I'm a law student too and have only participated in a moot competition once, but, their argumentative skills gave me the goose bumps *_* . All the speakers are well.
@@marilousacop7338 I'm in my second year of law and I have social anxiety too, but I learned that you sound a lot smarter and calmer than you think you do when you present. I always thought my presentations were terrible, but the teacher would give me awesome feedback, which made me think that you can really fake confidence and make people believe that you understand the content. And, honestly, moots and presentations aren't even that bad because you form a bond with your peers and teachers that makes you less nervous to present in class. Even if you mess up, it's not likely that anyone would take a piss at your misfortunes. Plus, cold calling is unlikely (at least at my uni), so teachers won't normally force you to answer questions in a lecture or tutorial class.
@@farizaali3874 woah I just realized I've been a victim of a misconception for years now. I actually thought that if you mess up, you'll immediately fail and get yelled at. My mom's a law graduate so I have all the books I need here already. All I need now is to actually motivate myself and be productive af.
@@marilousacop7338 You won't fail unless you've nailed the key ideas! Even if your presentation doesn't go well, you're super unlikely to fail unless it had insufficient content or you didn't understand the concepts properly. And teachers will NEVER yell at you for getting something wrong; they'll tell you how to improve for the future. I've gotten stuff wrong and taken feedback personally, but it's crucial to understand that the feedback is there to help you for your next assessment. Motivating yourself will be hard sometimes because the work load seems too much, but focus on things that are important (e.g. Going to lectures and preparing for the tutorials). You don't really have to do ALL the readings, unless you want to make exam notes and case summaries will become your best friend.
Wow. What an amazing group of young professionals. Yes, I will call them professional. As they they were professional in every aspect Of their demeanour, presentation, and the substantive knowledge they maintained and presented throughout. I am always amazed at how impressive young minds can be! Thank you and congratulations on a job well done!
@@awanaalislam562 the students probably rehearsed their speech a hundred times before this and has prepared for all questions meanwhile the judges probably received the brief a few days prior to this event. The students were still exellent tho
Tomorrow I will be having my 1st moots trial and this has give me a glimpse of what am supposed to do during moots ..👍 I’m much obliged counsel ...! U guys did a great job 💪
I am preparing for my law entrance exam and after watching this, I am hell scared to become a lawyer all due to my anxiety & poor public speaking skills. Any suggestion/tip please 🙏😭
All speakers are awesome. They all have place in out Legal Justice System. They are HSlers. I have seen fellow lawyers who cannot make/defend an argument to save their lives.
Im also part of this profession.. well the first thing that attract me in this video is the way of talking of the first participent i wish i could speak like him.
The Defence arguments rested mainly on two points: (1) anonymous complaint and (2) Legitimate expectation of privacy. But can such arguments negate the hard fact that crime did take place and that clinching evidence had come on record. I would have loved to hear a reasoned judgment as well. Oh yes, I know the moot court has its own limitations. On the whole, it was a unique experience for me to know about the American judicial system. Thanks and regards.
Even if a crime had taken place, the methods in getting that evidence was illegal (well argued by defence as the plain sight/view doctrine) . So, the evidence is inadmissible, meaning that whatever the crime, a prosecution can't be mounted
Even drones now available to public, extra features such zoom are not accessible for public technology which is not in general public use Kyllo v. United States
I don't know if I'm I tripping I only watched the first one and when you foxes on him you will kind see his hand stately shaking damn that must be very nerve racking
Kinkade Koolaid I agree, he held his ground. Just like when this girl in my class held her ground about something that case law showed was wrong...it’s nice to hold your ground, but it also looks silly when your argument is flawed. I don’t know what they’re discussing in this video at all and just watched it briefly. Props to them anyhow, being a high school student and mooting is something to be proud of.
1. Mere interrogation of Seargent on trial will conclude that use of drone on an anonymous tip is 'Sufficient Reasonable Suspicion', and i think Seargent was having that prior exp as he had been on Campus. Since the tip was right and detailed, there 80% chance to convert this argument in his favor 2. Regarding "Reasonable expectation of privacy" by accused is also correct, as the hill was a clear vantage point, and it may dilute it to some extent but doesn't make it zero. Making fences as per state law was enough to prove that he was privacy seeker for his curtilage, secondly hill was not publicly accessible nor it was meant to be peek specifically into his property. Hence even if it dilutes it doesn't 100%. 3. Proving the first argument will make second void. As drone is used out of "Sufficient reasonable suspicion".
The anonymous source was unreliable due to the anonymous information no name or whereabouts. Also the drone was an intrusion of The Respondents occupancy, the government used extra measures to see the respondent and the hill is not ground level because you are inclined therefore enhancing viewing proximity. Clearly this is a 4th amendment violation
Your comment about the ground level is easily refutable, based on the fact that enhancing your view through methods that neither involve privacy breaches through Breaking and Entering, nor the use of a device, tool, or some type of contraption that would allow you to increase your vantage point's panoramic 360° sphere of visibility. So with no use of outside devices or misuse of the existing landscape, your assertion does not stand.
on the contrary, anonymous tip was detailed one with names, location and details of offences/wrongs. Don't forget it was a correct one in all perspectives as well. Lastly as far as the "Sufficient Reasonable Suspicion" is considered, prior association is evident to support and oral trial will definitely aid the petitioner, on the contrary defense is purely relying on records which doesn't mention anything like that.
I know from experience that facing the judges questions is the most difficult part in mooting. You never properly prepare for these questions until when they are asked. Brilliant responds by the students. Unbelievable that they’re high schoolers
Would it be correct to say that these are "Skeleton arguments"? I'm wondering why no evidence was shown to the court. Shouldnt documents of evidence be shown during the lawyers argument?
Luke Jones not in a moot court competition mate. There are trial court competition, which are actually much closer to how actual courts work and they do have evidences and witnesses
Moot Courts mimic appellate courts, meaning no new evidence is introduced. Its basically twisting the arguments of trial court without bringing new facts to light.
Right, ok. So all necessary evidence must be filed at the trial stage. Can it be assumed that the appellate judge(s) looked at all the evidence that was filed during the trial stage, before the appeal hearing? Thanks.
Yeah pretty much. In California we put in some background case knowledge into the beginning of our arguments in case the judge didn't read the case facts but it's usually assumed they know what the case is.
I'm a law student too and have only participated in a moot competition once, but, their argumentative skills gave me the goose bumps *_* . All the speakers are well.
Ds it feel scary to speak up? Do lawyers really speak like that?
@@nuwangichandrakirthi3612 indeed yes
Yess me also
@@nuwangichandrakirthi3612 yess bec it's really imp to argue ur matters in proper way
Me too
Impressed by first speaker, the way he argu with reference of his case is highly appreciated.
studying law is something that give me more strong on understanding court ethics and code
Bro understand anything say bro
It's helpful to me
These kids are dope. I sucked on my first argument. Heart was pounding and hands shaking. Great job
Did you finish your law school? If so how was it?
@@revacheema4453Also keen!
gurl I was thinking of taking law when I graduate from highschool but watching this, uhmm no--MY SOCIAL ANXIETY AND LAZINESS CANNOT.
That's me rn 😔 gotta find something I could do for the rest of my life...
@@bvnny1379 same here I rlly don't know what I want for now smh my friends already have a career path while I'm just here doin nothin
@@marilousacop7338 I'm in my second year of law and I have social anxiety too, but I learned that you sound a lot smarter and calmer than you think you do when you present. I always thought my presentations were terrible, but the teacher would give me awesome feedback, which made me think that you can really fake confidence and make people believe that you understand the content. And, honestly, moots and presentations aren't even that bad because you form a bond with your peers and teachers that makes you less nervous to present in class. Even if you mess up, it's not likely that anyone would take a piss at your misfortunes. Plus, cold calling is unlikely (at least at my uni), so teachers won't normally force you to answer questions in a lecture or tutorial class.
@@farizaali3874 woah I just realized I've been a victim of a misconception for years now. I actually thought that if you mess up, you'll immediately fail and get yelled at. My mom's a law graduate so I have all the books I need here already. All I need now is to actually motivate myself and be productive af.
@@marilousacop7338 You won't fail unless you've nailed the key ideas! Even if your presentation doesn't go well, you're super unlikely to fail unless it had insufficient content or you didn't understand the concepts properly. And teachers will NEVER yell at you for getting something wrong; they'll tell you how to improve for the future. I've gotten stuff wrong and taken feedback personally, but it's crucial to understand that the feedback is there to help you for your next assessment. Motivating yourself will be hard sometimes because the work load seems too much, but focus on things that are important (e.g. Going to lectures and preparing for the tutorials). You don't really have to do ALL the readings, unless you want to make exam notes and case summaries will become your best friend.
Wow. What an amazing group of young professionals. Yes, I will call them professional. As they they were professional in every aspect Of their demeanour, presentation, and the substantive knowledge they maintained and presented throughout. I am always amazed at how impressive young minds can be! Thank you and congratulations on a job well done!
This was amazing both teams did an awesome exqusite job and I pray they gave close ear to each justice advice and learned the differences
I can’t wait to head to law school THIS right here is what you call AMAZING TALENTED people this was GOOD 😊 👍🏾
It's so weird how the judges literally stutter more than the students like-
The students literally studied for this
@@izaccmoreno7354 n the judges have been doing this before the students were even born
@@izaccmoreno7354 say touche
@@awanaalislam562 the students probably rehearsed their speech a hundred times before this and has prepared for all questions meanwhile the judges probably received the brief a few days prior to this event. The students were still exellent tho
I said the same thing
Tomorrow I will be having my 1st moots trial and this has give me a glimpse of what am supposed to do during moots ..👍 I’m much obliged counsel ...! U guys did a great job 💪
Where are you from? Korea?
I'd like to warn everyone that there's a very loud noise at 14:30. You should probably turn off your sound for a second.
Mike Hermida and again at 44:54
scared the hell out of me
Mike Hermida too high for them kind of nosies 😂
I could've gone deaf plus I was wearing headphones so thanks for that😃
@@zaiharris8509 I guess the video is just of 49 mins
I am preparing for my law entrance exam and after watching this, I am hell scared to become a lawyer all due to my anxiety & poor public speaking skills. Any suggestion/tip please 🙏😭
Start speaking small sentences from any video of public speaking ,slowly slowing increase the matter then fortunately u would be good in speaking
In no time you’ll be the best don’t worry everything takes time
Me too😭
3rd speaker did Amazing. She was extremely composed and answered questions directly.
Because she’s black?
@@BudFuddlacker lol you have hit the bulls eye lol
That ALL did amazing, but the girl that spoke last was the best. She was clear, concise, and presented very well!
All speakers are awesome. They all have place in out Legal Justice System. They are HSlers. I have seen fellow lawyers who cannot make/defend an argument to save their lives.
the second speaker. wow! absolutely amazing.
Me: 1st year law student
what have I gotten myself into 😢
I dont know what the process is like in America but in the uk i can pretty much say goodbye to my social life and free time😂
Absolutely Amazing performance of all the team members, their arguments were worth listening and have good moot skills.
I hope we have a such good thing in my country
Im also part of this profession.. well the first thing that attract me in this video is the way of talking of the first participent i wish i could speak like him.
These people must be really smart
Wow - I am amazed by this - they perform better than some real lawyers . Way to go kids
I’m trying to be a lawyer so i wanna see what i might do
sameee😂
I just started in January and it is nothing like this. It is supposed to be onsite but due to COVID it is through ZOOM.
Same 😳
same. Now I am researching either I should be a lawyer or not🤣
bravo to the first speaker
Great articulations from the opposing side.
If I had known that law and safety included this, I would have another endorsement. My friend told me they did this in high school.
This one was an interesting case. I can’t believe I watched the whole video. It had me gripped. All 4 of them were so good.
Then lets argue with me on the above points, what wud you like to be state lawyer or defence lawyer?
Wow everyone of you are so amazing
First speaker excellent,
Second speaker spoke well and good,
Third speaker well organized.
For constant motivation follow "remind your strength"
I never knew they did these for high schoolers. Impressive!
All Spekar are really speaks fabulous
Dada tume law katha ka
BRILLIANT KID WITH A GREAT POTENCIAL.
All Speakers are awesome but especially fast Speaker was too good
Justice quence really wanted to help the first team! Really Sweet
Judges made a case for them instead.
Goose bumps ❤
The fourth speaker is so calm and eloquent. I hope to be like her in the future!
The Defence arguments rested mainly on two points: (1) anonymous complaint and (2) Legitimate expectation of privacy. But can such arguments negate the hard fact that crime did take place and that clinching evidence had come on record. I would have loved to hear a reasoned judgment as well. Oh yes, I know the moot court has its own limitations. On the whole, it was a unique experience for me to know about the American judicial system. Thanks and regards.
Even if a crime had taken place, the methods in getting that evidence was illegal (well argued by defence as the plain sight/view doctrine) . So, the evidence is inadmissible, meaning that whatever the crime, a prosecution can't be mounted
Anonymous tip is not sufficient unless additional corroboration added Florida v. J.L.
Even drones now available to public, extra features such zoom are not accessible for public technology which is not in general public use Kyllo v. United States
Everyone fabulous ❤
I am law student and I want pasitive friendship with you. Plz send me message on my what's app number +923076627186
This argument is awesome and it's giving me a driving force for me to be doing my research wide
No one:
Captions at 2:49 - My name is "Condom loose Nick."
😂😂😂
I don't know if I'm I tripping I only watched the first one and when you foxes on him you will kind see his hand stately shaking damn that must be very nerve racking
first speaker really speak fabulous....
The hill being ground level though? Umm
@@Checkersss lol it's easy to pic on the little things but this guy presented very well and held his ground
Kinkade Koolaid I agree, he held his ground. Just like when this girl in my class held her ground about something that case law showed was wrong...it’s nice to hold your ground, but it also looks silly when your argument is flawed.
I don’t know what they’re discussing in this video at all and just watched it briefly. Props to them anyhow, being a high school student and mooting is something to be proud of.
Confidence level 💯
Fluency in English 💯
I'm amazed 💯 .
I am also a law student .i also participated in national trial moot court competition.lawyers arguments.
i don't know why this pops up in my recommendations wtf
🤣🤣🤣🤣 same here
Same but I’m not disappointed
Maybe it is a hint you belong in law school lol.....😁
Grade 9 and want to study law,still improving my speaking skills,i watches this more than 5 times in a day🦔
Good luck I believe in you. Mines is tomorrow.
Some children of society got a lot to learn about the real world!
First speaker I'm hiring you lol
The first speaker is amazing😵
It's almost done
Law is my aim
I want to be a lawyer in future
20:35 until she finishes speaking is impressive, very well laid out argument!!
It beautiful
1. Mere interrogation of Seargent on trial will conclude that use of drone on an anonymous tip is 'Sufficient Reasonable Suspicion', and i think Seargent was having that prior exp as he had been on Campus. Since the tip was right and detailed, there 80% chance to convert this argument in his favor
2. Regarding "Reasonable expectation of privacy" by accused is also correct, as the hill was a clear vantage point, and it may dilute it to some extent but doesn't make it zero. Making fences as per state law was enough to prove that he was privacy seeker for his curtilage, secondly hill was not publicly accessible nor it was meant to be peek specifically into his property. Hence even if it dilutes it doesn't 100%.
3. Proving the first argument will make second void. As drone is used out of "Sufficient reasonable suspicion".
The first speaker was really good👌👍
armyyyyy
🤨Kpopers
What's his name?
Ikr ..he was just so good
@@nobodyandfuckyou5659 they r hella annoying
excellent...
Lagend
The all presented the case very well 👌👏
Direct to supreme court
The anonymous source was unreliable due to the anonymous information no name or whereabouts. Also the drone was an intrusion of The Respondents occupancy, the government used extra measures to see the respondent and the hill is not ground level because you are inclined therefore enhancing viewing proximity. Clearly this is a 4th amendment violation
Your comment about the ground level is easily refutable, based on the fact that enhancing your view through methods that neither involve privacy breaches through Breaking and Entering, nor the use of a device, tool, or some type of contraption that would allow you to increase your vantage point's panoramic 360° sphere of visibility. So with no use of outside devices or misuse of the existing landscape, your assertion does not stand.
Jeffrey Bonanno damnn😳
Jeffrey Bonanno I see you didn’t mention anything about the anonymous info lol
I think it Florida v. Riley it was 400ft
on the contrary, anonymous tip was detailed one with names, location and details of offences/wrongs. Don't forget it was a correct one in all perspectives as well.
Lastly as far as the "Sufficient Reasonable Suspicion" is considered, prior association is evident to support and oral trial will definitely aid the petitioner, on the contrary defense is purely relying on records which doesn't mention anything like that.
The first speaker is 💯
The only thing I would say is they need to work on sounding less robotic/ scripted , otherwise all I have to say is I’m jealous of them lol
I need Namjoon's Iq before I study Law
Lol I found a fellow ARMY 💜
For reallllll
Yeeeeee armyyyyyyy 💜yes we need Namjoon's Iq level for sure
@@jarileycastillo6946 army💜💜💜
armies are everywhere 🤣🤣
This is awesome
Well spoken by the first kid
That's quite bold.
Owo im impressed!
nice voice and very clear Word.
I know from experience that facing the judges questions is the most difficult part in mooting. You never properly prepare for these questions until when they are asked.
Brilliant responds by the students. Unbelievable that they’re high schoolers
something good for those who are doing law in the university
Listening to him is giving me a panic attack
last female speaker is very talented argument delivered step by step
Love you 💓💓💓
If I was asked to do this when I was in high school, I wouldn't be able to say a word
I wish to participate one day
I wish you good luck
The speaker is really exeptional
my 1st moot court is on 30 oct 2021. wish me luckkkk
Good speech
In regards to curtilage, my shotgun says otherwise; wanna test that theory?
Excellent
An example of young people learning about the parasitic BARS
Is there a place, I can watch the final ruling by the FL supreme court? Thanks!
I too add extremely curious to know the ruling. Did you ever find out? please let me know
I love it
As a law student, I am very impressed.
💪
Nice work.
So good
But first, we have to set the definition of ground.
...is this a “Veep” reference?
Also the definition of person.
Second speaker is such amazing
What is the fact of case ?
I couldn't more understand fast english 😯😯😯but it was nice 👍👍
Really nice
Which country .....
I came here to see Moot 👀
What we’re rulings?
2021
First one is good 👍🏻
Would it be correct to say that these are "Skeleton arguments"? I'm wondering why no evidence was shown to the court. Shouldnt documents of evidence be shown during the lawyers argument?
Luke Jones not in a moot court competition mate.
There are trial court competition, which are actually much closer to how actual courts work and they do have evidences and witnesses
Moot Courts mimic appellate courts, meaning no new evidence is introduced. Its basically twisting the arguments of trial court without bringing new facts to light.
Right, ok. So all necessary evidence must be filed at the trial stage. Can it be assumed that the appellate judge(s) looked at all the evidence that was filed during the trial stage, before the appeal hearing? Thanks.
Yeah pretty much. In California we put in some background case knowledge into the beginning of our arguments in case the judge didn't read the case facts but it's usually assumed they know what the case is.
I am a law student.. I participated in moot court competition once.
I am law student and I want pasitive friendship with you. Plz send me message on my what's app number +923076627186
Can you please tell me the legal definition of person.
@@slimshady3648 are you the real slim shady?
@@pikacheem8432 I am slim shady but not Marshall Mathers aka Eminem
Law is a mouse trap easy to enter but not easy to get of it,finally judiciary is a mess of complaints and impotency of disposal
We are can de lowyer oneday