JFK Assassination Forensic Debate #1

[William Kelly]

Who wants to have a go?

In this debate, we will use an amended version of the VERMONT RULES OF DEBATE

(Where they say speech, I changed to statement and eleminted time contstraints).

JFK Assassintion - Coincidence or Conspiracy?

ORDER OF STATEMENTS:

First affirmative constructive statement

Cross-examination of first affirmative by either negative debater

First negative constructive statement

Cross-examination of first negative by either affirmative debater

Second affirmative constructive statement

Cross-examination of second affirmative by other negative statement

Second negative constructive statement

Cross-examination of second negative by the other affirmative statement

First negative rebuttal

First affirmative rebuttal

Second negative rebuttal

Second affirmative rebuttal

SPEAKING ORDER

Teams are permitted to switch speaking order in the rebuttal speeches. The other team and the judge(s) must be notified before the debate of the switch in speaking order.

USE OF CHARTS

No non-verbal communication will be acceptable in a round of debate. Charts or pictures will not have any weight as evidence in a round.

COMMUNICATION BETWEEN TEAM MEMBERS

Is Permitted - unlike the official Vermont rules.

RULES OF EVIDENCE

In debate, complete source citations of evidence must be presented on request by the opposing team or judge in a round for each source used. A complete evidence citation must include the following as identified by the original source: author's name and qualifications, publication title, complete date (and date of access for a web site), and page number (or complete http address). In the event of a violation of this rule, the judge should void the effect of the evidence in question when making the decision.

The author, qualifications, and date of the source should be given the first time each citation is mentioned. (change from Vermont rules). A complete source citation, as specified above, need not be read during a speech.

Rules of Evidence Authenticity

1. Judges are prohibited from requesting and reading any piece of evidence at the end of a round unless the issue of authenticity was raised during the debate or unless the judge has substantial reason to suspect the authenticity of the evidence.

Authenticity refers to:

1. Fabrication: falsely representing a cited fact or statement of opinion as evidence; or intentional omission/addition of information within quoted material.

2. Distortion: misrepresentation of evidence or of citation which significantly alters meaning or content.

2. Debaters are responsible for the authenticity of evidence they present in rounds and shall allow the opposing team/debater to examine evidence introduced in the round. Any challenges to the authenticity of evidence must be made by the debaters during the round or at the conclusion of the second affirmative rebuttal....

Edited July 29, 2010 by William Kelly