rowan, argued that Tyrone Simmons was attacked by Derek Abott because of racist tendencies.

Witness statement
Statement of: Derek Abott
Age if under 18: Over 18
Occupation: Unemployed

Statement
On July 17, 2016 I was viciously attacked by Tyrone Simmons after I tried to tell him he was putting a fence on my land. My wife called the police and I pulled my gun in self-defense and ordered him to get on the ground. At this point the police came and arrested him.



Witness statement
Statement of: Crystal Abott
Age if under 18: Over 18
Occupation: Housewife

Statement
On July 17, 2016 After I heard shouting and found my husband being attacked by Tyrone Simmons. I quickly called the police and my husband pulled his gun. The police came and arrested Tyrone Simmons.


Witness statement
Statement of: Tyrone Simmons
Age if under 18: Over 18
Occupation: Teacher

Statement
On July 17, 2016 I was putting up a wooden fence in my front yard when my neighbor Derek Abbot came home. He immediately started shouting at me that I had no right putting up this fence and that I should “go back to where I came from” I tried my best to keep it civil but the discussion did become a bit heated, though neither of us had used violence by that point.
Then Crystal Abbot came out of the house and called the police yelling “A crazy nigger is attacking my husband”. I took offence to her claim and wording and wanted to say something but got assaulted by Derek Abbot before I had the chance. I tried to defend myself but then he drew his gun and told me to “get the **** down”. I layed down with my stomach on the ground fearing for my life. Then the police came and I thought I was saved but they arrested me without listening to anything I had to say.





Police report
Case nr.: CV-3299
Date: July 17th 2016
Reporting officer: Jeff Winsley
Details of event
We had a call coming in at around 13:08 p.m. from an adult woman, later identified as Crystal Abbot, who was panicked and screamed “Help, a black guy is attacking my husband”. When we arrived at the scene we found mr. Derek Abbot pointing a gun at an Afican-American who was lying on the ground. Derek Abbot seemed relieved at the sight of us and that he was attacked by “this man” pointing at Tyrone Simmons. The Abbot family seemed panicked so I deemed it best to arrest Tyrone Simmons.
Actions taken
Arrested Tyrone Simmons


Sentence
If found guilty, the defendant Tyrone Simmons will have 6 years in prison.



CASE 2
The plaintiff
Liam Nickel
The plaintiff’s attorney
Jennifer Jill Mathers, Tudor & Mathers, Nashville, Tennessee

The defendant
Bowe’s home improvement
The defendant’s attorney
Stephen S. Ankuda, The Brocklin Law firm, Nashville, Tennessee

Charge filed by
The plaintiff Liam Nickel

Details of the charge
The plaintiff claims that the defendant is liable of wrongful termination because he was fired based on his sexuality and that he deserves compensation for punitive damages.

Bowe’s claims that having a pedophile would discredit the company and that the plaintiff deserves no such thing.
Background
Plaintiff Liam Nickel lived in Nashville, Tennessee and sexually identifies as a pedophile. Evidence shows that he did not collect or view any illegal pornographic material. Liam Nickel is an active member of a forum for pedophiles where he also outed himself. On September 13, 2016 an internet vigilante group called “Perverted Justice” put his identity on their website “www.wikisposure.com”, a website where the identities of known pedophiles and sex offenders are released.
The evidence shows that between September 15 and September 23 of 2016 Bowe’s home improvement store in Nashville, Tennessee received numerous complaints about the plaintiff’s employment at Bowe’s. The defendant deemed that continuing employment of the plaintiff would bring discredit to the company and chose to fire Liam Nickel who is currently unemployed.


Attorney statements
Plaintiffs’ attorney
Jennifer Jill Mathers of Tudor & Mathers, Nashville Tennessee, argued that being a pedophile does not necessarily mean Liam Nickel has actually viewed or created illegal pornography or has done anything sexual with children in any way. She also argued that firing Liam Nickel because he is a pedophile is wrongful termination because he is discriminated against for his sexual orientation and that this would not happen if he was homosexual or heterosexual.



Defendant’s attorney
Stephen S. Ankuda of the Brocklin Law firm, Nashville, Tennessee, argued that continuing the employment of the plaintiff would result in discrediting Bowe’s brand and would therefore lose customers all over the United States of America. He also argued that being sexually attracted to underaged children is unhealthy and unsafe for the plaintiff himself and his surroundings.


Sentence
If the defendant is found guilty, they will have to pay Liam Nickel $230,000.00.




CASE 3
The plaintiff
Jeff Keiley
The plaintiff’s attorney
Kathryn A.C. Cennedy, Cennedy & Lynch LLC, Middleton, Wisconsin

The defendant
State of Illinois
The defendant’s attorney
Bradley Simmel, attorney general, Wisconsin.

Charge filed by
The plaintiff Jeff Keiley

Details of the charge
Jeff Keiley wishes to receive compensation for punitive damages as he was partially falsely accused has possibly suffered side effects from the chemical castration.



Background
On May 7 1986, Jeff Keiley was convicted for the sexual assault and first degree intentional homicide on Amanda Odell and was sentenced to 40 years in prison. Wisconsin gives sexual offenders the choice to voluntarily chemical castrate in exchange for a reduced sentence. Jeff Keiley agreed to chemical castration in exchange for a reduced sentence. After the procedure he received a lesser sentence of 30 years.
Two months after his release on July 12, 2016 New evidence was presented in the investigation that can lead to the conclusion of Jeff Keiley being falsely accused and convicted for rape.


Attorney statements
Plaintiffs’ attorney
Kathryn A.C. Cennedy of Cennedy & Lynch LLC, Middleton, Wisconsin argued that chemical castration for sex offenders does not nullify the sentence and therefore the 30 years that Jeff Keiley was sentenced to was a harsher punishment then he should have gotten. He also would not have needed to undergo the chemical castration and his health is now at risk to the side effects of said procedure.



Defendant’s attorney
Bradley Simmel, attorney general of Wisconsin, argued that the Wisconsin law can give anyone convicted with first degree intentional homicide a sentence between 20 years to life, with and without parole and that the sentence given to Jeff Keiley was lenient from the start. Bradley Simmel also argued that the choice of undergoing chemical castration was the choice of Jeff Keiley himself and not the state’s.

Expert statement
Name: Stefan T. Mendoza, PhD
From: Madison, Chairman of the department of urology, Wisconsin University
Called in by: plaintiff
Statement
Life threatening side effects are rare, but there is a chance for an increase in bodyfat and reduced bone density, which increases the long-term risks of cardiovascular disease and osteoporosis.

Sentence
If the defendant is found guilty, they will have to pay Jeff Keiley $7,500,00.00 in punitive damages.

Re: Please help with schoolproject

Here are 3 more cases

Again, this really helps us, thank you for taking the time.

CASE 4
The plaintiff
Grand jury, Orlando, Florida.

The plaintiffs’ attorney:
George Ashton and Frankie Becker.

The defendant
Samantha Casey
The defendant’s attorney
Jose Victoria, Trial attorney, Orlando Florida
Charge filed by
Grand jury, Orlando, Florida.

Details of charge
“On October 25, 2009, Samantha Casey was indicted by a grand jury on charges of first degree murder, aggravated child abuse, aggravated manslaughter of a child, and four counts of providing false information to police.

Requested punishment
Death penalty



Background
On July 2, 2009 Harriet Casey reported her grandchild, Caylee Casey missing. She had not seen her for one month while the mother (Samantha Casey) also lived under Cindy’s roof. She also noted that there had been a very bad smell coming from Samantha’s car. A few days later the body of Caylee was found in the woods near the family home with duct tape on her face. Reportedly Caylee would have drowned accidentally in the family pool. Samantha wasn’t able to tell this because of mental health reasons and sexual assault against her in upbringing allegedly by her father. Although there has never been any evidence reported for this.

Attorney’s statement
Plaintiffs’ attorney
The defendant has evidence stacking up against her! The attorney said. At some point she has to come true because lies won’t do it forever. He continued, she lied about it all: the whereabouts of the child to her parents and to the police. The false accusation of the nanny who would’ve kidnapped her. The decomposing body smell coming from the car. Last of all: If this really was an unfortunate accident why try to make it look like a murder?

Defendants attorney
The Stains in the car did not seem to be from the body of Caylee, there are many holes in your forensic evidence Except for that the tape was on after death. The only logical explanation is that she drowned in the pool she could have opened the door herself to the backyard as also the grandparents confessed. Why does it make my client a murderer, that she decided not to testify?




Case 4 was based on a real case, this the outcome of that case:
Found not guilty on the charges of:
First degree murder, aggravated child abuse, aggravated manslaughter of a child.
Found guilty on the charges of:
Four counts of providing false information.
Punishment:
217,000$ fine + trial costs + the costs for a three-day search mission for the missing child.


CASE 5
The plaintiff
State of New York
The plaintiff’s attorney
Erica Schneider, attorney general of New York.


The defendant
Patrick Ceder
The defendant’s attorney
Michelle Kainen, Kainen Law LLC, Yonkers, New York

Charge filed by
The plaintiff the state of New York

Details of the charge
The state claims the defendant is liable to racism and discrimination.
Patrick Ceder claims that this is for his and his family’s safety.


Background
Patrick Ceder owns a jewelry shop in Yonkers, New York. In the last 5 years he has been robbed a total of 8 times. During the robberies he has sustained multiple injuries ranging from light to heavy including getting shot in the chest and , in the last robbery, a broken back leaving him in a wheelchair. Evidence shows that all robberies were carried out by Hispanic-American teenagers. After the last robbery Patrick Ceder has since refused Hispanic-American teenagers in his store.


Attorney statements
Plaintiffs’ attorney
Erica Schneider, attorney general of New York, argued that anybody of any age group or race could commit these crimes and that the defendant Patrick Ceder is using this coincidence to discriminate.



Defendant’s attorney
Michelle Kainen of Kainen Law LLC, Yonkers, New York, argued that teenagers have no business in a high class jewelry store and that it is perfectly normal for Patrick Ceder to fear something that did not hurt him once or twice but 8 times.



Sentence
If the defendant Patrick Ceder is found guilty he will have to open his store for everyone and pay $175,000.00 in punitive damages.



This case was also based on a real case:
In 2011 The dutch bureau of equality received complaints about a jewelry store that would refuse teenage foreigners. They were robbed by foreign teenagers 8 times and after the 8th time left the owner with a broken back. The owner and his wife who was then in a wheelchair wanted to refuse foreign teenagers and decided to sue the government for this right. There is no information about the case after that, just that the owner died in 2015 at the age 68 an that he and his wife closed the store not long before that. Many people claim that his death was partially because of the stress he had to endure the last couple of years.

CASE 6
The plaintiff
The Hindeberg Family
The plaintiff’s attorney
Micheal Rott, Hiden Rott & Oertle, LLP


The defendant
Mercedes-Benz
The defendant’s attorney
Mercedes-Benz’ lawyer ( I cannot find valuable information about whom that might be.)

Charge filed by
The Hindenberg Family

Details of the charge
The Hindeberg Family has lost 5 family members. They were killed by a Mercedes-Benz self-driving vehicle. The Family refuses to charge the driver of the car, since Mercedes-Benz ensures safety of all Passengers driving the vehicle. The Family pleads to Mercedes-Benz that they receive back-up money from Mercedes-Benz to cover the damages.
Background
Mercedes-Benz is a German car manufacturer. The brand is large and they sell a wild range of cars for mid- to high income households. Mercedes-Benz released a complete self-driving feature on their newly released S-Class Mercedes-Benz. Mercedes ensures that the safety of the driver is always priority number one for the car manufacturer, since selling a car that does not attempt this at all time, will not be sold be consumers.
Eye witnesses:

Δ John Coal states: The 5 family members were walking through a red light when the accident happened.

Δ Michelle Freddinson states: The car had plenty of options to crash into something else instead of the 5 people. Possibly killing the driver, but at least the 5 people crossing the road would be save.

Attorney statements
Plaintiffs’ attorney
Micheal Rott, attorney of Hiden Rott & Oertle, LLP, argued that the self-driving car should ensure that it should’ve saved the 5 people walking over the street, instead of it’s 1 seated driver. They car killed 5-1 not an acceptable ratio for such an intelligent system.


Defendant’s attorney
Mercedes-Benz’ lawyer, of Mercedes-Benz, argued that the vehicle will always follow the traffic laws. That means that the vehicle will never run through a red light, or disobey the traffic laws. And since eye witnesses state that the family was walking through the red light, the family members made a conscious decision to put themselves in danger. Thus, Mercedes-Benz is not responsible for the accident.



Thank you so much for taking the time to do this, it really means a lot to us.

Re: Please help with schoolproject

Hi John, we explained to you in another section that we don't allow link that could result in email harvesting.
Post any questions you have on here.
If people wish to take part in your project on site they can and you can cut and paste the results.
Thanks.

Re: Please help with schoolproject

Hi Meg, sorry I must have missed the message and thank you for already removing the links!

I will post the questions here.
Age:

Do you think that both the plaintiff and the defendant have valid arguments?

Was your verdict guilty or not guilty?

Please explain your choice.

Would you share your answer with friends, family or strangers over social media?

Why would or wouldn't you?

Do you think you would change your answer if you knew friends, family or strangers had answered differently?

Please explain your choice

And of course any other kind of feedback or comments are greatley appreciated!

Again, thank you for your time!

Re: Please help with schoolproject

Hmmm!!! Don't like this sort of stuff posted you have to be so careful, so be careful if you take part. I myself will not be taking part.

Re: Please help with schoolproject

Guilty..hang them all.