Norwich ― About 250 Norwich Free Academy students had their day in court without leaving campus Tuesday as the state Appellate Court heard cases ― one criminal, one civil ― in the school’s Slater Auditorium.

Attorneys chatted with students following the court sessions and answered questions about their cases and their careers.

Two weeks earlier, New London Superior Court Judge John Newson, an NFA graduate, met with 10th-, 11th- and 12th-grade students in honors history, social studies and law classes to discuss what to expect. The students read the case briefs in advance of Tuesday’s arguments.

Judges Bethany Alvord; Nina Elgo, an NFA graduate; and Ingrid Moll listened to attorneys argue their cases, the first was a Danbury criminal case involving whether the state had sufficient evidence to charge a defendant with first-degree threatening and first-degree unlawful restraint.

The second case focused on whether a civil court erred in ruling in favor of the city of Meriden in a matter involving alleged age discrimination.

In the criminal case, attorney Naomi Fetterman, representing defendant Joseph Bernardo, argued that the state lacked sufficient evidence to convict Bernardo of first-degree unlawful restraint as well as first-degree threatening. She said prosecutors relied on the same evidence ― that Bernardo wielded a shotgun against the victim ― to prosecute both charges.

She said case law required additional evidence to prove that Bernardo had the intent to restrain the victim.

Assistant State’s Attorney Nancy Chupak countered that the evidence was in Bernardo’s actions, which at one point included holding the gun against his victim’s body. She said it also appeared by Bernardo’s actions that the gun was loaded.

According to accounts of the incident by Fetterman and Chupak, Bernardo held a shotgun on the male victim, at one point putting the end of the barrel in his mouth and accusing the man of sleeping with Bernardo’s wife. The gun was not loaded, but Chupak said the victim did not know that until after he was able to create a distraction and escape.

Following the arguments, students asked technical questions about the cases and personal questions about the attorneys’ careers and their emotions when they argue cases marked by violence or tragedy.

Fetterman said when she started her career, she wanted to work in civil law but switched to criminal defense. She said her obligation is to ensure that her clients’ constitutional rights are protected and that prosecutions follow the requirements of the legal process. She said if she loses a case, it can be emotional.

“I have to tell a client he most likely will spend the rest of his life in jail,” Fetterman said.

Chupak said at times she suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder in cases involving violent crimes. She said prosecutors often speak to victims of violence and may go to crime scenes and attend autopsies.

“It’s difficult,” Chupak said. “There are cases that stick with me for a long time.”

c.bessette@theday.com