[Vision2020] Case closed: Future lawyers in training -- Moscow school wins mock trial competition against Bishop Kelly

Bruce and Jean Livingston jeanlivingston@turbonet.com
Fri, 9 Apr 2004 15:07:15 -0700


I can't agree with some of Wayne's criticism of the Logos Mock trial team or
the legal system.  Sounds to me like they did a fine job within the rules.

Generally, asking a question to which an answer may not be allowed is
neither dishonest nor cheating in our legal system.  The opposing lawyer has
to object to an improper question.  If the opposing lawyer chooses not to
object to an objectionable question, the witness must answer the question.
If the opposing lawyer objects to a question and the judge sustains the
objection, the witness may not answer the question.  Frequently, a lawyer
will not object to an objectionable question as a matter of strategy.

Asking the question is ALLOWED, not cheating.  Good lawyering requires
making timely, valid objections.

An opposing lawyer may waive an objection, so not asking the potentially
objectionable question (to which you would like an answer, if you could get
it) would be foolish and not in the client's interest -- unless there had
been a pre-trial order specifying that a particular area of inquiry was
forbidden.  If one violates a pretrial order by asking a particularly
improper and prejudical question, one risks a mistrial and sanctions.

Not having seen the mock trial competition, I suspect that whatever
'improper" questions got asked by the Logos team were ones that were not
specifically precluded in advance by a pre-trial order.  I congratulate the
Logos team for both their win in the competition and the deserved
recognition of a lot of hard work.  Preparation is the name of the game for
any good lawyer.

Bruce Livingston

PS  At the risk of getting into a debate about "truth", I add the following
additional comments:

Moreover, Wayne is confusing the "rules" and the "truth."  The truth is
often suppressed by the rules of evidence, in that some aspect of the story
is not allowed to be told in court.  That is one reason that lawyers
sometimes fail to raise a meritorious objection to a question  -- the lawyer
may prefer to be viewed as someone who facilitates getting the whole story
told and not suppressing part of the story based on objections under
technical rules of evidence.

The rules of evidence control what parts of the story may be told in court.
When an objection is sustained, often the "truth" is kept OUT of court.
Generally the rules of evidence admit or exclude evidence based on the
notion that an anwer to a question might not be "relevant" or might be
relevant but so unimportant, compared to its potentially prejudicial impact,
that it won't be allowed.  Other rules preclude some hearsay evidence even
though it may be "true" that someone said something outside of court,
because we perceive it to be more reliable to obtain testimony under oath
from the person directly and because the truthfulness of the testimony may
be better evaluated by a jury that can see the person testifying.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <thansen@moscow.com>
To: "Art Deco aka W. Fox" <deco@moscow.com>; "Vision 2020"
<vision2020@moscow.com>
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 1:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Case closed: Future lawyers in training -- Moscow
school wins mock trial competition against Bishop Kelly


> Recommendaiton:  See the movie "And Justice for All" starring Al Pacino.
>
> It pretty much reflects my attitude toward our court system (notice that I
> said "court" system and not "justice" system).
>
> Our justice system is geared toward attaining justice.  Our court system
is
> geared toward winning.  If we are fortunate, sometimes justice is a side
effect
> of our court system.  Defense counsels go to court with one goal in mind,
"Win
> this for the client."  Whether or not the client is guilty is
insignificant.
> The more notches under the "W" column, the better for the attorney of
record.
>
> Sure.  It would be nice if all attorneys put their cards on the table face
up
> after the "game" is over.  But after the last card is played, all we do is
> count our winnings (those that we are entitled to and the "others").
>
> It is all a matter of winning.
>
> But then, isn't life?
>
> Tom
>
>
> > Ben, et al,
> >
> > Did you read the entire article that Dale posted?
> >
> > For example, the following:
> >
> > "But an hour before, the teams looked like the real things arguing a
capital
> > murder case involving a dog mauling, with all the subtleties seen in a
real
> > courtroom. Such as:
> > .. Asking a witness a question knowing the judge will rule it stricken,
but
> > getting it before the jury at least once. The Logos team did that a few
> times."
> >
> > The is exactly the kind of unethical, underhanded behavior that causes
the
> > populace to rank some lawyers [and all Christ Church Cult Leaders] below
the
> > bottom rung of the integrity ladder.
> >
> > The message of such conduct is "Prevail at any cost; the hell with the
truth
> and
> > the rules."  Maybe such telling conduct is appropriate on the football
field
> but
> > in courts of law where the dispensation of justice is attempted and
where real
> > people's lives and property are at stake, such conduct seems not only
immoral
> > and depraved but counter-productive to foundational goals of and the
very
> reason
> > for the existence of those courts of law.
> >
> > It is obvious that the Logos students worked hard and performed
effectively.
> I
> > might have congratulated these perhaps well-intentioned but misled young
folks
> > for their effort and for winning had they in the process refused to
follow
> their
> > instructors' obviously unscrupulous, dishonorable, though not unexpected
> > tutelage.
> >
> > The real subtext of the news article is "Send your children to Logos.
We'll
> > teach them how to prevail by cheating and dishonesty."
> >
> > Note from the quote of the news article that the Logos team cheated not
only
> > once but "a few times".
> >
> > It is too bad the opposition team did not ask for an assignment of
prejudicial
> > misconduct and a finding of contempt against the Logos team.  Had they
done
> so,
> > the outcome of the contest might have been different.
> >
> > Logos will proudly hang their victory banner [probably appropriately
near the
> > large portrait of Robert E. Lee].  In a few weeks the fecal stench of
the
> > dishonorable, unprincipled way it was won will be just small,
unpleasant,
> > nagging itch (if that) which in further time will be repressed entirely.
The
> > final paean will be "We won!  We won!  We're the greatest!" not the more
> > accurate "We cheated!  We won!  We're the sneakiest!".
> >
> > I am very saddened for our community and for the courts of law though
hardly
> > surprised that a law student who masquerades as a Christian would find
Logos'
> > conduct in this case laudable.  But Oh, Yes!  You are a graduate of
Logos -- 
> > ethical viewpoint explained.  Is Logos' dishonest conduct excused by the
> > Doctrine of Covenantal Lying or is there another justification?
> >
> >
> > Wayne
> >
> > Art Deco  (Wayne Fox)
> > deco@moscow.com
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> >
> > From: "Ben Twigg" <bentwigg@yahoo.com>
> > To: <vision2020@moscow.com>
> > Cc: <deco@moscow.com>
> > Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 9:07 AM
> > Subject: [Vision2020] Case closed: Future lawyers in training -- Moscow
school
> > wins mock trial competition against Bishop Kelly
> >
> >
> > | Wayne Fox wrote:
> > |
> > | Perhaps Logos is an ideal place for lawyers to start.
> > | The text for their logic and rhetoric studies is The
> > | Art of Deception.  How fitting for future lawyers and
> > | religious crackpots!
> > |
> > | I respond:
> > |
> > | I am not familiar with The Art of Deception, nor am I
> > | aware of any lawyers or religious crackpots that have
> > | attended Logos.
> > |
> > | I do recall being encouraged to think critically and
> > | argue persuasively during logic and rhetoric classes
> > | at Logos many years ago, and I know teachers, nurses,
> > | coaches, engineers, accountants, foresters, artists,
> > | pastors, carpenters, dieticians, musicians and small
> > | business owners that once attended Logos.
> > |
> > | News of a local school winning a statewide academic
> > | (or at least semi-academic) contest should be cause
> > | for celebration, not inspiration for insults.
> > |
> > | Probably sounding like a broken record (but hopefully
> > | in the interest of fairness),
> > |
> > | Ben Twigg
> > |
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> This message was sent by First Step Internet.
>            http://www.fsr.net/
>
>
> _____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
> ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ