Random Post #2: Mock Trial and Debate

       People often confuse mock trial with English debate. That is because both activities involve logic and arguments to win. Often people who excel in debate also do well in mock trial because whereas mock trial puts more emphasis on presentation and preparedness, debate is about spontaneous responses and rebuttals.
       In essence, the two activities are laying out arguments and persuading other people. In mock trial, your team must persuade the jury. Juries are listening, but your points should be laid out in an easy way to understand since they only listen, not taking notes. It can be said that it is easier to make an emotional appeal since juries are not decision-making machines but very human, whereas trained judges in debate put their emphasis on logic. Although jury trials are only held in big competitions, judges always assume that the trial is a jury trial. A debate competition is about persuading the judge to give you more points.
      The format is also very different. Mock trial is a trial. It follows similar processes to a real trial. The attorneys should always address the judge as "your honor" and always ask permission to proceed with any speech or examination. A general outline of the procedure would include: Pre-trial matters > Opening speeches by both sides (Prosecution/Plaintiff > Defense) > Direct examination of P. side witnesses along with cross examinations after each direct examination > Repeat for defense > Closing speeches. Compared to debates which is basically each speaker taking turns to have chances to speak, it is very complex.