Total Posts:7|Showing Posts:1-7
Jump to topic:

TBJ2 endgame

TUF
Posts: 21,309
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2012 12:36:04 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Alright so I'm on a phone, so this will be short unfortunately. I think both teams did splendidly, big props to both jm and medic. This game had tons of problems, most of which were my fault. I should have planned this out a little bit better, and been more active so my deepest appolagies. Julie May Keeler was the murderer. She pushed Andy off the cliff, after being consistently rejected. Though with the case againt Murral, I think he would have convinced me otherwise (I admit there was a lot of loopholes in his testimony). Medic made a lot of awesome points, though I feel he was a bit aggressive with his questiong, and JM could have objected to a lot more of them. Luckily he was able to pull through the questioning just fine. I definitely didn't mean for this trial to go on so long, but it was fun to read along the way. I would like to thank you both officially for sticking it out and not quitting during it. It was a really close decision. Goos job mates! I wanted to go on in more detail about things, but it is kind of aggrivating on a cellular device.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2012 6:17:09 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Congrats to JM on the win and thanks to TUF for a fun game.

Yeah I was a bit aggressive on questioning because I knew Murral wasn't the real killer and I basically felt like I had to manufacture a case, turning little things into big things. I still thought he was prolly the easiest to build a case against, given what I knew at the time that I had to decide who to prosecute.
I also wanted to manufacture some drama between the attorneys. Every good trial has some good sparring between the attorneys.

I was a bit frustrated for the first half of the game, but once I settled in and got use to the scenario and had my plan set up, it ended up being a really fun game for me. Sorry TUF for all the bmc'ing. The frustrating part for me was that I wasn't allowed to do any investigating or questioning of witnesses before the trial, I had to decide who to prosecute based on the witness statements and list of evidence. That's a problem for a prosecutor. One of the golden rules in trial is that you never ask a question that you don't already know the answer to, a surprise in front of the jury is always a bad thing, but I had to throw that theory out the window because of the situation.

I'm glad that Tuf took over answering questions because Daytona started giving unauthorized answers and that could have hurt my case if it continued. Ultimately it's best that the mod acts in the role of the witnesses for the very reasons that we ran into in this game.

Again congrats to JM and thanks to all for a fun experience.
jm_notguilty
Posts: 683
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2012 9:56:40 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Boy, that was awesome. Guess who has to buy me steak? Haha. Medic's cross was far from objectionable but I let it play through. I knew Medic had nothing to use against the defendant, so building a theory would be an excellent option.. The cross was notably intense. If I was the DA in this, I couldn't think of anything to use or to build. Kudos.

A few things I noticed was during direct examination, you keep leading and giving hints of the answers. I was tempted to object but since none of them really affects the guilt of Murrall, I let it pass. Also, as a response to your last objections before TUF cut Julie's testimony, it's cross examination. I can lead witnesses and antagonize them like you did with Murrall. But I think you already knew that. Did you object to avoid the answer by stalling time knowing TUF's leaving? ;-)

I also have to admit, I was a bit disappointed by myself. I knew I couldve done better. I should've objected more on the cross but I knew Medic was desperate. Also, my cross on Keith was a little bit laid-back. I could've been more hostile. But due to my schedule, the time remaining until TUF goes and the fact that enough reasonable doubt can be produced just by looking at the report, I eventually lost interest and got bored. I was just getting started with Julie when it was cut. Pity.

Daytonanerd and Viper were the only ones aside from the two attorneys who participated. Daytona"s way of putting his character to play was impressive. Viper, well, not so much but it was a nice try. TUF eventually took over the rest of the witnesses, making the game like Medic"s first TBJ game. I"m not sure if him playing the witnesses in a "neutral" demeanor was helpful or not but it certainly helped Murrall.

The game as already said left a lot of holes and many questions unanswered. Including the explanation of strangulation without fingerprints and how Julie was able to do that, etc. If whenever possible, your version of how this all happened would be greatly appreciated.

I also agree that it was frustrating that you cannot interview witnesses before trial or investigate a bit. As said, lawyers cannot ask questions if they don't know the answer because that would seriously be detrimental.

Also, the testimony of the investigator or M.E. would be much helpful if they were available. Not to mention rebuttal witnesses (e.g.: the father or maybe a psychologist?)

As for the verdict, well, 2-1 technically, in real life, is a hung jury. It would be cool to get the deliberations PM screenshot and perhaps some RFD and opinion. Also, nice to get some feedback on what was done wrong or what should've been done.

Again, this was enjoyable. Mock trials are great and I would seriously do it again. Good game, guys.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2012 11:53:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/24/2012 9:56:40 AM, jm_notguilty wrote:
Boy, that was awesome. Guess who has to buy me steak? Haha. Medic's cross was far from objectionable but I let it play through. I knew Medic had nothing to use against the defendant, so building a theory would be an excellent option.. The cross was notably intense. If I was the DA in this, I couldn't think of anything to use or to build. Kudos.

http://thumbs.dreamstime.com...

A few things I noticed was during direct examination, you keep leading and giving hints of the answers. I was tempted to object but since none of them really affects the guilt of Murrall, I let it pass. Also, as a response to your last objections before TUF cut Julie's testimony, it's cross examination. I can lead witnesses and antagonize them like you did with Murrall. But I think you already knew that. Did you object to avoid the answer by stalling time knowing TUF's leaving? ;-)

lol...suffice it to say that I wasn't going to object to cutting Julie's testimony short.

I also have to admit, I was a bit disappointed by myself. I knew I couldve done better. I should've objected more on the cross but I knew Medic was desperate. Also, my cross on Keith was a little bit laid-back. I could've been more hostile. But due to my schedule, the time remaining until TUF goes and the fact that enough reasonable doubt can be produced just by looking at the report, I eventually lost interest and got bored. I was just getting started with Julie when it was cut. Pity.

Daytonanerd and Viper were the only ones aside from the two attorneys who participated. Daytona"s way of putting his character to play was impressive. Viper, well, not so much but it was a nice try. TUF eventually took over the rest of the witnesses, making the game like Medic"s first TBJ game. I"m not sure if him playing the witnesses in a "neutral" demeanor was helpful or not but it certainly helped Murrall.

I kinda liked the adversarial nature of mine and Tuf's back and forth when he was playing Murral. I was hoping to instigate him into talking more, but Tuf didn't fall for it, and wouldn't argue with me.

The game as already said left a lot of holes and many questions unanswered. Including the explanation of strangulation without fingerprints and how Julie was able to do that, etc. If whenever possible, your version of how this all happened would be greatly appreciated.

I already deduced alot of answers before charging Murral. The scratches on the face was a giveaway, and the strangulation attempt failed. Her weakness is why the knife only went in a half inch, though I can't figure out how a sharp object caused jagged edges. Andy's wallet was empty but Julie had $183 dollars cash, seems a bit much for a camping trip in the woods. I thought Murral would be easier to build a case against, but in hindsight, the kind of case I built didn't work for 2/3 of the jurors so not a good choice.

I also agree that it was frustrating that you cannot interview witnesses before trial or investigate a bit. As said, lawyers cannot ask questions if they don't know the answer because that would seriously be detrimental.

Also, the testimony of the investigator or M.E. would be much helpful if they were available. Not to mention rebuttal witnesses (e.g.: the father or maybe a psychologist?)

As for the verdict, well, 2-1 technically, in real life, is a hung jury. It would be cool to get the deliberations PM screenshot and perhaps some RFD and opinion. Also, nice to get some feedback on what was done wrong or what should've been done.

I'd agree, I'd like to see input on what made the jurors decide the way they did.

Again, this was enjoyable. Mock trials are great and I would seriously do it again. Good game, guys.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2012 1:25:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Well, there wasn't much deliberation. Because TUF was doing it as a vote, we all just kind of stated our verdicts and the one that had at least 2 won.

I voted Not Guilty because I felt that, as JM said, there really wasn't enough the prosecution presented that eliminated reasonable doubt.

I can get a little bit more in depth with that if you like.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus