On April 16th, 2025, the MHS Mock Trial team presented their first event, “Stephanie Hardee V.S. Commonwealth of Massachusetts”, which ended on a positive note.
“Stephanie Hardee v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts” trial was about a grandmother, Stephanie Hardee, played by Jaell Dumas, who shot her son-in-law, Harry Kumar, as he forcefully entered her house without permission. The jury, or the audience, would determine if Ms. Hardee was guilty or not.
The trial started with Mock Trial teacher Richard Tivnan briefly presenting the trial and how hard the students worked for this event. Tivnan also welcomed two second-year Suffolk University law students, Terrica Dang-Mertz and Joseph Wilson, as the judges. Then, Tivnan had the Mock Trial students stand up and swear they would only tell the truth.
The prosecution and defendant teams then explained their opening statements on Ms. Hardee. Prosecution team, represented by Lumi Leshane, believed that Ms. Hardee did intentionally shoot Harry Kumar. A reason why the prosecution team believed this was that Ms. Hardee had taken shooting classes, believing that it was intentional.
But the defendant’s team, represented by Mack Keating, also Editor-in-Chief for The Blue and Gold, claimed that her actions weren’t intentional. Taking shooting classes was a way for her to learn to protect herself as a grandmother who could be vulnerable, and shooting Harry Kumar was an act of self-defense, trying to protect her grandchildren. They also stated that Harry Kumar had a history of being an abusive father to Hana. After both teams finished their opening statements, six students from each team were able to testify to the six victims.
The main victim, daughter of Harry Kumar, Hana Jo Kumar (played by Istahil Hassan), was asked a series of questions from both sides, questions that would help the prosecutor and defendant visualize what happened on the day of the crime, based on Hana’s perspective. Questions such as, “How did you react when your grandma had shot your father?” and “Was your father abusive?” were asked.
The testimony of each victim continued throughout, where each team was allowed to cross-examine and object to the opposite team’s statements and questions, making the atmosphere feel real.
Once the testimony finished, Seniors Sarah Pham, who represented the defendants’ team, and Reda Benhafoun, who represented the prosecution team, were able to voice their closing statements, making sure that their claims were able to get the votes from each jury. As the closing statements finished, a QR code of a Google form was presented, and the jury was able to vote if they believed Ms. Hardee had pleaded guilty to first-degree murder, second-degree murder, or manslaughter, or pleaded not guilty.
The tension in the air filled the room as everyone was excitedly waiting to see the results. Tivnan came back onto the stage and announced that Ms. Hardee, with 56% of voters, was not guilty for the death of Harry Kumar, 9% voted first-degree murder, 17% voted second-degree murder, and 15% voted manslaughter. The defendants’ team cheered as they successfully saved Ms. Hardee from going to jail.
Although the prosecution team was unable to send Ms. Hardee to jail, each student felt good about their performance. Wilson shared that he felt “very proud of my kids up there, some of them really shocked me with their stage presence and their objections. They really showed a lot of expertise when it comes to evidentiary inquiries and also lines of questioning. It was awesome to see.”
Even though Hassan felt nervous about playing a victim for the first time, she “felt good about my performance… overall it was a great experience.”
Tivnan believes that his students’ hard work in preparing for this event for two months paid off, but he also believes that there were things to improve on. “There were a lot of objections which are good, and in the competition, part of it, when we really do it, we’re supposed to object a lot and get it going…The night dragged on a little bit, and I think some of the audience members kind of got a little bored. So next year, when we do it, I’m going to shorten the pieces, have each section be no more than five minutes…We need to pick up the pace a little bit.”
“There are always things to work on, no matter what field you go into,” commented Wilson. “I think one of the biggest things that we could work on is acting as a witness…Another thing I think we could work on is how to adjust examinations based on what the witness is saying or has said… Adjusting questions on the fly based on those factors would really level up the performance.”
Hassan shared that her biggest challenge was trying to get into the emotions of her role, and she wants to be able to improve.
Challenges are common when preparing for a huge event. Nour Howard, who played the cousin of Hana Kumar, Martha Hockbird, mentioned that she had to overcome her stage fright and public speaking.
Another big challenge that many of the students had to overcome, especially the victims, was to memorize their scripts, as the scripts relied on each other. Youmna Drissi, who was a part of the prosecution team, shared that, “It was definitely stressful for both Istahil and me. If a question wasn’t answered correctly, it would disrupt the flow of the other questions, as most of them relied on the previous answers and played off of each other.”
Similarly, defendant Fiona Youmell stated, “The biggest challenge of this performance was memorizing all of my questions and learning how to improvise when something doesn’t go as planned. This was my first time being a lawyer as opposed to a witness, so it was a big change.”
Senior and defendant Jennifer Slawson felt satisfied about her performance, but also “felt pretty burnt out because we were working on the case at the end of senior year, so it was hard to focus on practicing my questions. However, I do appreciate how the case challenged me because I had to work mostly on my own.”
There’s no denying that most people’s favorite part of the event was to see an almost identical trial to a real one, as well as seeing their classmates and friends up on a stage performing. But, Pham shared that her favorite part of the event, “would definitely be dressing up. I loved my suit and seeing everyone else in fancy attire,” adding, “How often can you really dress that professionally in high school?”
Dang-Mertz also shared that her favorite part was seeing the audience act like the jury and vote. “Since the percentages were so close, it just goes to show how compelling both sides were, and that was fantastic to see.”
“My favorite part of this event was working with my witness, Jaell. It was super fun coming up with questions and planning our matching outfits, and overall just bonding over this experience,” mentioned Youmell.
Seeing this event was exciting for many, but going deeper into thought, you can learn a lot from this. From student to student, Pham stated, “Students can learn about civic responsibility and what the law actually means. The audience acted as the jury, and as these students grow up and enter society, knowing what it means to be an engaged citizen is so important. And as they vote, they also learn about justice, holding those who are guilty accountable and allowing for due process in case someone is, in fact, innocent.”
Similarly, “Students who participate in mock trials either as a team member or a part of the jury audience can learn the intricacies of our judicial system… now is the time to learn about fairness, liberty, and rights and it can start with events like this one out on by the mock trial team,” concluded Dang-Mertz.
