Total Posts:4|Showing Posts:1-4
Jump to topic:

Mock Trials

Buddamoose
Posts: 19,448
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2012 12:05:58 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
So im trying to find some people that are interested in participating in mock trials. The layout would pretty much be:

A) One side(person) as defense and one as prosecution
B) Each side is given a case file chosen from a source such as this (http://www.isba.org...)

Rounds would be:

Round 1: Opening statement- "An introductory statement made by the attorneys for each side at the start of a trial. The opening statement, although not mandatory, is seldom waived because it offers a valuable opportunity to provide an overview of the case to the jury and to explain the anticipated proof that will be presented during the course of the trial.

The primary purpose of an opening statement is to apprise the trier of fact, whether jury or court, of the issues in question and to summarize the evidence that the party intends to offer during the trial. The Supreme Court has characterized an opening statement as "ordinarily intended to do no more than to inform the jury in a general way of the nature of the action and defense so that they may better be prepared to understand the evidence" (Best v. District of Columbia, 291 U.S. 411, 54 S. Ct. 487, 78 L. Ed. 882 [1934]).
Round 2: Case Presentations
Round 3: Cross Examination(Rebuttals)
Round 4: Closing Statements(Same deal as opening statements, just an overall synopsis.

BoP: Prosecution(always)

Idk if there might be improvements that could be made upon the idea? 5 rouds instead of 4(although two CX rounds would most likely be horridly redundant)

If anybody is interested maybe we could test out one of the mock trials. Enough people become interested and a tournament might be possible? Just throwing out some ideas, more so hoping to find a few people interested in participating semi-regularly.
"Reality is an illusion created due to a lack of alcohol"
-Airmax1227

"You were the moon all this time, and he was always there to make you shine."

"Was he the sun?"

"No honey, he was the darkness"

-Kazekirion
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2012 9:04:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/17/2012 12:05:58 AM, Buddamoose wrote:
So im trying to find some people that are interested in participating in mock trials. The layout would pretty much be:

A) One side(person) as defense and one as prosecution
B) Each side is given a case file chosen from a source such as this (http://www.isba.org...)

Rounds would be:

Round 1: Opening statement- "An introductory statement made by the attorneys for each side at the start of a trial. The opening statement, although not mandatory, is seldom waived because it offers a valuable opportunity to provide an overview of the case to the jury and to explain the anticipated proof that will be presented during the course of the trial.

The primary purpose of an opening statement is to apprise the trier of fact, whether jury or court, of the issues in question and to summarize the evidence that the party intends to offer during the trial. The Supreme Court has characterized an opening statement as "ordinarily intended to do no more than to inform the jury in a general way of the nature of the action and defense so that they may better be prepared to understand the evidence" (Best v. District of Columbia, 291 U.S. 411, 54 S. Ct. 487, 78 L. Ed. 882 [1934]).
Round 2: Case Presentations
Round 3: Cross Examination(Rebuttals)
Round 4: Closing Statements(Same deal as opening statements, just an overall synopsis.

BoP: Prosecution(always)

Idk if there might be improvements that could be made upon the idea? 5 rouds instead of 4(although two CX rounds would most likely be horridly redundant)

If anybody is interested maybe we could test out one of the mock trials. Enough people become interested and a tournament might be possible? Just throwing out some ideas, more so hoping to find a few people interested in participating semi-regularly.

Initial thought...very difficult in this forum.
1. Statement of facts would have to involve stipulations
2. Opening and closing arguments are NOT evidence
3. Defense could have the option of making no argument until its case in chief or, in this case, just before plaintiff's final close.
4. Would there be clear rules for Judging and would there be a Judge as determiner.
5. Would IL law be the determiner?
Buddamoose
Posts: 19,448
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2012 9:31:10 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/17/2012 9:04:17 AM, logicrules wrote:
At 3/17/2012 12:05:58 AM, Buddamoose wrote:
So im trying to find some people that are interested in participating in mock trials. The layout would pretty much be:

A) One side(person) as defense and one as prosecution
B) Each side is given a case file chosen from a source such as this (http://www.isba.org...)

Rounds would be:

Round 1: Opening statement- "An introductory statement made by the attorneys for each side at the start of a trial. The opening statement, although not mandatory, is seldom waived because it offers a valuable opportunity to provide an overview of the case to the jury and to explain the anticipated proof that will be presented during the course of the trial.

The primary purpose of an opening statement is to apprise the trier of fact, whether jury or court, of the issues in question and to summarize the evidence that the party intends to offer during the trial. The Supreme Court has characterized an opening statement as "ordinarily intended to do no more than to inform the jury in a general way of the nature of the action and defense so that they may better be prepared to understand the evidence" (Best v. District of Columbia, 291 U.S. 411, 54 S. Ct. 487, 78 L. Ed. 882 [1934]).
Round 2: Case Presentations
Round 3: Cross Examination(Rebuttals)
Round 4: Closing Statements(Same deal as opening statements, just an overall synopsis.

BoP: Prosecution(always)

Idk if there might be improvements that could be made upon the idea? 5 rouds instead of 4(although two CX rounds would most likely be horridly redundant)

If anybody is interested maybe we could test out one of the mock trials. Enough people become interested and a tournament might be possible? Just throwing out some ideas, more so hoping to find a few people interested in participating semi-regularly.

Initial thought...very difficult in this forum.
1. Statement of facts would have to involve stipulations
2. Opening and closing arguments are NOT evidence
3. Defense could have the option of making no argument until its case in chief or, in this case, just before plaintiff's final close.
4. Would there be clear rules for Judging and would there be a Judge as determiner.
5. Would IL law be the determiner?

1) General statements, not fine details.
2) I agree, evidence must be presented in the case presentation(and would have to be presentes in whole, for example, "The prosecution now submits the first piece of evidence before the court. Witness statement from witness A." Then whichever side that presented it goes about explaining the evidence.
3) Ah I see, well being the the prosecution will go first in round two, the final close would be contained within round two. Unless a better format would be:

1) Opening statement
2) Prosecutiom Case/Defense CX
3) Defense Case/Prosecutiom CX
4) Closing statements

4) A single judge? No I was more imagining a by-vote basis(Arguments being the only votable criteria(S&G, Conduct, Sourcing not seperate but contained within the "argument" vote.
5) I suppose it could be wherever both sides agree upon. IL law sounds good, but the location would probably change given the case itself. Theres more than just the one website link I gave that have pdf's of mock trials. Each mock trial does have a set location but it can be changed, doesnt have to be that way.
"Reality is an illusion created due to a lack of alcohol"
-Airmax1227

"You were the moon all this time, and he was always there to make you shine."

"Was he the sun?"

"No honey, he was the darkness"

-Kazekirion
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2012 11:27:49 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/17/2012 9:31:10 AM, Buddamoose wrote:
At 3/17/2012 9:04:17 AM, logicrules wrote:
At 3/17/2012 12:05:58 AM, Buddamoose wrote:
So im trying to find some people that are interested in participating in mock trials. The layout would pretty much be:

A) One side(person) as defense and one as prosecution
B) Each side is given a case file chosen from a source such as this (http://www.isba.org...)

Rounds would be:

Round 1: Opening statement- "An introductory statement made by the attorneys for each side at the start of a trial. The opening statement, although not mandatory, is seldom waived because it offers a valuable opportunity to provide an overview of the case to the jury and to explain the anticipated proof that will be presented during the course of the trial.

The primary purpose of an opening statement is to apprise the trier of fact, whether jury or court, of the issues in question and to summarize the evidence that the party intends to offer during the trial. The Supreme Court has characterized an opening statement as "ordinarily intended to do no more than to inform the jury in a general way of the nature of the action and defense so that they may better be prepared to understand the evidence" (Best v. District of Columbia, 291 U.S. 411, 54 S. Ct. 487, 78 L. Ed. 882 [1934]).
Round 2: Case Presentations
Round 3: Cross Examination(Rebuttals)
Round 4: Closing Statements(Same deal as opening statements, just an overall synopsis.

BoP: Prosecution(always)

Idk if there might be improvements that could be made upon the idea? 5 rouds instead of 4(although two CX rounds would most likely be horridly redundant)

If anybody is interested maybe we could test out one of the mock trials. Enough people become interested and a tournament might be possible? Just throwing out some ideas, more so hoping to find a few people interested in participating semi-regularly.

Initial thought...very difficult in this forum.
1. Statement of facts would have to involve stipulations
2. Opening and closing arguments are NOT evidence
3. Defense could have the option of making no argument until its case in chief or, in this case, just before plaintiff's final close.
4. Would there be clear rules for Judging and would there be a Judge as determiner.
5. Would IL law be the determiner?

1) General statements, not fine details.
2) I agree, evidence must be presented in the case presentation(and would have to be presentes in whole, for example, "The prosecution now submits the first piece of evidence before the court. Witness statement from witness A." Then whichever side that presented it goes about explaining the evidence.
3) Ah I see, well being the the prosecution will go first in round two, the final close would be contained within round two. Unless a better format would be:

1) Opening statement
2) Prosecutiom Case/Defense CX
3) Defense Case/Prosecutiom CX
4) Closing statements

4) A single judge? No I was more imagining a by-vote basis(Arguments being the only votable criteria(S&G, Conduct, Sourcing not seperate but contained within the "argument" vote.
5) I suppose it could be wherever both sides agree upon. IL law sounds good, but the location would probably change given the case itself. Theres more than just the one website link I gave that have pdf's of mock trials. Each mock trial does have a set location but it can be changed, doesnt have to be that way.

Good luck. I reviewed the page and this years case. slam dunk. Motion to dismiss for lack of standing. Followed closely by, euthanize the animals in the interest of Justice and expediency.