Team B Notes

Thanks to Brittney Williams for these great notes:


OS (P) - Good job telling what would be testified to (esp. by specific witnesses). Might emphasize that more, because you tell the story in a lot of detail. Tell it, but don't be the one testifying.
--Motive/means/opportunity/intent
--"Defense will try to..." good job

OS (D) - Analogy to a puzzle. Missing pieces, lacking strength.
--Simplified version of the story, while hammering exactly what they were going for. Lots of "So-and-so will testify..."
--Brought analogy full-circle; finished with burden of proof


**

Rory Riley
D - Attorney: you're friendly but still seem a bit formulaic with going through your questions. This is YOUR witness; you're her ally and trying to give ease and credibiity. It got better as your questioning progressed.
- Already better with introducing evidence. "Your Honors I will be referring to page __ in the binders that we've provided for yourselves as well as the defense." --as you're approaching your witness. Then SHE can expand upon what it is....etc. You did well asking her if she recognized it, and having it be accepted as evidence.
- GREAT response to the HEARSAY objection. You made the other attorney stumble :) And they withdrew!!!! Kudos to you. It's hard to knock down a hearsay objection.
- Witness: Good job being relaxed and professional. Very believable!
X - I love how you started out, still with your professional/credible demeanor. You weren't just playing a part, you were answering candidly.
- Excellent balance between "yes/no" and expanding your answers. Natural :)
- Good timing/explanation of the objection to lack of personal knowledge. And good acceptance of being overruled.

Kim Kilian
D - Good timing with admitting her as an expert
- Witness: I like your facial expressions
- Don't start every response the same. "Well..." It can be effective but don't overuse it. Don't worry, it's easy to do, especially in the hot seat. I've been there!
- Attorney: Better job approaching the witness/entering in evidence. I still think it's helpful for all of us if you mention at least the page you'll be referring to. I mean, in a real trial if the attorney had permission to approach the witness but no one had a clue of what was going to be shown to them....just food for thought. I'll stop hammering this though, cuz it's improved a lot since the last time I watched.
X - Good poise. Your posture still said "confident" but you shrank in your voice and responses.
- Don't get stuck in the yes/no rut. When you finally tried to expand your response, the attorney was easily able to stop you and rope you back into the simple answers he wanted.
- STAY CONFIDENT. Get bigger, not smaller.
RD - Thank you for giving your witness a chance to recover and explain herself!

Sawyer Simpson
D - This is the direct, where you are helping the witness tell her story. Be professionally conversational, rather than interrogative.
- Ojection to narrative wasn't really that valid, but the simple way to recover from that is to break the reponses up with more questions. Sometimes teams will use that objection to just throw off your groove, too.
- Leading question objections...I'll have a little rant on that towards the end here.
X - Tough attorney
- For later use, it was nice the way she said, "Let's talk about Casey's R-Space page..." Guides the questioning and makes it clear to the judges what you're going towards. It also makes it harder to object to relevance.

Requested to rest the case, since the prosecution had not met the burden of proof required. This is more of a formality in the context of mock trial, and it's impressive to the judges if (as defense) you make this statement. In MT, they're just going to hear both sides of the case anyways, but keep it in mind for when you play defense.



****



Avery Atkinson
D - Seemed pretty scripted, yes?
X - GREAT job cornering the witness. For one last punch, you could've said, "But you didn't feel that this was important enough to mention in your affadavit?" Careful not to "overpunch" it. One step too far is WAY too far. But in this case it would've worked alright.
- You were politely domineering. I probably would've felt very small as a witness, with you crossing me. Careful not to overdo it. I don't agree that you were being argumentative per say, but apparently your opposing team did.

Cameron Cortez
X - Excellent use of the exhibit and making her answer the way ou wanted her to.
- Stayed composed when speaking with co-counsel. Seemed natural and unflustered! Good job! Often when attorneys talk with their co-counsel, they've already let on that they're flustered. I didn't even think of it that way, so that's awesome :)
- I like your use of logic with the witness to make her answer the way you wanted. There's really no way she can lie her way through that logic.

Casey Campbell
D - Very friendly/sympathetic towards the witness. Great example of being conversational.
- "Online you can be whoever you want to be, and I just wanted to be someone who wasn't picked on." Interesting and valid response.
- Be on your toes and don't let those critical questions get answered! "Did you make the time bomb..." or whatever it was. Leading and VERY pertinent to the verdict. And you let it in!
X - Don't seem too frantic to get through your questions and have them answered. You have time! Don't cut off the witness so much, it seems rude and like you're trying to hide something. Stay calm and cool-headed.
- I like your question/statement, "And you are the only one in the courtroom today that can testify to that, correct?"
RX - Stay within the scope of the redirect.



****



CA (P) - Good job reaffirming the means/motive/opportunity/intent and telling the judges exactly what in the case has proven those. It was easy to understand.
- Very confident and clear in your speech :)
- We have proven...
- I liked how you talk about the potential disaster that could've ensued.
- Bring in legal charges

CA (D) - Prosecution has failed to provide burden of proof, failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, etc.
- Supposed sightings, don't have any solid proof/evidence
- Small pile of sticks. Resulted to be nothing more than a burning pile of sticks. (I kinda like this one!) They brought it full-circle, too. Use something like this, because it gives an image/symbol for judges to remember. Tree without a trunk.

Rebuttal (P): Way to re-establish your clients' credibility!
- Defense "They have failed to prove..." Don't emphasize the fact that the defense hasn't proven anything. Emphasize what YOU have proved. YOU carry the burden of proof, not the defense. The defense doesn't have anything to prove, but you do.
- Good job staying poised; sometimes rebuttals/redirects/recrosses are a game of thinking on your feet. You did it well!


****


In general:
-You were better at speaking up than you were last week, but it could still be improved upon. ESPECIALLY witnesses. Being crossed can be tough
-Directing attorneys can be less stiff with their own witnesses. Professional, but not stiff. Conversational.
-A note on LEADING QUESTIONS! A lot of times, we just assume that leading questions are yes/no questions. While this is true, it's really anytime you LEAD the witness to answer a particular way. Not every yes/no question is a leading question. If it calls for a yes/no response but also calls for further explanation, and if you aren't the one testifying for the witness, you're fine. Use those questions RARELY though, and run those questions by MW or your coaches before trying them out. Also, if/when the opposing team objects, you can just back down/rephrase your question, or you could attempt to stand up for the question by saying "Your Honors, it's simply a yes or no question. I'm not leading the witness to respond in a certain way." Just be aware of the small differences because you can make it can work to your advantage. Sometimes even judges don't understand the differences, and that really irks me...
-Stay professional even on breaks. Even if the judges aren't in the courtroom, you're still sending messages to the other team members (and your audience as well).
-Careful with asked/answered and going too far with your questioning.
-Be convinced of your own side, even if you are prosecution and it's very unlikely you'll win a mock trial verdict. You have to believe it yourselves, not just go through the motions. Remember to treat this like it's REAL. I mean, there's a high school kid trying to blow the school to smithereens...it's serious stuff!


****



JUDGE DEBRIEFING -- 2-1 Prosecution
2-1 prosecution!!!!!!

Judge 1
-she liked the puzzle pieces analogy
-prosecution: put the case together very well. Well presented
-OS, points need to be spoken a little slower so it's easier to catch.
-Best prosection attorney: Dominique. Witness: Caitlyn.

Judge 2
- OS great job telling the story. MORE EYE CONTACT WITH JUDGES, not just reading.
- Witnesses had great eye contact, did well knowing their facts AND thinking on their feet
- Don't let it go if the witness isn't giving you what you want
- Don't get argumentative. You can ask the judge to be the one to instruct witness to answer yes/no. Let the judge be the mean one, not you.
-Liked it when you crossed w/o notes
-Good job pointing out defense weaknesses
-Defense doesn't have to prove anything. Only provide doubt.
-Don't argue law in OS
-Liked the analogies

Judge 3 Richard Davis
-CA, the judge stops you and asks you questions. Be prepared for that. In Supreme Court, the judges wouldn't let him go more than a minute and a half without questions
-The attorney needs to KNOW the case, not READ the case, so that you can respond to the judge somewhat intelligently. Judges have that right. They also have the right to ask the witness questions.
-Prosecution started with a ton of energy, Defense gained a ton of energy
-OS is a MAP! And don't let the judge forget where you're going -- not just first 3 minutes and last 3 minutes.
-Body language; he can tell when you're confident, nervous, etc.
-Prosecution don't be so aggressive on X. Attorney is trained to confuse the witness. Judge wants to let the witness say what they want. Judge is more sympathetic to a witness than to an attorney.
-FIRST THING YOU DO WHEN INTRODUCING EVIDENCE IS SHOW IT TO THE JUDGE AND OTHER SIDE.
-Know WHY you're making an objection. Tactile: throw witness off. Legal: So something doesn't come out (But this is also big red flashing lights to the judge to "listen to this!")
-Witnesses: DON'T use uh-huh and yeah. Say yes or no. Listen to every word that's asked, because sometimes you admitted to things you wouldn't have admitted to if you had listened to what had been asked.
Prosecution attorney: Dominique and Caitlyn (very good at being a witness)