MOCK JURY EXERCISE

Facts of the Case:

1. Frank Castle, a 12-year decorated veteran of the Fort Worth Police Department, was the lead investigator on the Organized Crime Task Force.

2. Castle’s investigation was the basis for the Grand Jury indictment of suspected mob boss, Pauli “The Hammer” Gnucci.

3. Gnucci brought up charges under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

4. Allegations of “jury tampering” in a case where Gnucci was eventually acquitted.

5. On his way out of the courtroom, Gnucci turns to Castle, smiles, winks, and says, “Say hi to your wife and son for me.”

6. Two months after Gnucci’s acquittal, Castle, his wife, and his eight-year-old son, were attacked by two gunmen in Dallas’ Central Park.

7. Castle, the sole survivor of the attack, identified the two gunmen as Johnny “Fahgeddaboudit” Maranelli and Tommy “Iceman” O’Doyle, “Lieutenants” in Gnucci’s alleged criminal operations.

8. Citing professional “conflict of interest,” Castle’s supervisor orders him off the case and places him on a paid leave of absence during a subsequent investigation.

9. One month after Castle is ordered off the Gnucci case, police respond to a 911 call originating from Gnucci’s suburban estate and find three bodies:

a. Two alleged gunmen in the Castle case; Johnny Marinelli shot with a high-powered rifle, the other burned beyond recognition with a flame thrower (body identified as Tommy O’Doyle by dental records)

b. Pauli Gnucci; shot “execution style” with his hands tied behind his back with a blue ribbon (forensics identified the ribbon as a “spelling Bee” award given to Castle’s young son)

10. Castle turns himself into authorities and hands over a flamethrower, a high-powered rifle, and a pistol with a silencer to forensic investigators.

11. Fingerprint and ballistics testing reveals a positive match between the weapons and evidence found at the scene.

12. At the initial hearing, Castle stands before the Court pleads “Guilty,” and says, “Only the guilty must be punished.” He does not testify and makes no further statements.

Instructions for Mock Court Exercise:

YOU are chosen to be on the jury deciding Castle’s fate. Since Castle pleaded guilty, he waived his right to a jury trial and was automatically convicted. However, this is a capital case, and therefore this is a bifurcated trial, where you have been assigned to the second jury whose charge is to determine whether or not Castle should face the death penalty.

In Texas, jurors in the sentencing phase are first asked to determine whether the defendant represents a future danger to society; only after deciding unanimously that “there is a probability that the defendant would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society” will the jury consider whether any evidence in mitigation supports a sentence less than death.

You have listened to the cases presented by both the prosecutor and Castle’s defense attorney, Matthew Murdock, and now you are attempting to reach a verdict. At any time, you may ask the Judge, the Honorable Cary D. Adkinson, to verify procedural law or to clarify any and all facts of the case. Remember, because this is a capital case, all jurors MUST agree on a sentence, or the judge will declare a hung jury and mistrial. You may choose from the following sentencing options:

PART I: MITIGATING FACTORS

Identify and discuss the most influential mitigating factors that would lead you to give the defendant a lighter sentence. Explain why these factors should be considered when sentencing the defendant. Why are they important? How do they explain and/or excuse the offender’s behavior? Why should they be grounds for sentencing the offender to a lesser punishment other than the death penalty?

PART II: AGGRAVATING FACTORS

Identify and discuss the most influential aggravating factors that would lead you to give the defendant the death penalty. Explain why these factors should be considered when sentencing the defendant. Why are they important? How do they suggest that the offender deserves capital punishment? Why should they be grounds for not sentencing the offender to a lesser punishment?

PART III: SENTENCING DECISION

Based on your analysis in PARTS I and II, what sentence would you choose from the following options?

1. Guilty—Life with the possibility of parole after 10 years

2. Guilty—Life without the possibility of parole—“True Life” Sentence

3. Guilty—Execution by lethal injection.

Provide a rationale for your decision. Why is this the appropriate sentence in this case? 

JURY INSTRUCTIONS:

1. Each juror should identify the most influential mitigating factors and explain why they should carry the most weight.

2. Each juror should identify the most influential aggravating factors and explain why they should carry the most weight.

3. The jury must reach a unanimous decision in their deliberations.