ILNews

Mock trial program to become part of Indiana Bar Foundation

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana’s Mock Trial competition will soon have a new home at the Indiana Bar Foundation.

The annual competition that gives high school students the opportunity to learn about the judicial system by participating in a mini-trial has been managed and operated by volunteers, mostly attorneys, from around Indiana.

After the 2014 rounds of the competition, the Indiana Bar Foundation will assume responsibility for the program. The IBF also manages We The People, U.S. Senate Youth Program and the Indiana Legislative Youth Advisory Council.

“It’s an ideal fit for our mission of educating the public about the law,” said Charles Dunlap, executive director of IBF. “We created the Center for Law and Civic Education to house youth education programs related to the legal profession.”

The Indiana Mock Trial Association organized the 2013 national competition held for the first time in Indianapolis. The association will run the 2014 state competition and give behind-the-scenes training to the staff at the foundation.

Longtime mock trial volunteer Susan Roberts, of counsel with Stuart & Branigin LLP in Lafayette, said the foundation is the right home for the Indiana program.

“It’s a good marriage,” Roberts said. “I’m enthusiastic about the mock trial program moving forward with the dedicated staff and resources of the Indiana Bar Foundation.”

Both Roberts and Ann Marie Waldron, Indianapolis attorney at Robinson Wolenty & Young LLP, will be teaching IBF staff their systems for managing the competition which, annually, involves about 400 students in regional and state competitions.

The 2014 state Mock Trial finals will be March 1 and 2 in Indianapolis. The winning team will then advance to the national Mock Trial competition held May 8 through 10 in Madison, Wis.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT