1. EVIDENCE AND PROCEDURES
I.
 Specific Piece of Evidence:
o KHS Anti-Bullying Policy
 Rule(s):
o Rule 401 –Test for Relevant Evidence
o Rule 701 –Opinion Testimony by Lay Witnesses
o Rule 1002 –Requirement of the Original
 Explanation:
o Rule 401 applies to this because the KHS Anti-Bullying Policy is relevant
in this case as it is the basis behind whether or not Metro City School
District and King High School had the proper policies in place to prevent
harm done to students. The relevance of the policy dictates that had the
policy not been in place describing in detail the definition of bullying,
what exactly bullying entails according to KHS, and the appropriate
procedures administration must follow then both Metro City School
District and C.J. Pearson would have responsibility and liability to the
damages incurred by Alex Billings. The Anti-Bullying Policy provides
coverage to KHS, proving they had the necessary policies in tact to
provide a safe and educational learning environment.
o Rule 701 applies to the KHS Anti-Bullying Policy because the policy will
be perceived, explained, and discussed in testimony by Brendon/Brenda Li
and Justin/Justine Cook. This testimony will help explain from the policy
writer and someone who helped create the policy, what exactly the
policy’s goal is and the school’s take on it.
o Rule 1002 applies to the KHS Anti-Bullying Policy because an original
copy of the policy is required to prove its contents.
II.
 Specific Piece of Evidence:
o KHS Cell Phone Policy
 Rule(s):
o Rule 401 –Test for Relevant Evidence
o Rule 701 –Opinion Testimony by Lay Witnesses
o Rule 1002 –Requirement of the Original

2.  Explanation:
o Rule 401 applies to this case to prove the relevance of KHS’s cell phone
policy which states that cell phones are not to be brought to campus or into
KHS whatsoever. The policy also gives the appropriate disciplinary
actions if the policy is broken. The cell phone policy is relevant here to
prove that a strict policy is in place and faculty have instructions on what
to do if the policy is breached, but because the students were never caught
text messaging on KHS property, it is impossible for the school to have
known the accompanying bullying was taking place, showing the school
district’s lack of liability.
o Rule 701 applies to the KHS cell phone policy because as administration,
Brendon/Brenda Li will give his/her opinion, in testimony, on the school’s
cell phone policy and how it is practiced. Testimony from the person in
charge of the school will help depict how the school handles situations like
this.
o Rule 1002 applies to the KHS Cell Phone Policy because an original copy
of the policy is required to prove its contents.
III.
 Specific Piece of Evidence
o MyFace page
 Rule(s):
o Rule 401 –Test for Relevant Evidence
o Rule 403 –Excluding Relevant Evidence
o Rule 701 –Opinion of Testimony by Lay Witnesses
o Rule 1002 –Requirement of the Original
o Rule 1006 –Summaries to Prove Content
 Explanation:
o Rule 401 applies to this case in order to establish the MyFace page as
relevant and contributing to the damages incurred by Billings but not as a
result of Pearson alone. The page and the posts made to the page are
necessary to show that the damages incurred by Billings due to the posts
on MyFace do not prove Pearson to be the sole cause of the damage. The
MyFace posts were created and followed by a mix of 300 KHS students,
making it impossible to pinpoint Pearson as liable for all the damage
caused by the posts. Without the specific posts from MyFace, Pearson
would be liable for all of the harassing posts if it could not be proved that
others also took part.
 Rule 401 also applies in order to give evidence that
bullying/harassing occurred off of KHS property. According to

3. Brendon/Brenda Li and Justin/Justine Cook, MyFace is banned
and blocked from all KHS computers, making the creation of these
posts off school property. Without specific examples of bullying
between text messages and social media the bullying would not be
able to be broken down to where it occurred. The MyFace page
and posts are relevant in proving the alleged bullying away from
KHS property taking away the liability of Metro City School
District.
o Rule 403 applies to this case because the MyFace posts needlessly present
cumulative evidence. If the alleged bullying did occur, the text messages
are proof enough of that. The MyFace posts should be excluded from
evidence because MyFace is a social media site that is public and anyone
can make posts to it, meaning Pearson along with 300 other KHS students
posted to it. If the bullying can be proved through direct text messages
sent by Pearson then the MyFace posts should not be used as numerous
students contributed creating confusion in pinpointing liability. If bullying
can be proved from the text messages alone, the MyFace posts are
unnecessary as bullying has already been established. If bullying can be
established through the text messages, it would be a waste of time
analyzing each MyFace post and a waste of time trying to explain the role
the 300 other students had on MyFace.
o Rule 701 applies to the MyFace messages because C.J. Pearson will give
testimony on why he/she created the MyFace page, the types of things
posted to the page, and his/her opinion on how the situation turned out.
o Rule 1002 applies to the MyFace page and posts because an original copy
of the posts are required to prove its content.
o Rule 1006 applies to the MyFace page and posts because a summary of
the posts can be used as evidence instead of using every post. Attempting
to show a jury multiple posts between multiple people could easily
become confusing and take away from the effectiveness. Therefore,
summarizing the posts will have much more success.
IV.
 Specific Piece of Evidence:
o Email messages between Li and Cook
 Rule(s):
o Rule 401 –Test for Relevant Evidence
o Rule 404 –Character Evidence
o Rule 701 –Opinion Testimony by Lay Witnesses
o Rule 1002 –Requirement of the Original

4.  Explanation:
o Rule 401 applies to the email messages in order to provide the relevance
between the emails between Principal Li and counselor Cook and the
procedures faculty of KHS must exercise in regards to the KHS Anti-
Bullying Policy. The emails also begin to discuss prior behavior of
Pearson which shows Principal Li’s knowledge of Pearson’s past. The
emails provide proof that the counselor took the correct steps in notifying
Principal Li about the situation and explains the principal’s justification to
why the alleged bullying issue did not concern KHS and Metro City
School District. The emails are relevant to show why the school handled
the conflict in the manner it did. Without the emails between Li and Cook,
the prosecution could attempt to claim KHS faculty and administration as
negligently supervising students in regards to bullying within the school.
o Rule 404 applies to the email messages by prohibiting the prosecution’s
use of Pearson’s past character trait of causing trouble and being a burden
to prove he/she acted the same in this situation in accordance to how
he/she has acted in the past.
o Rule 701 applies to the email messages between Li and Cook because Li
and Cook with both give testimony on the emails. Cook will testify to why
he/she felt the need to email Li about the conflict. Cook will also testify
that he/she followed procedure by letting the principal know. Li will
testify his/her opinion on why the issue would not be further reviewed by
KHS administration. Li will also testify to the advice given to Cook on
how to further address the situation.
o Rule 1002 applies to the email messages between Li and Cook because a
copy of the emails is required to prove its contents.
V.
 Specific Piece of Evidence:
o PTSD Diagnostic Test Results
 Rule(s):
o Rule 401 –Test for Relevant Evidence
o Rule 608 (a) –A Witness’s Character for Truthfulness or Untruthfulness
o Rule 702 –Testimony by Expert Witnesses
o Rule 703 –Bases of an Expert
o Rule 706 –Court-Appointed Expert Witnesses
o Rule 1002 –Requirement of the Original

5.  Explanation:
o Rule 401 applies to the results of the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Test
in order to prove the relevance of the results that tend to favor the plaintiff
which questions whether the test results are considered accurate or
inaccurate. Without the specific test results, the prosecution could claim
Billings as accurately diagnosed with PTSD costing thousands of dollars
in medical expenses to Pearson and Metro City School District.
o Rule 608 (a) applies to the PTSD test results because the test was
administered by Dr. Rodriguez who works as head of the recruitment
committee at Saint Joseph Academy. Rodriguez’s truthfulness is at
question because his/her job duties consist of bringing new students into
SJA. The positive PTSD test results ultimately resulted in Billings being
enrolled into SJA. The defense is questioning whether the test was
performed accurately by Rodriguez without intent of using the results for
the benefit of SJA. Opinions will be made by Li and Cook in their
testimonies questioning the truthfulness of Rodriguez.
o Rule 702 applies to the PTSD results because Dr. Rodriguez will testify as
an expert witness because he/she has obtained a PhD in psychology and
has expert knowledge on juveniles and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.
o Rule 703 applies to the test results of the PTSD test because as an expert,
Rodriguez must give his/her opinion on why and when the test was
administered in accordance to whether other professionals in the same
field would reasonably rely on the same kind of facts in forming a similar
opinion.
o Rule 706 applies to the PTSD test results because if there is sufficient
cause to why a party’s expert witness should not be used then the court
will appoint an expert witness. Because Dr. Rodriguez works for Saint
Joseph Academy, specifically as head of the recruitment committee, the
PTSD test should be administered from an unbiased, uninterested party.
o Rule 1002 applies to the PTSD test results because an original copy of the
test is required to prove its contents.

6. VI.
 Specific Piece of Evidence:
o Text Messages
 Rule(s):
o Rule 401 –Test for Relevant Evidence
o Rule 701 –Opinion Testimony by Lay Witnesses
o Rule 1002 –Requirement of the Original
 Explanation:
o Rule 401 applies to the text messages between Billings and Pearson in
order to establish the relevance of when the text messages occurred. The
text messages are being used by the prosecution to prove the alleged
bullying through text message did in fact happen on KHS property during
KHS hours. However, because KHS bans cell phones from being brought
onto KHS campus in their cell phone policy, the text messages show both
parties breaking school policy by bringing and using their cell phones
during class. Billings is just as guilty as Pearson for disobeying the
school’s policy. Pearson cannot be held liable for using his/her cell phone
in school when Billings participated in the same insubordinate behavior.
o Rule 701 applies to the text messages between Billings and Pearson
because Pearson will testify about the text messages. Pearson will testify
on why he/she texted Billings, where the text messaging took place, and
his/her opinion on the situation as a whole.
o Rule 1002 applies to the text messages because a copy of the text
messages is required to prove its contents.
o Rule 1006 applies to the text messages because there are an abundance of
text messages dating from August to November. Having so many text
messages would potentially confuse a jury and take away from the
effectiveness. Summarizing the text messages will be more successful.