Last Updated: July 18, 2016 American Mock Trial Association MIDLANDS RULES OF EVIDENCE Article I. Rule 101. Scope; Definitions (a) Scope. These rules apply to proceedings in the courts of the State of Midlands. The specific courts and proceedings to which the rules apply, along with exceptions, are set out in Rule 1101. No bureaucratic organizations whose edicts govern conduct in Midlands are considered to exist unless specified within the case problem. Comment: Midlands is recognized as being in the United States and governed by the U.S. Constitution. (b) Definitions. In these rules (1) \"civil case\" means a civil action or proceeding; (2) \"criminal case\" includes a criminal proceeding; (3) \"public office\" includes a public agency; (4) \"record\" includes a memorandum, report, or data compilation; (5) a \"rule prescribed by the Midlands Supreme Court\" means a rule adopted by the Midlands Supreme Court under statutory authority; and (6) a reference to any kind of written material or any other medium includes electronically stored information. Rule 102. Purpose These rules should be construed so as to administer every proceeding fairly, eliminate unjustifiable expense and delay, and promote the development of evidence law, to the end of ascertaining the truth and securing a just determination. Rule 103. Rulings on Evidence (a) Preserving a Claim of Error. A party may claim error in a ruling to admit or exclude evidence only if the error affects a substantial right of the party and: (1) if the ruling admits evidence, a party, on the record: (A) timely objects or moves to strike; and (B) states the specific ground, unless it was apparent from the context; or (2) if the ruling excludes evidence, a party informs the court of its substance by an offer of proof, unless the substance was apparent from the context. (b) Not Needing to Renew an Objection or Offer of Proof. Once the Court rules definitively on the record - either before or at trial - a party need not renew an objection or offer of proof to preserve a claim of error for appeal. (c) Omitted. (d) Preventing the Jury from Hearing Inadmissible Evidence. To the extent practicable, the court must conduct a jury trial so that inadmissible evidence is not suggested to the jury by any means. (e) Taking Notice of Plain Error. A court may take notice of a plain error affecting a substantial right, even if the claim of error was not properly preserved. -1- Last Updated: July 18, 2016 Rule 104. Preliminary Questions (a) In General. The court must decide any preliminary question about whether a witness is qualified, a privilege exists, or evidence is admissible. In so deciding, the court is not bound by evidence rules, except those on privilege. (b) Relevance That Depends on a Fact. When the relevance of evidence depends on whether a fact exists, proof must be introduced sufficient to support a finding that the fact does exist. The court may admit the proposed evidence on the condition that the proof be introduced later. (c) Omitted. (d) Omitted. (e) Evidence Relevant to Weight and Credibility. This rule does not limit a party's right to introduce before the jury evidence that is relevant to the weight or credibility of other evidence. Rule 105. Omitted Rule 106. Remainder of or Related Writings or Recorded Statements If a party introduces all or part of a writing or recorded statement, an adverse party may require the introduction, at that time, of any other part - or any other writing or recorded statement - that in fairness ought to be considered at the same time. Comment: This rule of completeness applies only to material provided in the case packet. This rule does not reference any material not provided in the case packet. Article II. Rule 201. Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts (a) Scope. This rule governs judicial notice of an adjudicative fact only, not a legislative fact. (b) Kinds of Facts That May Be Judicially Noticed. The court may judicially notice a fact that is not subject to reasonable dispute because it: (1) is generally known within the trial court's territorial jurisdiction; or (2) can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. (c) Taking Notice. The court: (1) omitted; (2) must take judicial notice if a party requests it and the court is supplied with the necessary information. (d) Timing. The court may take judicial notice at any stage of the proceeding. (e) Opportunity to Be Heard. On timely request, a party is entitled to be heard on the propriety of taking judicial notice and the nature of the fact to be noticed. If the court takes judicial notice before notifying a party, the party, on request, is still entitled to be heard. (f) Instructing the Jury. In a civil case, the court must instruct the jury to accept the noticed fact as conclusive. In a criminal case, the court must instruct the jury that it may or may not accept the noticed fact as conclusive. Article III. Rule 301. Presumptions in Civil Actions Generally In a civil case, unless a Midlands statute or these rules provide otherwise, the party against whom a presumption is directed has the burden of producing evidence to rebut the presumption. But this rule does not shift the burden of persuasion, which remains on the party who had it originally. -2- Last Updated: July 18, 2016 Rule 302. Omitted Article IV. Rule 401. Test for Relevant Evidence Evidence is relevant if: (a) it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; and (b) the fact is of consequence in determining the action. Rule 402. General Admissibility of Relevant Evidence Relevant evidence is admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise: the United States Constitution; these rules; or other rules prescribed in Midlands. Irrelevant evidence is not admissible. Comment: Relevant evidence is limited to the information supplied by or reasonably inferred from the case materials supplied by AMTA. For further explanation see Rule 8.9 of the AMTA Rulebook. Rule 403. Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time, or Other Reasons The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. Rule 404. Character Evidence; Crimes or Other Acts (a) Character Evidence. (1) Prohibited Uses. Evidence of a person's character or character trait is not admissible to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character or trait. (2) Exceptions for a Defendant or Victim in a Criminal Case. The following exceptions apply in a criminal case: (A) A defendant may offer evidence of the defendant's pertinent trait, and if the evidence is admitted, the prosecutor may offer evidence to rebut it. In lieu of rebuttal witness availability, a defendant must first notify the court and opposing counsel in writing at the Captains' Meeting of the intention to offer such evidence. If such notice is given, the form included with these Rules of Evidence should be completed and presented to the judges with the ballots, and the prosecution may also offer such character evidence during its case-in-chief. (B) A defendant may offer evidence of an alleged victim's pertinent trait, and if the evidence is admitted, the prosecutor may: (i) offer evidence to rebut it; and (ii) offer evidence of the defendant's same trait. In lieu of rebuttal witness availability, a defendant must first notify opposing counsel in writing at the Captains' Meeting of the intention to offer such evidence. If such notice is given, the form included with these Rules of Evidence should be completed -3- Last Updated: July 18, 2016 and presented to the judges with the ballots, and the prosecution may also offer such character evidence during its case-in-chief. (C) In a homicide case, the prosecutor may offer evidence of the alleged victim's trait of peacefulness to rebut evidence that the victim was the first aggressor. (3) Exceptions for a Witness. Evidence of a witness's character may be admitted under Rules 607, 608, and 609. (b) Crimes, Wrongs, or Other Acts. (1) Prohibited Uses. Evidence of a crime, wrong, or other act is not admissible to prove a person's character in order to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character. (2) Permitted Uses; Notice in a Criminal Case. This evidence may be admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident. The prosecution in a criminal case shall provide written notice of such intent prior to witness selection in the Captains' Meeting. Rule 405. Methods of Proving Character (a) By Reputation or Opinion. When evidence of a person's character or character trait is admissible, it may be proved by testimony about the person's reputation or by testimony in the form of an opinion. On cross-examination of the character witness, the court may allow inquiry into relevant specific instances of the person's conduct. (b) By Specific Instances of Conduct. When a person's character or character trait is an essential element of a charge, claim, or defense, the character or trait may also be proved by relevant specific instances of the person's conduct. Rule 406. Habit; Routine Practice Evidence of a person's habit or an organization's routine practice may be admitted to prove that on a particular occasion the person or organization acted in accordance with the habit or routine practice. The court may admit this evidence regardless of whether it is corroborated or whether there was an eyewitness. Rule 407. Subsequent Remedial Measures When measures are taken that would have made an earlier injury or harm less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove: negligence; culpable conduct; a defect in a product or its design; or a need for a warning or instruction. But the court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as impeachment or - if disputed - proving ownership, control, or the feasibility of precautionary measures. Rule 408. Compromise Offers and Negotiations (a) Prohibited Uses. Evidence of the following is not admissible - on behalf of any party - either to prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim or to impeach by a prior inconsistent statement or a contradiction: (1) furnishing, promising, or offering - or accepting, promising to accept, or offering to accept - a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise the claim; and -4- Last Updated: July 18, 2016 (2) conduct or a statement made during compromise negotiations about the claim - except when offered in a criminal case and when the negotiations related to a claim by a public office in the exercise of its regulatory, investigative, or enforcement authority. (b) Exceptions. The court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as proving a witness's bias or prejudice, negating a contention of undue delay, or proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution. Rule 409. Offers to Pay Medical and Similar Expenses Evidence of furnishing, promising to pay, or offering to pay medical, hospital, or similar expenses resulting from an injury is not admissible to prove liability for the injury. Rule 410. Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements (a) Prohibited Uses. In a civil or criminal case, evidence of the following is not admissible against the defendant who made the plea or participated in the plea discussions: (1) a guilty plea that was later withdrawn; (2) a nolo contendere plea; (3) omitted; or (4) a statement made during plea discussions with an attorney for the prosecuting authority if the discussions did not result in a guilty plea or they resulted in a later-withdrawn guilty plea. (b) Exceptions. The court may admit a statement described in Rule 410(a)(3) or (4): (1) in any proceeding in which another statement made during the same plea or plea discussions has been introduced, if in fairness the statements ought to be considered together; or (2) in a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement, if the defendant made the statement under oath, on the record and with counsel present. Rule 411. Liability Insurance Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible to prove whether the person acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully. But the court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as proving a witness's bias or prejudice or proving agency, ownership, or control. Rule 412. Omitted Rule 413. Omitted Rule 414. Omitted Rule 415. Omitted Article V. Rule 501. Privileges in General Only privileges granted by a statute of the state of Midlands or by Midlands case law shall be recognized. Rule 502. Omitted -5- Last Updated: July 18, 2016 Article VI. Rule 601. Competency to Testify in General Every person is competent to be a witness unless these rules provide otherwise. Rule 602. Need for Personal Knowledge A witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may, but need not, consist of the witness's own testimony. This rule is subject to the provisions of Rule 703, relating to opinion testimony by expert witnesses. Rule 603. Oath or Affirmation to Testify Truthfully Before testifying, a witness shall be presumed to have been sworn in, by an oath or affirmation to testify truthfully administered in a form designed to impress that duty on the witness's conscience. Rule 604. Omitted Rule 605. Judge's Competency as a Witness The presiding judge may not testify as a witness at the trial. A party need not object to preserve the issue. Rule 606. Omitted Rule 607. Who May Impeach a Witness Any party, including the party that called the witness, may attack the witness's credibility. Rule 608. A Witness's Character for Truthfulness or Untruthfulness (a) Reputation or Opinion Evidence. A witness's credibility may be attacked or supported by testimony about the witness's reputation for having a character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, or by testimony in the form of an opinion about that character. But evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the witness's character for truthfulness has been attacked. Comment: Written notice is required in civil and criminal cases. In lieu of rebuttal witness availability, if the party attacking the character of the witness for truthfulness is the defense and the witness is a plaintiff/prosecution witness, the defense must first notify opposing counsel in writing at the Captains' Meeting of the intention to offer such evidence. If such notice is given, the form included with these Rules of Evidence should be completed and presented to the judges with the ballots, and the plaintiff/prosecution may offer evidence of truthful character during its case-in-chief. (b) Specific Instances of Conduct. Except for a criminal conviction under Rule 609, extrinsic evidence is not admissible to prove specific instances of a witness's conduct in order to attack or support the witness's character for truthfulness. But the court may, on cross-examination, allow them to be inquired into if they are probative of the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness of: (1) the witness; or (2) another witness whose character the witness being cross-examined has testified about. -6- Last Updated: July 18, 2016 Rule 609. Impeachment by Evidence of a Criminal Conviction (a) In General. The following rules apply to attacking a witness's character for truthfulness by evidence of a criminal conviction: (1) for a crime that, in the convicting jurisdiction, was punishable by death or by imprisonment for more than one year, the evidence: (A) must be admitted, subject to Rule 403, in a civil case or in a criminal case in which the witness is not a defendant; and (B) must be admitted in a criminal case in which the witness is a defendant, if the probative value of the evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect to that defendant; and (2) for any crime regardless of the punishment, the evidence must be admitted if the court can determine that establishing the elements of the crime required proving - or the witness's admitting - a dishonest act or false statement. (b) Limit on Using the Evidence After 10 Years. This subdivision (b) applies if more than 10 years have passed since the witness's conviction or release from confinement for it, whichever is later. Evidence of the conviction is admissible only if: (1) its probative value, supported by specific facts and circumstances, substantially outweighs its prejudicial effect; and (2) the proponent gives an adverse party reasonable written notice of the intent to use it so that the party has a fair opportunity to contest its use. (c) Effect of a Pardon, Annulment, or Certificate of Rehabilitation. Evidence of a conviction is not admissible if: (1) the conviction has been the subject of a pardon, annulment, certificate of rehabilitation, or other equivalent procedure based on a finding that the person has been rehabilitated, and the person has not been convicted of a later crime punishable by death or by imprisonment for more than one year; or (2) the conviction has been the subject of a pardon, annulment, or other equivalent procedure based on a finding of innocence. (d) Juvenile Adjudications. Evidence of a juvenile adjudication is admissible under this rule only if: (1) it is offered in a criminal case; (2) the adjudication was of a witness other than the defendant; (3) an adult's conviction for that offense would be admissible to attack the adult's credibility; and (4) admitting the evidence is necessary to fairly determine guilt or innocence. (e) Pendency of an Appeal. A conviction that satisfies this rule is admissible even if an appeal is pending. Evidence of the pendency is also admissible. Rule 610. Religious Beliefs or Opinions Evidence of a witness's religious beliefs or opinions is not admissible to attack or support the witness's credibility. Rule 611. Mode and Order of Examining Witnesses and Presenting Evidence (a) Omitted. (b) Scope of Cross-Examination. Cross-examination, other than the initial cross-examination, should not go beyond the subject matter of the direct examination immediately preceding it and matters affecting the witness's credibility. The court may allow inquiry into additional matters as if on direct examination. -7- Last Updated: July 18, 2016 (c) Leading Questions. Leading questions should not be used on direct examination except as necessary to develop the witness's testimony. Ordinarily the court should allow leading questions: (1) on cross- examination; and (2) when a party calls a hostile witness, an adverse party, or a witness identified with an adverse party. Rule 612. Writing Used to Refresh a Witness's Memory A witness may use any material provided by AMTA to refresh memory either during or prior to giving testimony. Rule 613. Witness's Prior Statement (a) Showing or Disclosing the Statement During Examination. When examining a witness about the witness's prior statement, a party need not show it or disclose its contents to the witness. But the party must, on request, show it or disclose its contents to an adverse party's attorney. (b) Extrinsic Evidence of a Prior Inconsistent Statement. Extrinsic evidence of a witness's prior inconsistent statement is admissible only if the witness is given an opportunity to explain or deny the statement and an adverse party is given an opportunity to examine the witness about it, or if justice so requires. This subdivision (b) does not apply to an opposing party's statement under Rule 801(d)(2). Rule 614. Court's Calling or Examining a Witness Calling and/or examining of a witness by the court is not allowed. Rule 615. Excluding Witnesses. At a party's request, the court must order witnesses constructively excluded so that they cannot hear other witnesses' testimony. But this rule does not authorize constructively excluding: (a) a party who is a natural person; (b) an officer or employee of a party that is not a natural person, after being designated as the party's representative; (c) omitted; or (d) a person authorized by a statute provided in the case materials to be present. Comment: This rule does not permit the actual exclusion of students portraying witnesses. Rather, it allows for the constructive exclusion of some witnesses. Article VII. Rule 701. Opinion Testimony by Lay Witnesses If a witness is not testifying as an expert, testimony in the form of an opinion is limited to one that is: (a) rationally based on the witness's perception; (b) helpful to clearly understanding the witness's testimony or to determining a fact in issue; and (c) not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of Rule 702. -8- Last Updated: July 18, 2016 Rule 702. Testimony by Expert Witnesses A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: (a) the expert's scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue; (b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data; (c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and (d) the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case. Comment: Formal Certification of Experts Not Permitted. Unless otherwise provided in the case materials, formal certification of a witness as an expert in a specific field of expertise is not required nor permitted. Attorneys and witnesses should develop expertise and lay foundation through appropriate questioning based on the case materials provided. Judges may entertain any appropriate objections to expert witness qualifications and opinions under the Midlands Rules of Evidence. Rule 703. Bases of an Expert's Opinion Testimony An expert may base an opinion on facts or data in the case that the expert has been made aware of or personally observed. If experts in the particular field would reasonably rely on those kinds of facts or data in forming an opinion on the subject, they need not be admissible for the opinion to be admitted. But if the facts or data would otherwise be inadmissible, the proponent of the opinion may disclose them to the jury only if their probative value in helping the jury evaluate the opinion substantially outweighs their prejudicial effect. Rule 704. Opinion on an Ultimate Issue (a) In General - Not Automatically Objectionable. An opinion is not objectionable just because it embraces an ultimate issue. (b) Exception. In a criminal case, an expert witness must not state an opinion about whether the defendant did or did not have a mental state or condition that constitutes an element of the crime charged or of a defense. Those matters are for the trier of fact alone. Rule 705. Disclosing the Facts or Data Underlying an Expert's Opinion Unless the court orders otherwise, an expert may state an opinion - and give the reasons for it - without first testifying to the underlying facts or data. But the expert may be required to disclose those facts or data on cross-examination. Rule 706. Omitted Article VIII. Rule 801. Definitions That Apply to This Article; Exclusions from Hearsay (a) Statement. \"Statement\" means a person's oral assertion, written assertion, or nonverbal conduct, if the person intended it as an assertion. (b) Declarant. \"Declarant\" means the person who made the statement. (c) Hearsay. \"Hearsay\" means a statement that: (1) the declarant does not make while testifying at the current trial or hearing; and (2) a party offers in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. -9- Last Updated: July 18, 2016 (d) Statements That Are Not Hearsay. A statement that meets the following conditions is not hearsay: (1) A Declarant-Witness's Prior Statement. The declarant testifies and is subject to crossexamination about a prior statement, and the statement: (A) is inconsistent with the declarant's testimony and was given under penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding or in a deposition; (B) is consistent with the declarant's testimony and is offered to rebut an express or implied charge that the declarant recently fabricated it or acted from a recent improper influence or motive in so testifying; or (C) identifies a person as someone the declarant perceived earlier. (2) An Opposing Party's Statement. The statement is offered against an opposing party and: (A) was made by the party in an individual or representative capacity; (B) is one the party manifested that it adopted or believed to be true; (C) was made by a person whom the party authorized to make a statement on the subject; (D) was made by the party's agent or employee on a matter within the scope of that relationship and while it existed; or (E) was made by the party's coconspirator during and in furtherance of the conspiracy. The statement must be considered but does not by itself establish the declarant's authority under (C); the existence or scope of the relationship under (D); or the existence of the conspiracy or participation in it under (E). Rule 802. The Rule Against Hearsay Hearsay is not admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise: these rules; or other rules prescribed by the Midlands Supreme Court. Rule 803. Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay - Regardless of Whether the Declarant Is Available as a Witness The following are not excluded by the rule against hearsay, regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness: (1) Present Sense Impression. A statement describing or explaining an event or condition, made while or immediately after the declarant perceived it. (2) Excited Utterance. A statement relating to a startling event or condition, made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement that it caused. (3) Then-Existing Mental, Emotional, or Physical Condition. A statement of the declarant's then-existing state of mind (such as motive, intent, or plan) or emotional, sensory, or physical condition (such as mental feeling, pain, or bodily health), but not including a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed unless it relates to the validity or terms of the declarant's will. (4) Statement Made for Medical Diagnosis or Treatment. A statement that: (A) is made for - and is reasonably pertinent to - medical diagnosis or treatment; and (B) describes medical history; past or present symptoms or sensations; their inception; or their general cause. - 10 - Last Updated: July 18, 2016 (5) Recorded Recollection. A record that: (A) is on a matter the witness once knew about but now cannot recall well enough to testify fully and accurately; (B) was made or adopted by the witness when the matter was fresh in the witness's memory; and (C) accurately reflects the witness's knowledge. If admitted, the record may be read into evidence but may be received as an exhibit only if offered by an adverse party. (6) Records of a Regularly Conducted Activity. A record of an act, event, condition, opinion, or diagnosis if: (A) the record was made at or near the time by - or from information transmitted by - someone with knowledge; (B) the record was kept in the course of a regularly conducted activity of a business, organization, occupation, or calling, whether or not for profit; (C) making the record was a regular practice of that activity; (D) all these conditions are shown by the testimony of the custodian or another qualified witness, or by a certification that complies with Rule 902(11) or (12) or with a statute permitting certification; and (E) neither the source of information nor the method or circumstances of preparation indicate a lack of trustworthiness. (7) Absence of a Record of Regularly Conducted Activity. Evidence that a matter is not included in a record described in paragraph (6) if: (A) the evidence is admitted to prove that the matter did not occur or exist; (B) a record was regularly kept for a matter of that kind; and (C) neither the possible source of the information nor other circumstances indicate a lack of trustworthiness. (8) Public Records. A record or statement of a public office if: (A) it sets out: (i) the office's activities; (ii) a matter observed while under a legal duty to report, but not including, in a criminal case, a matter observed by law-enforcement personnel; or (iii) in a civil case or against the government in a criminal case, factual findings from a legally authorized investigation; and (B) neither the source of information nor other circumstances indicate lack of trustworthiness. (9) Public Records of Vital Statistics. A record of a birth, death, or marriage, if reported to a public office in accordance with a legal duty. (10) Absence of a Public Record. Testimony - or a certification under Rule 902 - that a diligent search failed to disclose a public record or statement if the testimony or certification is admitted to prove that: (A) the record or statement does not exist; or (B) a matter did not occur or exist, if a public office regularly kept a record or statement for a matter of that kind. (11) Records of Religious Organizations Concerning Personal or Family History. A statement of birth, legitimacy, ancestry, marriage, divorce, death, relationship by blood or marriage, or similar facts of personal or family history, contained in a regularly kept record of a religious organization. - 11 - Last Updated: July 18, 2016 (12) Certificates of Marriage, Baptism, and Similar Ceremonies. A statement of fact contained in a certificate: (A) made by a person who is authorized by a religious organization or by law to perform the act certified; (B) attesting that the person performed a marriage or similar ceremony or administered a sacrament; and (C) purporting to have been issued at the time of the act or within a reasonable time after it. (13) Family Records. A statement of fact about personal or family history contained in a family record, such as a Bible, genealogy, chart, engraving on a ring, inscription on a portrait, or engraving on an urn or burial marker. (14) Records of Documents That Affect an Interest in Property. The record of a document that purports to establish or affect an interest in property if: (A) the record is admitted to prove the content of the original recorded document, along with its signing and its delivery by each person who purports to have signed it; (B) the record is kept in a public office; and (C) a statute authorizes recording documents of that kind in that office. (15) Statements in Documents That Affect an Interest in Property. A statement contained in a document that purports to establish or affect an interest in property if the matter stated was relevant to the document's purpose - unless later dealings with the property are inconsistent with the truth of the statement or the purport of the document. (16) Statements in Ancient Documents. A statement in a document that is at least 20 years and whose authenticity is established. (17) Market Reports and Similar Commercial Publications. Market quotations, lists, directories, or other compilations that are generally relied on by the public or by persons in particular occupations. (18) Statements in Learned Treatises, Periodicals, or Pamphlets. A statement contained in a treatise, periodical, or pamphlet if: (A) the statement is called to the attention of an expert witness on cross-examination or relied on by the expert on direct examination; and (B) the publication is established as a reliable authority by the expert's admission or testimony, by another expert's testimony, or by judicial notice. If admitted, the statement may be read into evidence but not received as an exhibit. Comment: This rule concerns published treatises, periodicals, or pamphlets that have been provided in the case packet. Mere reference to a title in the packet is insufficient; the entirety of the item must be provided in the case packet for this rule to be applicable. (19) Reputation Concerning Personal or Family History. A reputation among a person's family by blood, adoption, or marriage - or among a person's associates or in the community - concerning the person's birth, adoption, legitimacy, ancestry, marriage, divorce, death, relationship by blood, adoption, or marriage, or similar facts of personal or family history. (20) Reputation Concerning Boundaries or General History. A reputation in a community - arising before the controversy - concerning boundaries of land in the community or customs that affect the land, or concerning general historical events important to that community, state, or nation. (21) Reputation Concerning Character. A reputation among a person's associates or in the community concerning the person's character. - 12 - Last Updated: July 18, 2016 (22) Judgment of a Previous Conviction. Evidence of a final judgment of conviction if: (A) the judgment was entered after a trial or guilty plea, but not a nolo contendere plea; (B) the conviction was for a crime punishable by death or by imprisonment for more than a year; (C) the evidence is admitted to prove any fact essential to the judgment; and (D) when offered by the prosecutor in a criminal case for a purpose other than impeachment, the judgment was against the defendant. The pendency of an appeal may be shown but does not affect admissibility. (23) Judgments Involving Personal, Family, or General History, or a Boundary. A judgment that is admitted to prove a matter of personal, family, or general history, or boundaries, if the matter: (A) was essential to the judgment; and (B) could be proved by evidence of reputation. (24) Omitted. Rule 804. Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay -When the Declarant Is Unavailable as a Witness (a) Criteria for Being Unavailable. A declarant is considered to be unavailable as a witness if the declarant: (1) is exempted from testifying about the subject matter of the declarant's statement because the court rules that a privilege applies; (2) refuses to testify about the subject matter despite a court order to do so; (3) testifies to not remembering the subject matter; (4) cannot be present or testify at the trial or hearing because of death or a then-existing infirmity, physical illness, or mental illness; or (5) is absent from the trial or hearing and the statement's proponent has not been able, by process or other reasonable means, to procure: (A) the declarant's attendance, in the case of a hearsay exception under Rule 804(b)(1) or (6); or (B) the declarant's attendance or testimony, in the case of a hearsay exception under Rule 804(b)(2), (3), or (4). But this subdivision (a) does not apply if the statement's proponent procured or wrongfully caused the declarant's unavailability as a witness in order to prevent the declarant from attending or testifying. Comment: This rule may not be used at trial to assert that a team has \"procured\" the unavailability of a witness by choosing not to call that witness. (b) The Exceptions. The following are not excluded by the rule against hearsay if the declarant is unavailable as a witness: (1) Former testimony. Testimony that: (A) was given as a witness at a trial, hearing, or lawful deposition, whether given during the current proceeding or a different one; and (B) is now offered against a party who had - or, in a civil case, whose predecessor in interest had - an opportunity and similar motive to develop it by direct, cross-, or redirect examination. (2) Statement Under the Belief of Imminent Death. In a prosecution for homicide or in a civil case, a statement that the declarant, while believing the declarant's death to be imminent, made about its cause or circumstances. - 13 - Last Updated: July 18, 2016 (3) Statement Against Interest. A statement that: (A) a reasonable person in the declarant's position would have made only if the person believed it to be true because, when made, it was so contrary to the declarant's proprietary or pecuniary interest or had so great a tendency to invalidate the declarant's claim against someone else or to expose the declarant to civil or criminal liability; and (B) is supported by corroborating circumstances that clearly indicate its trustworthiness, if it is offered in a criminal case as one that tends to expose the declarant to criminal liability. (4) Statement of Personal or Family History. A statement about: (A) the declarant's own birth, adoption, legitimacy, ancestry, marriage, divorce, relationship by blood, adoption, or marriage, or similar facts of personal or family history, even though the declarant had no way of acquiring personal knowledge about that fact; or (B) another person concerning any of these facts, as well as death, if the declarant was related to the person by blood, adoption, or marriage or was so intimately associated with the person's family that the declarant's information is likely to be accurate. (5) Omitted. (6) Statement Offered Against a Party That Wrongfully Caused the Declarant's Unavailability. A statement offered against a party that wrongfully caused - or acquiesced in wrongfully causing - the declarant's unavailability as a witness, and did so intending that result. Rule 805. Hearsay Within Hearsay Hearsay within hearsay is not excluded by the rule against hearsay if each part of the combined statements conforms with an exception to the rule. Rule 806. Attacking and Supporting the Declarant's Credibility When a hearsay statement - or a statement described in Rule 801(d)(2)(C), (D), or (E) - has been admitted in evidence, the declarant's credibility may be attacked, and then supported, by any evidence that would be admissible for those purposes if the declarant had testified as a witness. The court may admit evidence of the declarant's inconsistent statement or conduct, regardless of when it occurred or whether the declarant had an opportunity to explain or deny it. If the party against whom the statement was admitted calls the declarant as a witness, the party may examine the declarant on the statement as if on cross-examination. Rule 807. Omitted Article IX. Rule 901. Authenticating or Identifying Evidence (a) In General. To satisfy the requirement of authenticating or identifying an item of evidence, the proponent must produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it is. - 14 - Last Updated: July 18, 2016 (b) Examples. The following are examples only - not a complete list - of evidence that satisfies the requirement: (1) Testimony of a Witness with Knowledge. Testimony that an item is what it is claimed to be. (2) Nonexpert Opinion About Handwriting. A nonexpert's opinion that handwriting is genuine, based on a familiarity with it that was not acquired for the current litigation. (3) Comparison by an Expert Witness or the Trier of Fact. A comparison with an authenticated specimen by an expert witness or the trier of fact. (4) Distinctive Characteristics and the Like. The appearance, contents, substance, internal patterns, or other distinctive characteristics of the item, taken together with all the circumstances. (5) Opinion About a Voice. An opinion identifying a person's voice - whether heard firsthand or through mechanical or electronic transmission or recording - based on hearing the voice at any time under circumstances that connect it with the alleged speaker. (6) Evidence About a Telephone Conversation. For a telephone conversation, evidence that a call was made to the number assigned at the time to: (A) a particular person, if circumstances, including self-identification, show that the person answering was the one called; or (B) a particular business, if the call was made to a business and the call related to business reasonably transacted over the telephone. (7) Evidence About Public Records. Evidence that: (A) a document was recorded or filed in a public office as authorized by law; or (B) a purported public record or statement is from the office where items of this kind are kept. (8) Evidence About Ancient Documents or Data Compilations. For a document or data compilation, evidence that it: (A) is in a condition that creates no suspicion about its authenticity; (B) was in a place where, if authentic, it would likely be; and (C) is at least 20 years old when offered. (9) Evidence About a Process or System. Evidence describing a process or system and showing it produces an accurate result. (10) Methods Provided by a Statute or Rule. Any method of authentication or identification allowed by a Midlands statute or a rule prescribed by the Midlands Supreme Court. Rule 902. Evidence That Is Self-Authenticating The following items of evidence are self-authenticating; they require no extrinsic evidence of authenticity in order to be admitted: (1) Domestic Public Documents That Are Sealed and Signed. A document that bears: (A) a seal purporting to be that of the United States; any state, district, commonwealth, territory, or insular possession of the United States; the former Panama Canal Zone; the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands; a political subdivision of any of these entities; or a department, agency, or officer of any entity named above; and (B) a signature purporting to be an execution or attestation. (2) Domestic Public Documents That Are Not Sealed but Are Signed and Certified. A document that bears no seal if: (A) it bears the signature of an officer or employee of an entity named in Rule 902(1)(A); and - 15 - Last Updated: July 18, 2016 (B) another public officer who has a seal and official duties within that same entity certifies under seal - or its equivalent - that the signer has the official capacity and that the signature is genuine. (3) Foreign Public Documents. A document that purports to be signed or attested by a person who is authorized by a foreign country's laws to do so. The document must be accompanied by a final certification that certifies the genuineness of the signature and official position of the signer or attester - or of any foreign official whose certificate of genuineness relates to the signature or attestation or is in a chain of certificates of genuineness relating to the signature or attestation. The certification may be made by a secretary of a United States embassy or legation; by a consul general, vice consul, or consular agent of the United States; or by a diplomatic or consular official of the foreign country assigned or accredited to the United States. If all parties have been given a reasonable opportunity to investigate the document's authenticity and accuracy, the court may, for good cause, either: (A) order that it be treated as presumptively authentic without final certification; or (B) allow it to be evidenced by an attested summary with or without final certification. (4) Certified Copies of Public Records. A copy of an official record - or a copy of a document that was recorded or filed in a public office as authorized by law - if the copy is certified as correct by: (A) the custodian or another person authorized to make the certification; or (B) a certificate that complies with Rule 902(1), (2), or (3) or a rule prescribed by the Midlands Supreme Court. (5) Official Publications. A book, pamphlet, or other publication purporting to be issued by a public authority. (6) Newspapers and Periodicals. Printed material purporting to be a newspaper or periodical. (7) Trade Inscriptions and the Like. An inscription, sign, tag, or label purporting to have been affixed in the course of business and indicating origin, ownership, or control. (8) Acknowledged Documents. A document accompanied by a certificate of acknowledgment that is lawfully executed by a notary public or another officer who is authorized to take acknowledgments. (9) Commercial Paper and Related Documents. Commercial paper, a signature on it, and related documents, to the extent allowed by general commercial law. (10) Omitted. (11) Certified Domestic Records of a Regularly Conducted Activity. The original or a copy of a domestic record that meets the requirements of Rule 803(6)(A)-(C), as shown by a certification of the custodian or another qualified person that complies with a rule prescribed by the Midlands Supreme Court. Before the trial or hearing, the proponent must give an adverse party reasonable written notice of the intent to offer the record - and must make the record and certification available for inspection - so that the party has a fair opportunity to challenge them. Comment: The reasonableness requirement of this rule is satisfied if the aforementioned notice, record, and certification are affirmatively made available at the Captains' Meeting. (12) Certified Foreign Records of a Regularly Conducted Activity. In a civil case, the original or a copy of a foreign record that meets the requirements of Rule 902(11), modified as follows: the certification, rather than complying with a Midlands Supreme Court rule, must be signed in a manner that, if falsely made, would subject the maker to a criminal penalty in the country where the certification is signed. The proponent must also meet the notice requirements of Rule 902(11). Comment: If no foreign law is provided in the case materials, the presumption will be that no legal infraction occurred with respect to the requirement of subdivision 12 that the - 16 - Last Updated: July 18, 2016 certification \"must be signed in a manner that, if falsely made, would subject the maker to a criminal penalty in the country where the certification is signed.\" Rule 903. Subscribing Witness's Testimony A subscribing witness's testimony is not necessary to authenticate a writing. Article X. Rule 1001. Definitions That Apply to This Article In this article: (a) A \"writing\" consists of letters, words, numbers, or their equivalent set down in any form. (b) A \"recording\" consists of letters, words, numbers, or their equivalent recorded in any manner. (c) A \"photograph\" means a photographic image or its equivalent stored in any form. (d) An \"original\" of a writing or recording means the writing or recording itself or any counterpart intended to have the same effect by the person who executed or issued it. For electronically stored information, \"original\" means any printout - or other output readable by sight - if it accurately reflects the information. An \"original\" of a photograph includes the negative or a print from it. (e) A \"duplicate\" means a counterpart produced by a mechanical, photographic, chemical, electronic, or other equivalent process or technique that accurately reproduces the original. Rule 1002. Requirement of the Original An original writing, recording, or photograph is required in order to prove its content unless these rules or a Midlands statute provide otherwise. Comment: No attorney may object under this Rule that the \"original writing, recording, or photograph\" in question is not among the documents contained in the case packet. Rule 1003. Admissibility of Duplicates A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as the original unless a genuine question is raised about the original's authenticity or the circumstances make it unfair to admit the duplicate. Rule 1004. Admissibility of Other Evidence of Content An original is not required and other evidence of the content of a writing, recording, or photograph is admissible if: (a) all the originals are lost or destroyed, and not by the proponent acting in bad faith; (b) an original cannot be obtained by any available judicial process; (c) the party against whom the original would be offered had control of the original; was at that time put on notice, by pleadings or otherwise, that the original would be a subject of proof at the trial or hearing; and fails to produce it at the trial or hearing; or (d) the writing, recording, or photograph is not closely related to a controlling issue. Rule 1005. Copies of Public Records to Prove Content The proponent may use a copy to prove the content of an official record - or of a document that was recorded or filed in a public office as authorized by law - if these conditions are met: the record or document is otherwise admissible; and the copy is certified as correct in accordance with Rule 902(4) or is testified to be correct by a witness who has compared it with the original. If no such copy can be obtained by reasonable diligence, then the proponent may use other evidence to prove the content. - 17 - Last Updated: July 18, 2016 Rule 1006. Summaries to Prove Content The proponent may use a summary, chart, or calculation to prove the content of voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs that cannot be conveniently examined in court. The proponent must make the originals or duplicates available for examination or copying, or both, by other parties at a reasonable time and place. And the court may order the proponent to produce them in court. Rule 1007. Testimony or Statement of a Party to Prove Content The proponent may prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph by the testimony, deposition, or written statement of the party against whom the evidence is offered. The proponent need not account for the original. Rule 1008. Functions of the Court and Jury Ordinarily, the court determines whether the proponent has fulfilled the factual conditions for admitting other evidence of the content of a writing, recording, or photograph under Rule 1004 or 1005. But in a jury trial, the jury determines - in accordance with Rule 104(b) - any issue about whether: (a) an asserted writing, recording, or photograph ever existed; (b) another one produced at the trial or hearing is the original; or (c) other evidence of content accurately reflects the content. Article XI. Rule 1101. Applicability of the Rules (a) To Courts and Judges. These rules apply to proceedings before all courts in the State of Midlands. (b) To Cases and Proceedings. These rules apply in: civil cases and proceedings; and criminal cases and proceedings. (c) Rules on Privilege. The rules on privilege apply to all stages of a case or proceeding. (d) Exceptions. These rules - except for those on privilege - do not apply to the following: (1) the court's determination, under Rule 104(a), on a preliminary question of fact governing admissibility; (2) omitted; and (3) omitted. (e) Omitted. Rule 1102. Amendments Amendments to the Midlands Rules of Evidence may be made at the annual AMTA Board Meeting or by special vote convened by the Board. Rule 1103. Title These rules shall be cited as the Midlands Rules of Evidence. - 18 - Defense Direct of Harley Kim 1. Could you please state your name for the record? A: My name is Harley Kim. 2. Mrs. Kim, where are you currently living? A: Los Angeles, California. What do you do for a living? Just like everyone else in LA, I'm involved in the entertainment industry. 3. What is it that you do exactly? A: I do camera and set work for BNN. 4. What is BNN and how did you become involved with them? A: I joined BNN back in 2003 when it was called Blitz Television Station. I worked as a cameraperson for one of the game shows. When the company announced in late 2003 that it would become a news organization, I applied for one of the \"photojournalist\" positions. 5. What exactly do you do as a 'photojournalist'? A: I do all the camera work for all of the stories we're working on. That includes shooting the reporters' interviews and stand-ups, but also shooting the subjects and scenery of our piece. I get to travel to a lot of really exotic places like St. Petersburg, Minneapolis, Des Moines, and Waukegan, sometimes I even get to meet celebrities and other famous people....it's a great perk of the job! 6. Did you receive any type of special training from BNN in regards to your position as photojournalist? A: Well, since I had already worked as a cameraperson for one of the old games that BNN, then known Blitz Television Station, I had a lot of practical real world experience behind the business side of a camera. In 2003, I applied for the photojournalist position at BNN. I'm not what a lot of people would call 'formally educated', heck, I never even went to college, but I do know how to do my job. BNN even required me to read a memo with all of the details of being a photojournalist and the expectations of it on January 1, 2004. It was from the CEO, Kit Berkshire, and I knew I better read anything that came from the head honcho himself. 7. Would you recognize that memo if you saw it today A: Yeah, I certainly would. **permission to approach opposing counsel.....** **permission to approach the witness............** 8. Could you identify this document, please? A: This is the memo that I was talking about earlier. The one that Mr. Berkshire sent for me to read. I get a lot of these from him and my other bosses, actually. down **at this time, I would like to introduce this into evidence as defense exhibit _____......** 9. Mrs. Kim, what did you learn from this memo? A: Well, Mr. Berkshire was very big on emphasizing three main topics: thoroughness, accuracy, and fairness. Let's take a look at each one of those topics addressed in the memo. How did you interpret the concept of thoroughness as pertaining to your job? A: Basically, I took it to mean that we should leave no stone unturned, and that if it comes down to interviewing one famous guy or 10 non-famous people to get all sides of the story, we go with the larger number of people versus the one 'famous' guy. What about the concept of accuracy in the memo? A: I took that to mean that we should fully investigate every source as fully as we can and only report what we have reason to believe is true, based on the evidence we have at the time. 10. Finally, what about the concept of fairness in the memo? A: Basically, we only report the facts based on the evidence we have at the time. We don't spin stories. 11. I'd like to direct your attention to the day of September 24, 2006. Were you working that day? 12. Could you tell us what you were doing as a photojournalist for BNN that particular day? A: I got an unusual job that day. I was paired up with Reagan Thomas to cover a political debate between Drew Walton and Lane Hamilton. 13. You mentioned that this was an unusual assignment, why is that? A: Well, I'm not really into politics and all of that boring stuff. BNN usually covers celebrity stories and all of that stuff like Tom-Kat and Brangelina stuff. But the way I look at it, where we go isn't my decision....it's the big wigs, so I just go where I'm told. 14. Let's talk about that debate for a moment, could you tell us exactly what your role in it was? A: Well, we didn't cover the debate itself, we were all set up to interview Drew Walton afterwards. The debate was supposed to last for about two hours so I went across the street to relax until it was over. 15. What did you do once the debate was over? A: Around 9:20pm, after the debate ended, Drew Walton and Lane Hamilton exited behind the stage and took separate podiums for a press conference. It was kinda one sided since all of the questions were being directed at Drew Walton and implying that Drew had destroyed Lane Hamilton at the debate. 16. So what did you do after that press conference? A: Well, at approximately 9:40pm I went out behind the Civic Center to load up my camera equipment into the truck. It was already dark but I was standing under a light so I could see just fine. A few minutes later I saw Drew Walton and his personal assistant come out the rear door of the Center. Mr. Walton walked up to his limo and threw the jacket his jacket in the back seat. His assistant got in the car and started the engine. At that point I heard some screaming from Lane Hamilton. 17. Could you tell us what you saw at that point? A: Well, like I said, Lane Hamilton was visibly angry and excited. He told Hamilton, 'You're wrong on gun control and you're wrong for this country. You might be able to fool voters with that propaganda, but your father would see right through it. If he saw you tonight, he would be ashamed.\" Walton got irate and said, 'Don't you dare talk about my father\". At that point, Drew Walton reached into the car and pulled out a gun. 18. After you witnessed that heated exchange, what did you do next? A: I immediately started dialing Reagan Thomas's cell phone number and I went to grab my camera from the truck. Yea, I had to take my eye off the action but my job's not to see the action it's to catch it on tape. I was still getting my camera ready when I heard a gunshot go off. I ducked inside the truck then I heard a second shot. I peeked from behind the truck and saw Hamilton on the ground. He wasn't moving and it looked like he was bleeding. 19. Where was Drew Walton at this point? A: Well, after the two shots rang out, I saw Drew Walton crouched over Lane Hamilton's body. From what I had seen.....Drew Walton pulled out a gun, and the next thing I heard was two shots ring out, then I saw Drew Hamilton crouching over Lane Hamilton's body. 20. You previously mentioned you had dialed Reagan's cell phone number. When did he come out of the Civic Center? A: A few seconds after the second shot was fired, he came running out the back and asked me what I saw and of course I gave him the whole story, detail by detail. 21. Could you describe the scene soon after the shots were fired. A: Well, just a few minutes had went by and a crowd had gathered, including lots of reporters and then soon after the cops showed up. They wanted my story so I could not get much action with the camera. 22. Where was Drew Walton during this time? A: Walton started doing a press conference. Reagan Thomas said that I was not to film it because everyone else would be doing it anyway. We interviewed the other eyewitnesses including myself, that goes along with our policy of BNN of being thorough and interviewing '10 non-famous guys' instead of 'one famous guy'. Reagan spoke to the police chief, one of the crime scene investigators, and Walton's assistant. 23. After you interviewed the other eyewitnesses what did Reagan want to do with that information? A: I overheard Reagan on the phone talking to our producer, Fran Martin. Reagan went through all of the interviews and what each person had said. He wanted us to be the network that broke the news. I could tell by Reagan's reaction that Martin had refused to let Reagan run the story. As soon as Reagan hung up the phone he called CEO Kit Berkshire. He gave the same recap to Berkshire as he had Martin. After he hung up he said, \"Were running the story.\" 24. Where did things go from that point? A: The next thing I know we're on live on BNN, interrupting the network's coverage of the Oski Awards and reporting that Drew Walton had apparently shot Lane Hamilton. 25. Knowing what you know now; what are your feelings towards that night? A: Well, my feelings are mixed. We did retract the story after it ran, because of new evidence. But I can tell you that in the heat of the moment, it's an important decision on what to report. You can only report on what evidence you have in your hands at the time. That's what we had, what looked to be like clear evidence that Drew Walton had shot Lane Hamilton. At that time, with the evidence we had....at that time, I think we made the right choice. We reported the facts that we had. 2016-17 Case Problem A civil case of employment discrimination Riley Winter v. TBD, Inc. BY THE AMTA CIVIL CASE COMMITTEE JUSTIN BERNSTEIN MICHAEL J. GELFAND DANIEL HAUGHEY TOBY HEYTENS MACKENZI SIEBERT ABBE STENSLAND KYLE WEST Revised 12/4/16 Synopsis Professional writer Riley Winter, age 50 at the time of termination, has sued an online magazine, TBD, Inc., for wrongful termination on the basis of age discrimination. Available Witnesses Riley Winter, writer Austin Perez, editor in chief Bobbie Lin, secretary Sam Owens, employment expert Cary Kramer, psychiatrist Sawyer Shaw, chief executive officer Skye Martin, human resources manager Adrian Edwards, tech magnate Kirby Doolittle, intern Vic Fogel, journalism expert We Need Your Help! Please report any typos, inconsistencies, or other errors to amta.civilcase@collegemocktrial.org. We do not anticipate releasing any additional changes before regionals. NEW AMTA POLICY - Licensing Fee for Use of Case Materials at Invitational Tournaments These case materials are the intellectual property of the American Mock Trial Association. By paying the School Registration Fee, a school acquires a license to use this case for internal educational purposes and to compete at AMTA-sanctioned tournaments (that is, regionals, ORCS, and the National Championship Tournament). Under AMTA's Intellectual Property policy, however, this license does not by itself permit use of these case materials to host an invitational tournament. Instead, Schools wishing to use these case materials to host an invitational tournament must obtain a separate license to do so. For 2016-17, this license will require tournament hosts to pay to AMTA an amount equal to 5% of gross fees collected from all participating teams, to provide AMTA with a copy of the tournament tab summary, and to respond promptly to any requests for information from AMTA. Failure to comply with any of these requirements could result in sanctions under the AMTA rules or other consequences, including inability to compete in AMTAsanctioned tournaments until the school is in compliance. If you have any questions, please contact AMTA.IP@collegemocktrial.org. Notes and Acknowledgments This case is a work of fiction, and AMTA owns all rights. Any similarity to real people, companies, locations, trade names, service marks, or copyrighted material is purely coincidental. The case committee wishes to thank: Alex Bluebond, Brandon Harper, Sue Johnson, Michael Nelson, and Melissa Schuett for proofreading the case. Sarah Sawtelle for creating our more technically challenging exhibits and logos. 1 1 Revised 12/4/16 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS Witnesses and Witness Selection 1. Witness Availability: Winter, Perez, Lin, Owens, and Kramer may be called only by the plaintiff. Shaw, Martin, Edwards, Doolittle, and Fogel may be called only by the defense. See Instructions 2(a) and (b) for special rules governing Kramer and Shaw. 2. Captains Meeting Procedures. Damages election and witness selection must proceed sequentially down the Captains Meeting Form. All announcements are final once made. a. Step 1: Plaintiff announces whether it is pursuing damages or whether the trial has been bifurcated into separate liability and damages phases. i. If plaintiff pursues damages: 1. Legal Document 5 (Pretrial Order (Liability Only)) does not exist and may not be referenced by either team for any purpose. 2. Plaintiff must select Kramer as one of its three witnesses. ii. If plaintiff chooses bifurcation: 1. Legal Document 6 (Pretrial Order (Damages)) does not exist and may not be referenced by either team for any purpose. 2. Plaintiff may not select Kramer as one of its three witnesses. b. Step 2: Defense announces if it is calling Shaw. i. If Shaw is one of the three defense witnesses: 1. Exhibit 20(2) (timestamp 2:00 p.m.) does not exist. ii. If Shaw is not one of the three defense witnesses: 1. Exhibit 20(1) (timestamp 1:59 p.m.) does not exist. 2. Notwithstanding AMTA Rule 4.31(1), the defense team's total allotted time for direct examination will be reduced to 20 minutes. c. Step 3: Defense announces its remaining witnesses. d. Step 4: Plaintiff announces its three witnesses, subject to the rules stated in Step 1. 3. Genders of available witnesses: The plaintiff team determines the genders of all available plaintiff witnesses. The defense team determines the genders of all available defense witnesses. 4. Party Representatives. Winter and Shaw are the only permissible party representatives under Rule 615 of the Midlands Rules of Evidence. If Winter or Shaw will be called as witnesses, they must be designated as party representatives by the party calling them. Other provisions 5. Reports as \"Affidavits.\" The reports of Owens, Kramer, and Fogel are \"affidavits\" for purposes of AMTA Rules 8.9 (Invention of Fact) and 8.17 (Admission) and thus may not be offered into evidence. 6. Winter and Shaw Depositions. Riley Winter and Sawyer Shaw do not have affidavits or reports. The depositions of Winter and Shaw are not \"affidavits\" for purposes of AMTA Rules 8.9 (Invention of Fact) or 8.17 (Admission). Students playing Winter and Shaw may build their testimony using the depositions and other documents in the case. Winter and Shaw may also invent facts outside of the case documents, but can still be cross examined on those inventions using the deposition, exhibits, or other case materials. All inventions of fact by Winter and Shaw must comply with all AMTA Rules and other special instructi