Ridiculous Quotes 09-10

[99problems]

I must ask, does it make you feel bigger or maybe better about yourself to be calling out Mike Thomas because he specifically disagreed with you on something (specifically the quality of a Penn State 8-0 record)?  If so, probably time for a new hobby.

youre cute

[Mock and Awe]

I ran into a similar issue at the Milwaukee regional. I was closing for the defense when during the state's closing argument he said:
"The defendant didn't testify today. The most important thing is that he didn't even declare his innocence!"
He then went on to repeat this same line right before calling for the verdict. Needless to say I was floored! I had no IDEA what to do! In real court you'd ask for a mistrial and I could tell by the judges reactions that they would be looking for me to do that, but I hadn't given my closing yet and I didn't want my request for a mistrial to be granted and have to wave closings and get a 0.... so I did the next best thing. I asked that the line be striken from the closing and the jury be admonished to disregard the statement because it violated Jackie Owens Constitutional rights. The judge let opposing council explain himself and then I cited State vs. Lowe. I never though I would ever actually have to cite that one.... but you know mock trial.... it always finds a way to surprise you!

We ran into a similar situation at ORC last year.  Their closer got up in closing and said a good number of things that never came out in trial (it was testimony from a witness no one called).  Our closer, waited until the end of the close and before giving his rebuttal cited MRE 103(a)(3) and moved to strike the portions which dealt with testimony that was never heard by the "jury."  The judge agreed and granted the motion.

After the round, the other team's coach went to the tab room upset that we "objected during closing arguments."  What it boiled down to them saying we violated AMTA rule 8.12(1) which disallows objections during openings and closings.  We didn't intend to violate AMTA rules and didn't feel that we had since we waited to the end.

The tab room interpretation was that rule 8.12(1) made objections forbidden during the entire portion of the trial where closing arguments are given (meaning after both case-in-chiefs).  They told us that while MRE 103(a)(3) states that evidence not entered during trial may not be used during closings, there is no remedy if it happens other than to point it out in your closing.  They told us we could have been docked points for it but questioning of the judges left them satisfied that it didn't affect scores.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that even if that happens or if they violate State v. Lowe, I would not recommend making any motions after case-in-chiefs are closed since we were almost penalized for it.

[algebra]

Our attorney x-ing Alex Grace (very angrily at this point)

XA - You don't remember a single thing you made that night, do you?
AG- I mean, I might, I don't cook very often etc
XA - WAS IT CHICKEN!?!?!


--------

A particularly rough scrimmage last weekend:

Our Jackie Owens

XA - You now own 89.5% of Trifecta entertainment don't you?
JO - I don't know. I don't really do math, if you say so, I'll take your word for it.
XA-  You don't know how much of the company you own?
JO - I just haven't had time to do the math yet.
XA - Mr. Owens, you are aware it is 2010, 2 years after the death of Jacob Bennet?
JO - Well, you know, just like Casey I've been in jail for the past two years. It's hard to run a business in jail.

- I've never seen another JO say they had been in jail, I don't know if this is a common tactic, but it seemed to take everyone by surprise.

Me on pros. close:

Jackie Owens bleached the bloat... the only person to take a shot in the dark was Jackie Owens, his shot was from a gun. And it went straight into Jacob Bennet's chest heart.

[Present sense impression]

XA - Mr. Owens, you are aware it is 2010, 2 years after the death of Jacob Bennet?
JO - Well, you know, just like Casey I've been in jail for the past two years. It's hard to run a business in jail.

- I've never seen another JO say they had been in jail, I don't know if this is a common tactic, but it seemed to take everyone by surprise.

our team discussed doing this, it lead to a murky, speculative 45 minute argument about whether owens would be out on bail already or not.

[Nur Rauch]

our team discussed doing this, it lead to a murky, speculative 45 minute argument about whether owens would be out on bail already or not.

Depends on how successful the prosecutor would be in arguing that he's a flight risk. He did, after all, leave the country for three weeks, and if he killed Jacob Bennett that means he left the country after murdering him.

[MiaWUCU]

Depends on how successful the prosecutor would be in arguing that he's a flight risk. He did, after all, leave the country for three weeks, and if he killed Jacob Bennett that means he left the country after murdering him.

The prosecutor's argument would be along the lines of, "This is a homicide and no amount of bail will hold this defendant in custoday.  People ask for remand."  And that would be that.

[mockboxoflove]

XA - You don't remember a single thing you made that night, do you?
AG- I mean, I might, I don't cook very often etc
XA - WAS IT CHICKEN!?!?!

hehe WAS IT CHICKEN!?

[FundamentalPrecepts]

The prosecutor's argument would be along the lines of, "This is a homicide and no amount of bail will hold this defendant in custoday.  People ask for remand."  And that would be that.

Only if you're in a state that allows for holding someone without bail. I don't know what Midlands law is on that issue.

[Nur Rauch]

At a scrimmage this past Saturday with Hamline:

Hamline Pretrial: "Also, your honor, at this time we would like the record to reflect that it is Collin Tierney's birthday today. I ask that the court sing for Mr. Tierney. Haaaappy biiirthday, tooo..."

Everyone else: Utter silence.

Hamline Pretrial: ::stops singing before finishing the first line and clears throat:: "Ahem. Uh, well, also, with that said we would ask your honor's permission to move freely about the well of the courtroom."

[Veni Vidi Vici]

Rules 7.21 and 7.22.

Rule 7.21:  There is only one presiding judge.

Rule 7.22:  The role of the presiding judge is to rule on objections.

In judge's meetings, it is ALWAYS made clear that ONLY the presiding judge should rule on objections, and the presiding judge should never change at any point during the trial.  Students only have to adapt to one presider, not two or three. 

mm i wouldnt be so sure about that. we just got back from ORCs this weekend and in one round we had the scoring judge make 9 rulings (which was about half of them), the presiding judge spend the better part of a whole direct texting so when we objected he had no idea what was going on, and this was all in the pros. case in chief. during the break i went to the tab room and the guy came and asked the other team if they thought there was a problem and i guess they didn't mind it, until in their case in chief we objected and it got overruled then the other judge sustained it.  the instructions in judges meetings need to be much better as we have hit so many bad judges.

[Quotequeen]

until in their case in chief we objected and it got overruled then the other judge sustained it. 

Whaaa???

This is not the fault of the judges meetings.  There is only so much that can be done - they can't force people to listen or follow the instructions.

[Carnal Knowledge]

#1
Jackie Owens (female):


"No ones too big for Jackie Owens!" 


#2
Directing attorney:


"Ms. Owens, no one else was there to verify your actions with Mr. Grace that night?"


Jackie Owens:


"I sure hope not."




Ridiculously Hilarious

[Veni Vidi Vici]

literally the worst cross of jackie owens, right after statements from the suppressed threat letter got kept out...

x attny: ms. owens, are you familiar with the phrase "the juice is running"?
d attny: Objection, you're honor he's crossing the witness on suppressed evidence
x attny: I'm just asking a question, it's not referring to anything
d attny: opposing counsel is using direct language from the suppressed evidence to cross the witness who hasn't contradicted it.
x attny: (gesturing wildly) I'm just asking! I'm just curious! I just want to know if the witness has ever heard this phrase, for my own curiousity your honor!!
judge: counselor, move on.

the crossing attorney also threw a pen up and down in the air the entire duration of the cross, dropping it several times and stopping to scoop it up. so ridiculous.

do you remember who this was against? or what tournament it was?

[Veni Vidi Vici]

on a cross of Malone. the Cxattny is trying to make Malone look bad for not coming clean right away on the fraud thing.

CX: now Mr. Malone you talked to the police didnt you?
Malone: yes i did
CX but you did not tell them that you were involved in the cars being stolen off your lot?
Malone: (laughing and sort of confused) Noo
CX: and then you talked with the insurance company, right?
Malone: Yes
CX: and you didnt tell them you were involved in stealing the cars off your lot either, did you? (sounding like she had him cornered)
Malone: No mam, thats not how fraud works.

[NoFoundationNecessary]

On cross:

Xing Atty: Dr. Lee, isn't it true that calcium carbonate can be found in mud at baseball fields?

Witness: Oh yes, but only if the chalk has been artificially inseminated into the ground.

Xing Atty: So it doesn't have to be naturally occuring?

Witness: No, artificial insemination works just as well.

*facepalm*