As a 2L, that's preparing for my Evidence exam today - this is golden! So easy to follow, so easy to address and dismiss! I love it! Thank you. Wish I could've received the pdf but I just paused the video constantly as I drafted my own 🙂 thank you for posting
So you have any advice on how to make visual notes just like your flow chart? In my opinion this is a game changer and a great advantage for learning in general and exam taking
The answer to you question is that C and D are both correct answers. It is just that D is arguably MORE correct. This is why this is a fraudulent exam, and I would argue that the examiner crafting a flawed question like this demonstrates lack of knowledge about the law. If they gave credit for C and D, I could understand it. But you only get points for selecting D, which is dumb.
Absolute clarity with the explanations and the chart in the video, however I have tried to download it but the web page does not seem to be working for International Bar Mentors. Is there any other website where I can find it?
Iam student of law school at unc chapel hill university. I will be graduating next year with bachelor degree in Law. After this i have to find a job from USCIS. then i go back to school to get my BAR EXAM
Don’t be a corrupt government lawyer like Paul Grant Rozelle who knowingly and willfully lied to federal courts about a material fact. In doing so, he might be facing $250,000 and up to five years in federal prison. See Baysa v, Gualtieri, et., al…
@@ellis77777777 yes, I'm saying a single witness testimony is not evidence. Evidence is something that logically implies facts. Witnesses are people and people are not logical. People can be wrong or lie. Evidence can't lie or be wrong, but it can be incomplete which is why it's not proof. Two witnesses can be evidence, but only if they testify to the same thing beyond coincidence and without having had the time or opportunity to collaborate with each other or plan their their testimony before the alleged crime even happened.
@@williampennjr.4448 This subject material is taught in law school, and it is taught in a class labeled “evidence”. And yes, a single witness testimony is deemed as evidence in the eyes of the law. You may personally not weigh a single witness testimony as having very much credibility, and that is your right as a juror. But it IS very much evidence.
@@Dr.HowieFeltersnatch Well then the law is wrong. Logically, evidence is a irrefutable fact that suggest a greater fact. A witness can't be evidence because, as I said, people lie or are mistaken. An actual foot print or DNA or video of an act can't be wrong or lie. They can only be wrongly obtained or interpreted. For something to considered evidence there has to have been no possibility of intentional flaw. This is why evidence is often thrown out. If not then why throw it out?
@@williampennjr.4448 Your post is a bunch of garbage. You are trying to sound smart, but to someone who is ACTUALLY educated, we see right through your nonsense. First if all, the hallmark of someone who is pretending to be smart is they throw the word “logically” around improperly. Learn what logic is. Logic doesn’t lead you to definitions. Second, your definition of evidence is wrong. The definition of relevant evidence is: something that has the TENDENCY to make a fact more or less probable Evidence does not have to be “irrefutable” to be admissible. Almost nothing is truly “irrefutable”. You could argue nothing is, actually. Of course people lie or are mistaken. What you are referring to is “credibility” of the evidence, or “weight” of the evidence. Of course, all jurors are tasked with “weighing the credibility of the evidence”. This task does NOT change regardless of whether there is 1 singular piece of evidence, or numerous pieces of evidence. It is the same process. The legal system considers things as evidence that can be flawed. You are just factually incorrect. Happens all the time in real life court rooms, EVERY DAY.
Thank you for making this!
It’s RUclips channels like yours that truly helps us who really want to learn
Thank you ❤✝️🙂
As a 2L, that's preparing for my Evidence exam today - this is golden! So easy to follow, so easy to address and dismiss! I love it! Thank you. Wish I could've received the pdf but I just paused the video constantly as I drafted my own 🙂 thank you for posting
Thank you for this Flow Chart. Makes life a bit easier.
So you have any advice on how to make visual notes just like your flow chart?
In my opinion this is a game changer and a great advantage for learning in general and exam taking
saving my ass for my evidence exam. thanks a bunch!
So if there weren't exclamation marks in the quote, would it be a Present Sense Impression?
The answer to you question is that C and D are both correct answers.
It is just that D is arguably MORE correct.
This is why this is a fraudulent exam, and I would argue that the examiner crafting a flawed question like this demonstrates lack of knowledge about the law.
If they gave credit for C and D, I could understand it. But you only get points for selecting D, which is dumb.
Why black robe guy denies exonerating fact or matter for defendant often?
Thank you.
Can someone help I am trying to get the flow chart but the website is taking me to another website.
How can I get this and the outlines . Appears the website given is up for sale .
I truly want to try and take the Bar exam just to see how I’d do … 🤷🏻♀️🙂
I signed up for the free outline from 2 different emails. Never received anything???
Better call Saul!
Absolute clarity with the explanations and the chart in the video, however I have tried to download it but the web page does not seem to be working for International Bar Mentors. Is there any other website where I can find it?
I have the same issue seems its up for sale . Would love to get a hold of this
Hope those arrows are in the courtroom
Can someone provide the link for the Outline! Thanks
Following
has anyone actually got the outline? i can't even pull up the website
International Bar Mentors seem to be permanently closed, so the PDF is not available.
Can someone send me this chart? Thanks so much
Would that be considered a really easy question?
Yeah seems like a present sense impression an exception for hearsay
Hello, where can I have the pdf please? I did not find the link
Iam student of law school at unc chapel hill university. I will be graduating next year with bachelor degree in Law. After this i have to find a job from USCIS. then i go back to school to get my BAR EXAM
Don’t be a corrupt government lawyer like Paul Grant Rozelle who knowingly and willfully lied to federal courts about a material fact.
In doing so, he might be facing $250,000 and up to five years in federal prison.
See Baysa v, Gualtieri, et., al…
Is that chart what the inside of a judges brain looks like?
it's not evidence. Its witness testimony.. It would only be evidence if there was more than one witness testifying the same thing.
I think he is talking about the course.
@@ellis77777777 yes, I'm saying a single witness testimony is not evidence. Evidence is something that logically implies facts. Witnesses are people and people are not logical.
People can be wrong or lie. Evidence can't lie or be wrong, but it can be incomplete which is why it's not proof.
Two witnesses can be evidence, but only if they testify to the same thing beyond coincidence and without having had the time or opportunity to collaborate with each other or plan their their testimony before the alleged crime even happened.
@@williampennjr.4448
This subject material is taught in law school, and it is taught in a class labeled “evidence”.
And yes, a single witness testimony is deemed as evidence in the eyes of the law.
You may personally not weigh a single witness testimony as having very much credibility, and that is your right as a juror.
But it IS very much evidence.
@@Dr.HowieFeltersnatch Well then the law is wrong. Logically, evidence is a irrefutable fact that suggest a greater fact. A witness can't be evidence because, as I said, people lie or are mistaken. An actual foot print or DNA or video of an act can't be wrong or lie. They can only be wrongly obtained or interpreted.
For something to considered evidence there has to have been no possibility of intentional flaw. This is why evidence is often thrown out. If not then why throw it out?
@@williampennjr.4448
Your post is a bunch of garbage. You are trying to sound smart, but to someone who is ACTUALLY educated, we see right through your nonsense.
First if all, the hallmark of someone who is pretending to be smart is they throw the word “logically” around improperly.
Learn what logic is. Logic doesn’t lead you to definitions.
Second, your definition of evidence is wrong.
The definition of relevant evidence is: something that has the TENDENCY to make a fact more or less probable
Evidence does not have to be “irrefutable” to be admissible. Almost nothing is truly “irrefutable”. You could argue nothing is, actually.
Of course people lie or are mistaken. What you are referring to is “credibility” of the evidence, or “weight” of the evidence.
Of course, all jurors are tasked with “weighing the credibility of the evidence”.
This task does NOT change regardless of whether there is 1 singular piece of evidence, or numerous pieces of evidence. It is the same process.
The legal system considers things as evidence that can be flawed. You are just factually incorrect. Happens all the time in real life court rooms, EVERY DAY.