CAMARILLO : The Murder Case May Be Moot, but the Learning Is Not

It was the defense attorneys’ argument about the fatal bullet that convinced 81-year-old Marcella Knutsen that Merle Raush was not guilty of murder.

Knutsen was sitting in the front row of a moot court audience this week at the Camarillo Senior Center, acting as a member of the unofficial jury.

The four attorneys in the mock trial were law students from a Pepperdine University litigation course taught by law professor William P. Haney Jr., who for the second year brought students and senior citizens together this week as a learning experience for both groups.

Given 10 minutes to deliberate, a simple majority of the seven official jury members reached the same verdict as the audience in the case of People vs. Merle Raush: Not guilty.

Attorneys for the defense, Pepperdine law students Theodore Byrne and Jay Landrum, argued that the location in Jones’ torso of the fatal bullet proved that Jones was shot as he was lunging at Raush.

Raush, played by prospective law student William P. Haney III, admitted to firing the shot that killed his opponent in an argument that evening outside a tavern. However, he testified that he acted in self-defense because he feared Jones was about to stab him with a hunting knife.

“I think it was great practice for the guys and gals,” said Knutsen, referring to the students.

Prof. Haney--in reality the defendant’s father--served as the judge, but also guided students through the proceedings.

Haney, a Camarillo resident, said the moot court gives his law students a chance to work with an older generation and vice versa, and it also encourages student volunteerism. He intends to have his students counsel seniors in estate planning and taxation.

The students said they were pleased to have a chance to practice their skills. “This is the most practical course in law school,” student Cory Stockman said. “The other courses are theory.”