State v Perry

[NDmock]

Now that Des Moines is over, it's officially a "Previous Case."  I'll start off the thread:

FACT: Perry was the worst case ever.  Discuss.

[DrCornelius]

FACT: Perry was the worst case ever.  Discuss.

These are the truest words I have ever read in my life.

Die, Nathanson, die.

[JayZ]

FACT: Perry was the worst case ever.  Discuss.

These are the truest words I have ever read in my life.

Die, Nathanson, die.

EVAR

[HBomber]

The case was too black and white, in my opinion.  There was a single legal question posed: did Tyler kidnap Bailey, or not?  There were no complicated underlying theories, unlike last year, where you had to prove a number of things: that Polk hospital had a duty, that they breached that duty, that Tony Kissner was hurt as a consequence of that breach, and that Tony Kissner's injuries prevented her from beginning a successful professional golf career.  Now, that's a rich case to get into.  This year, there was very little meat; as a prosecutor, you presented a handful of coincidences and asked the judge to accept them as proof of a crime.  It was ludicrous.  Most of the witnesses were terrible; I don't think I saw a single K.C. or Sturgeon all year.  I think the authors meant well, and it was a compelling narrative, but I hope that next year's case offers a little more depth.

[UMCane*GWB]

I think the case would have been a lot more dynamic with one little wrinkle... an option of a complicity charge against TP with Bralow (but probably would need to eliminate bralow as an actual witness available)

[bigtommyg]

Thanks to State v. Perry, I now crave a civil case like I crave saltwater taffy. And I'm a man who enjoys his taffy.

[bigtommyg]

I think the case would have been a lot more dynamic with one little wrinkle... an option of a complicity charge against TP with Bralow (but probably would need to eliminate bralow as an actual witness available)

ANY legal options would have been good. This year, we couldn't even decide what charge we were pursuing: the indictment simply charged all three counts, two of which we couldn't prove because Bailey wasn't harmed. Did ANYONE have a truly alternate case theory on P in this case? No, it was impossible: you went for felony kidnapping because that was your only option. If you were really crazy, you could argue terrorization instead of monetary motive; but then you'd get shot down by a sweet little girl playing TP.

Next year, please, OPTIONS!

[candacejuliana]

Now that Des Moines is over, it's officially a "Previous Case."  I'll start off the thread:

FACT: Perry was the worst case ever.  Discuss.

it made Smith v. Thompson look like a masterpiece.

and Smith v. Thompson was awful.

[andrewbaker]

Yes, this case was truly terrible.  It was full of errors, and it was too simplistic.

[DesertClassic]

[shrugs]  Even though Alicia Hawley hates me, I still think she and her students did a wonderful job on this case.  I like it.  Sue me.    

[The Gelf]

Yes, this case was truly terrible.  It was full of errors, and it was too simplistic.

Especially that Lawrence affidavit.  What a piece of useless garbage.  

[Herb]

[shrugs]  Even though Alicia Hawley hates me, I still think she and her students did a wonderful job on this case.  I like it.  Sue me.    

I agree with Jimmy, I liked it a hell of a lot better than last years case.  I chalk part of that up to the fact that I flat out prefer arguing criminal cases more.  Although I think I will say I liked Harmon better, and wish that I'd been better at mock trial that year.  I think I would've enjoyed it even more, then.

Edit:  Not that I necessarily disagree with some of the criticism, I do think it had too few options.  But in spite of the flaws it has (and every case will have them) I still had fun with the case.

[Veritas]

I viscerally loathed this case from the first day I read it to the last seconds of my closing in the championship round. I’ll offer a fuller dissection of its dysfunctionality later tonight, but I think the chief flaw was the lack of a single issue requiring argument with evidence. Mock trial cases should not be predicated on circumstantial evidence, because the prosecution is forced to simply throw up, as cleanly and coherently as possible, a web of entirely unrelated facts without ever formulating a substantial theory to combine them. Every prosecution theory was “Guilty!” because “I have 20 facts that correlate to Perry’s guilt!” I think the writers did a good job in creating a rich set of issues and I commend them for the meticulous construction of the fact pattern, but when everything is linked by the gaping void of not knowing what happened on Oct 22nd, making the arguments feels like throwing darts into jello. Let’s make the cases about a central set of commonly accepted facts that require a case theory to be interpreted.

[andrewbaker]

Especially that Lawrence affidavit.  What a piece of useless garbage.  

I can safely say the Lawrence affidavit was the best in the last 10 years.

[GooglyMoogly]

This case was excellent.

The best cases are the ones that have multiple possible defenses and require teams to be very flexible in witness selection.  That way, teams are forced to guess which way the other team is going to go.  

I saw cases where defense teams focused on Peyton, while others focused on Peyton, Mike Ryan and even the guy staying across the hall from the room where Bailey was found who checked out earlier than anticipated (according to the hotel log).  

I saw teams that didn't even argue alternate suspects and focused on the lack of physical evidence and lack of eye witnesses.  I saw teams argue conspiracy defenses, I saw teams argue about a botched police investigation.   I saw two teams argue all of these defenses.

Meanwhile, on prosecution, I saw teams flip Skogan and use him/her as a state's witness, I saw teams call the babysitter and catching opponents off guard, I saw teams not call Walsh, I saw teams not call either Reynolds, I saw teams call both Reynolds.

I agree that the case law was lacking....but it was nice to have a victim and it was nice to break away from murder and assaults which we had been seeing every year.  

I still wish AMTA would bring back the old witness selection format: PDPDPD.   It made for more interesting trials because, this year, I found that Prosecution cases were virtually guaranteed before captain's meeting ever began while the defense had to lose out on two witnesses who could have swung either way.  (Think of how many defense teams wanted Gustavo if prosecution didn't take him/her with their first pick)