Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Round stories

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • randy
    started a topic Round stories

    Round stories

    It's been years since there's been a casual perjuries thread about the things that happen in round. What are some of your fondest (or worst) memories? Funniest objections, most nonsensical rulings, weirdest arguments?

    I for one will never forget when a plaintiff attorney tried to keep out Winter's statements because he was our opposing party and therefore they were hearsay

  • The Gelf
    replied
    Originally posted by bdopl View Post
    In our second round at orcs going as defense, our presiding judge (who was also scoring) was incredibly biased. She worked at the state attorneys office. We made a character evidence objection and opposing counsel gave a hearsay exception as their response.... the judge turns to us, without letting us respond, and... I kid you not... says, “I tend to agree with that (?)... THE STATE overrules your objection.”

    We really couldn’t believe what we had just heard. Neither did the judge next to her. Unsurprisingly, we split that round - won and lost each ballot by double digits. Guess which judge’s ballot we lost.
    What was the hearsay exception? Something like motive, intent or plan (803(3)) could also be a colorable argument as to why something isn't improper character evidence (per 404(b)). Regardless, the judge should have allowed you to respond. No excuse for that. Sorry you had that happen.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gilamath
    replied
    My first tournament in Mock Trial I was playing Defense expert DeRosa (case was Park v. Duran). During cross, opposing counsel asks me a question about what I'd read in an affidavit. It's really obvious he's using me as a conduit to hearsay. My attorney objects to hearsay, citing Mississippi BBQ. Opposing counsel swears they're building to something. The judge sustains and asks for more foundation. Opposing counsel keeps asking questions to get the statement out, I keep talking about my expert opinion hoping to trip him up. Sure enough, four or five questions in, he finally says, verbatim, "I don't care about your expert opinion, I just want the statement!"

    Leave a comment:


  • bdopl
    replied
    In our second round at orcs going as defense, our presiding judge (who was also scoring) was incredibly biased. She worked at the state attorneys office. We made a character evidence objection and opposing counsel gave a hearsay exception as their response.... the judge turns to us, without letting us respond, and... I kid you not... says, “I tend to agree with that (?)... THE STATE overrules your objection.”

    We really couldn’t believe what we had just heard. Neither did the judge next to her. Unsurprisingly, we split that round - won and lost each ballot by double digits. Guess which judge’s ballot we lost.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Gelf
    replied
    Originally posted by OffOnCross

    I love this. It reminds me of a similar story from State v. Covington.

    One of my defense attorneys in a Covington trial tries to admit a statement by Bancroft for some reason. Prosecution objects to hearsay. Instead of using the response we had discussed, my attorney looks right at the judge and says, “Your honor, this is not hearsay, because it is a statement by my client’’s co-conspirator.” Opposing counsel and the judge share a look of utter confusion, and counsel then withdraws the objection.
    "Your Honor, I accept counsel's concession that their client and Bancroft were co-conspirators and happily withdraw my objection."

    Leave a comment:


  • tjb
    replied
    My favorite objection ever comes from a high school round I was judging a few years ago:

    "Objection, your honor. This is a lay witness offering opinion testimony on the ultimate issue in the case. It's clearly inadmissible."

    Sounds good, but.....the defendant does have the right to take the stand and say "I didn't do it."

    Leave a comment:


  • The Gelf
    replied
    During an early invitational in the Park v. Duran case in 2014, my team's DEFENSE expert (DeRosa) referred to the gun as "the murder weapon." Opposing counsel (who I believe was an All-American on an excellent team) objected that this was unduly prejudicial. The judge sustained it. That nearly broke me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Not a Good Mocker
    replied
    On the topic of hearsay, once I objected hearsay to a party opponent statement (living up to my username) and the opposing counsel rightfully responded that it was an opposing party statement and therefore admissible. I thought I was pretty fucked so I just restated the definition of hearsay and it ended up getting sustained because the judge didn't know the definition of hearsay.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X