ONU Tournament

[Nur Rauch]

turned out to be the new high-low pairings. while they do improve your chance to finish higher, your last rounds are usually no fun, as there is no competition, and you are either outclassed, or bored to tears with a team that doesn't understand simple courtroom mechanics. personally i could do without the use of high low pairings at invitationals, it effectively turns a tournament into a three round weekend. why not just give 5-1 and 6-0 teams a bye for the final round.

The current system also runs the risk that the 5-1 and 6-0 teams could actually drop a ballot or more to an under-classed team. Sometimes the difference in skill is very great, and yet the difference in score is hardly reflected. That can happen when the judges feel a mix of pity, confusion, and such a high dose of boredom that after awhile they stop listening.

The good thing about those kinds of rounds is that it forces the good teams to step it up a notch and not only perform well, but adapt to a confused, unpredictable setting, which builds flexibility and patience.

The problem (which I believe far outweighs the good) is that "adapting" to a less-experienced team and a confused judge entails lowering yourself to the other team's level. Example: We were plaintiff for a round against a team that was significantly less experienced this year, and they objected to statements that were not being offered by us for the truth of the matter on Walton's direct (statement by Hamilton about Walton's father), and the judge sustained them immediately. We "adapted" by doing the same thing on their case in chief and throwing out all of Reagan's very relevant and admissible testimony about the statements he gathered during his investigation by objecting to hearsay and speculation on literally everything, which the terribly confused judge sustained without hesitation. It was cheap, but it's possible our normal performance style would not have convinced the judge we were better.

[mocksluzer]

Wow! If that's true, that's too bad, sorry to hear it. I wonder if students felt that it gave them a real-life jury type trial (even though they probably weren't looking for one). Anyone have word on top-10?

[nmy060504]

It is rumored that there were rounds judged by bus drivers-- this is absolutely unexceptable and unfair to the hard working teams.

To the best of my knowledge ONU had some practicing attorneys, judges, law students and coaches judging. I am unaware of any bus drivers who acted as judges. Perhaps you could fill me on the rumored bus driver judges and what rounds the judged. Also if there was a problem with any judges in a round why was this not brought to the attention of the tournament director?

[SilentAssassin]

The Polar Bear ONU tournament was a learning experience. I would have to encourage ONU not to invite so many teams if you can not provide the needed amount of judges.

It is rumored that there were rounds judged by bus drivers-- this is absolutely unexceptable and unfair to the hard working teams.

Personally I feel as if the incompetence of the round judges created inaccurate results for the overrall competition.

Jeonnay
Northwood University 931

I think that's just Tab Room humor, that dates back to the first Polar Bear tourney, where the weather was so bad that there was talk of needing to bring in people off the streets to judge rounds.

[changebox]

I don't have the exact tab summary but 6 teams went 6-2, 2 teams went 6.5, and 4 teams went 7-1.

Ohio State 1449 won the tournament at 7-1 with a CS of 20, Case Western Reserve 1117 came in second at 7-1 with a CS of 18.


I believe they hit each other in the third round.

[EEBO]

I doubt there was any classless activity coming from Ohio Northern. Dr. Scott has her stuff together, so I would bet money that there's nothing wrong going on. Obviously someone gave you some bull about bus drivers and you took it.



edit: I heard it was a good tournament and all sorts of fun for those involved.

[thepezking639]

the "bus-driver" introduced himself as a professor of something entirely unrelated to law, to be honest, i forgot his specialty and his only affiliation to mock trial was that he would help drive the vans for his school.

perhaps "bus-driver" is an overstatement, but obviously he isn't fit to be the PRESIDING JUDGE in a first round tournament.

during the tournament we actually had two judges that were professors in something else than political science, one was a presiding judge the other was a scoring judge.

[itsjustagame]

We had round judged by a homeless looking man with cargo pants, crazy hair, and a beard. He hobbled in after the presiding judge who practically dragged him in. He looked very confused and a little high, told us he didn't know what he was doing there, fell asleep for a brief period, never looked up at anyone, took the luxury of a 20 minute break from which he came in with a full plate of food, ate a granola bar loudly during closings and included fascinating graphics of what happened during trial on the ballots.

The best part was when his cell phone started ringing to "good vibrations" during a cross exam. We affectionately called him "the dude."

[arcticlawyer]

Out of curiosity what did the dude draw on the ballots in particular?

[Nur Rauch]

We had round judged by a homeless looking man with cargo pants, crazy hair, and a beard. He hobbled in after the presiding judge who practically dragged him in. He looked very confused and a little high, told us he didn't know what he was doing there, fell asleep for a brief period, never looked up at anyone, took the luxury of a 20 minute break from which he came in with a full plate of food, ate a granola bar loudly during closings and included fascinating graphics of what happened during trial on the ballots.

The best part was when his cell phone started ringing to "good vibrations" during a cross exam. We affectionately called him "the dude."

Well, if it makes you feel better, at the Hatting Invite this weekend, we got a cocky-ass 3L-turned-presiding-judge, and he sustained opposing counsel's objection to relevance when we called a witness on the defense who challenged the element of falsity. I was so pissed at him by that time in the trial (he'd already sustained relevance objections to a lot of our case) that I interrupted him mid-ruling and pointed to opposing counsel's demonstrative where it quoted the element of falsity. He hesitated and then overruled the objection, but if he hadn't I probably would have flipped out on him and marched down to the tab room to request that they remove the presiding judge for not allowing us to call a witness on the grounds of relevance.

[mockrook86]

For me it wasn't the judges as much as that guy running the captains meetings. He was ineffective, thought he was funny with the tempurature stuff, he said he was a coach but I would hate to be on his team as he seems to be unable to put two thoughts together. Someone said he was judging too, "the dude" probably was more with it than this guy.

[nmy060504]

the "bus-driver" introduced himself as a professor of something entirely unrelated to law, to be honest, i forgot his specialty and his only affiliation to mock trial was that he would help drive the vans for his school.

perhaps "bus-driver" is an overstatement, but obviously he isn't fit to be the PRESIDING JUDGE in a first round tournament.

thepezking- I am sorry that you feel that way, but "the bus driver" sorely misrepresented himself and drastically understated his experience with mock trial and as a respected professor at the university. He has assisted the ONU mock trial team for at least 8 years to the best of my knowledge. He has been involved judging for 3 other tournaments (not including the tournament this weekend) as well as assisting in scrimmages.

I would caution you (and others for that matter) not to make snap judgements of hasty decisions about a person's qualifications (or lack thereof) until you know more about them. These people willing gave up their time to come and judge at a mock trial tournament so that you (and 40+ other teams) could compete. Ideally we would all love to be judged by practicing attorneys who specialize in litigation and judges who have been on the bench for years, but as you well know the ideal isn't always what happens. So unfortunately we must make due with the hands we are dealt in life and make every experience (no matter how bad or good it is) a learning experience.

[thepezking639]

thepezking- I am sorry that you feel that way, but "the bus driver" sorely misrepresented himself and drastically understated his experience with mock trial and as a respected professor at the university. He has assisted the ONU mock trial team for at least 8 years to the best of my knowledge. He has been involved judging for 3 other tournaments (not including the tournament this weekend) as well as assisting in scrimmages.

I would caution you (and others for that matter) not to make snap judgements of hasty decisions about a person's qualifications (or lack thereof) until you know more about them. These people willing gave up their time to come and judge at a mock trial tournament so that you (and 40+ other teams) could compete. Ideally we would all love to be judged by practicing attorneys who specialize in litigation and judges who have been on the bench for years, but as you well know the ideal isn't always what happens. So unfortunately we must make due with the hands we are dealt in life and make every experience (no matter how bad or good it is) a learning experience.

my issue isnt with a "lay person" being a judge, its with a layperson being a presiding judge who doesn't even have a lose handle on courtroom procedure or evidence. especially when you have three judges, two scoring one presiding. it wouldnt have been hard to make sure that each round had a judge who could run a trial fairly through knowledge of procedure and rules as i would imagine nearly every coach at the tournament could do so, and were required to do when the judge pool dried up. its not that i feel his rulings effected the outcome of our trial, however it was detrimental to the overall feel of mock as both an academic exercise and as a competitive entity.

[mcm61284]

We had round judged by a homeless looking man with cargo pants, crazy hair, and a beard. He hobbled in after the presiding judge who practically dragged him in. He looked very confused and a little high, told us he didn't know what he was doing there, fell asleep for a brief period, never looked up at anyone, took the luxury of a 20 minute break from which he came in with a full plate of food, ate a granola bar loudly during closings and included fascinating graphics of what happened during trial on the ballots.

The best part was when his cell phone started ringing to "good vibrations" during a cross exam. We affectionately called him "the dude."

Thanks from "the dude"---that's most definitely me.  In actuality, I'm a 1L at Ohio Northern and was confused because I had just agreed to judge five minutes earlier, after a 2L or 3L (3L I think) approached me about it.  It turned out a scheduled judge was stuck in a meeting. 

Your memory falters a bit, though.  For starters, I have a goatee, not an actual beard.  I was most definitely not high---I've never used an illegal drug in my life (or tobacco for that matter).  I never fell asleep, and I did watch you guys as you were presenting.   If you saw me looking down, that's because I was writing.  I probably shouldn't have done the graphics, but the young lady was rapidly falling apart and I wanted to illustrate that.  During the closing, I was eating dum-dum pops, not a granola bar.  I should've just sucked them rather than chewing though. 

Needless to say, I'm not homeless.  I live in a university-owned apartment complex where most of the population consists of fellow law students like myself.  As for the "crazy hair," I'm just kinda letting it go and seeing how long it can get.  I haven't had a haircut since July of 2007.  When I finally do get it cut, I'm planning to donate it to Locks of Love so some cancer patients can wear it as wigs. 

I have to say, I was impressed with several of the attorneys.  I think any of you folks, with the proper training, could be fine lawyers.  I enjoyed judging, and I hope I made it more enjoyable for you too.

Matthew C. Murray
aka "The Dude"

[Blue]

Wow, I would just like to add to this conversation by saying I am highly impressed with "the dude"s response. One of the reasons I enjoy to read this site is the professionalism of the questions and responses. I thought that at times this thread came close to falling below that line and he promptly restored it.

In addition I think everyone needs to be reminded that many people may come to this site and see your remarks. I don't feel that those remarks should belittle any one that has donated their weekend time to help out a mock trial tournament for nothing in return. With out those people many tournaments would be unable to function.