Post Trail Reflection

1. Summarize the facts of the case, as presented by the prosecution. Include relevant witnesses and testimony.

I felt like they were mostly reflecting on the whole McDonalds immigrant incident. I recall that when Ben was talking to the witnesses that he would talk about either the incident, constitution, and reflect on what the defendant side was arguing. For example one witness that the prosecution had was john adams. what he talked about was: natural rights, all people should have rights, and how arizona is racial profiling to catch immigrants. they used a lot of small short and straight to the point strong facts from the U.S. constitution.

2. Summarize the facts of the case, as presented by the defense. Include relevant witnesses and testimony.

I felt like the defense could have made a lot more stronger points to make and convince the jury that it does not break the law. There were operation wetback, prop 187, and about immigrants being jailed. When they talked about how in 2003, 2700,00 immigrants were jailed and it cost them $80 per day which equals to around $7 billion per year. I think that it did not help their case so much.

3. What was the most significant piece of evidence, in your personal opinion?

I think the most significant piece of evidence was when Ben read some of the facts from the constitution. That stated that all people are equal. That really shut down the defense and really was a huge part.

4. What was the most significant argument made, in your opinion?

I think two most significant arguments made was the McDonalds argument and the jailing of 270,000 immigrants. I think these two were big in my opinion because they changed my thinking. When the defense said that 270,000 immigrants in 2003 were jailed i was just thinking ok thats a lot of people. Then when they said that it cost $80 a day which equals out to over $7 billion, it changed they way i though because that a lot of money being wasted. With the McDonalds issue it was shocking to me because they just investigated a lot of people because they though they were illegal immigrants.

5. What do you personally believe the correct verdict should be? Do you agree with the jury? Why or why not?

I agree, but we need to create a better system so that no violence and no investigation on an innocent person just because of how they look or because of what they do or were they are from.


I think I deserve a 40 out of 50 points because i felt like i took import notes from both sides of the case. I think because of the notes i took it formed my opinion on what i think is correct. Without me taking notes i dont think that i would have had a good opinion. I did the following things very well like taking notes and understanding a couple of strong points because i could understand mostly of what they are talking about and to see what i believe in. I could have done better at taking all the notes and fully understanding everything thing and what the trail was 100% about by being more into the trail and to ask more questions.