From the Mock Trial Committee:

Here are the statements that need to be made regarding the matters that have been raised through the regionals.

Timekeepers.  Rule 7(a) speaks to this issue.  "Teams must also provide a timekeeper.  Teams with only six (6) members may allow a witness to serve as a timekeeper.  Teams with additional members must have a non-participating member serve as the timekeeper."  At the statewide competition, the timekeeper must be a student participant.  If there are only six (6) members on a team, a witness may serve as a timekeeper.

Motions in Limine.  Rule 15 speaks to this issue.  "A motion for directed verdict, acquittal, or dismissal of the case at the end of the Plaintiff/Prosecution's case may be made if the team attorney can properly support such motion with sufficient evidence. . . . No motion may be made unless expressly provided for in the problem."  A motion in limine is not specifically enumerated as a permitted motion.  Therefore, such motions will not be allowed during the statewide competition.  There had been some confusion regarding this at some of the regional competitions.  Rather than a motion in limine, the teams will need to address potentially objectionable matters as they arise during a witness' testimony with the proper evidentiary objection.  This provides all involved (the two attorneys, as well as the witness on the stand at the time)  the opportunity to score well by dealing with the objection, evidentiary ruling regarding the same, and the changes (if any) to the testimony as a result of the Presiding Judge's ruling as to same.

Laptops.  Rule 18 addresses this matter.  "Teams may refer only to materials included in the trial packet.  No illustrative aids of any kind may be used, unless provided in the case packet.  No enlargements or alterations of the case materials will be permitted."  The concept behind this rule is to keep everything on a level playing field.  The competition is about how well the students, operating under the same set of facts and conditions, can present their case.  Other states have addressed the issue the same way.  The Georgia Mock Trial Committee stated its position, as follows:  "Laptops are not equally available to all teams in the competition and would fall under. . . a prohibited supplemental material/prop if used during the competition rounds.  The focus of this competition is, as it has always been, on legal study and traditional advocacy.  It is not a showcase for technology."

Consistency among affidavits.  The information contained in the affidavits is presented as it is intended.  Teams should refer to Rule 3 and Item 1 of the Stipulations.  Witnesses are bound by the information contained within their own statements.

Legal Questions.  There have been several questions submitted regarding evidentiary matters and legal analysis of the case materials.  We cannot make any statements or provide legal advice regarding evidentiary matters or legal theories that should or should not be pursued as part of the competition.

Rule 10(a) mandates that different attorneys on a team must do opening and closing arguments during a competition round.  In other words, if an attorney on Team A gives the opening argument, that same attorney may not also give the closing argument in the same round.

We hope these clarifications will avoid any confusion at the statewide competition and allow the teams time to prepare accordingly.

Thanks,

2008 Mock Trial Committee

Click HERE for the 2008 Rule Waiver Final (2008 only)

If you have any questions regarding Mock Trial, please feel free to contact Rene Garner, Mock Trial Coordinator at The Mississippi Bar, at 601-355-9226 or email rgarner@msbar.org.