In this assignment, students will apply the content on actus reus (Ch. 4), mens rea (Ch. 5), and punishment (Ch. 3) by analyzing a controversial, high-profile case. Be sure to carefully watch and take notes on the "Taylor Smith and Jordan Holgerson case" video (linked below), review relevant laws (linked below), and read the news article summarizing the case outcome (linked below). Once you have done so, prepare and submit a semi-formal essay that effectively addresses the following:

• Section 1 - Case Background: Imagine you are a journalist who has been asked to cover this case as neutrally as possible for a local newspaper. This section should (1) provide a brief synopsis of the case for your reader (roughly 3-5 sentences recommended), (2) identify the specific criminal charge for which the defendant has been accused of violating (for the purpose of this assignment, the state has decided to charge the suspect with "one count of reckless conduct"), (3) summarize the corresponding statute (although the case occurred in WA, the greater specificity of GA's law is more useful for this thinking exercise. With that in mind, let's pretend that WA defines reckless conduct just like GA so you can just describe GA Code 16-5-60(b) here), and (4) clarify whether this violation is considered a misdemeanor or felony (remember to define these terms in your own words as you do so).
• Section 2 - Actus Reus: Let's switch gears. You are now an attorney who has been assigned to this case (you can decide whether you are on the side of the defense or the prosecution, but you will need to commit to this stance for the remainder of the assignment). Draft "part 1" of the opening statement that you plan to present to the jury. This section should (1) remind the jury of the current charge (reckless conduct), (2) in your own words, explain the concept of "actus reus" as defined in your readings/commentary, (3) identify the specific actus reus allegedly committed by the suspect, (4) clearly identify and explain each of the 3 actus reus criteria summarized in the Ch. 4 readings and/or professor commentary video, and (5) using specific evidence from the video to support your arguments, make a convincing case that the defendant's actions did (if you chose to be the prosecutor) or did not (if you chose to join the defense) meet each of these criteria.
• Section 3 - Mens Rea: Draft "part 2" of the opening statement that you plan to present to the jury. Remember to maintain consistency with the previous section (if you represented the prosecution previously, continue prosecuting. If you represented the defense previously, continue defending). This section should (1) warn the jury to not confuse motive and intent by clearly defining and distinguishing between these concepts (as defined in your readings/commentary), (2) identify and define each of the 4 categories of mens rea in your own words (as defined by the Model Penal Code in your readings/commentary), (3) clarify which level of intent would need to be present for the defendant to be guilty of this crime, and (4) using specific evidence from the video to support your arguments, make a convincing case that the defendant did (if you chose to be the prosecutor) or did not (if you chose to join the defense) demonstrate the necessary level of intent.
• Section 4 - Sentencing: Let's switch gears again. Now you are the judge. The jury has found the defendant guilty of reckless conduct (In real life, Smith plead guilty to the charge of reckless endangerment in exchange for a more lenient sentencing recommendation). You sentenced her to two days in jail, 38 days on a work crew, a $300 fine, and a 2-year "no contact order". Which goals of punishment are served by this sentence? Be thorough, name all that apply, be sure to define and distinguish between these goals (see the Ch. 3 readings/commentary on punishment goals), and convincingly defend your argument.
• Section 5 - Conclusion: Based on the sources included in this assignment, convincingly explain whether the court made the right decision. More specifically, make a compelling argument for (1) whether she met all of the legal requirements for this conviction, (2) whether the punishment achieved valuable criminal justice goals, and (3) whether this conviction and punishment reflect an ethical use of the criminal justice system. (4) With this in mind, should the defendant have been fully absolved of all culpability, pursued in civil court rather than criminal court, charged with the exact crime and corresponding sentence that she received, or charged with a harsher crime? Explain your reasoning. Remember to maintain a formal writing style (avoid personal pronouns), thoroughly explain your response in sufficient detail, and defend each argument logically.