Judge: Saianurag Karavadi (New York University)
Resolution: Resolved: The United Nation should require countries to uniformly enact substantial criminal justice reform in one or more of the following: forensic science, policing, sentencing.
|Click to begin|
Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.
Posted at June 29, 2020 06:52:58PM EST by Ava Angeles
Equal Justice Initiative: https://eji.org/criminal-justice-reform/
Posted at June 30, 2020 09:41:41PM EST by Albert Khawam
Posted at July 1, 2020 07:45:37PM EST by Ava Angeles
Forensic science is putting innocent people in prison: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-humes-forensic-evidence-20190113-story.html
Forensic science may not be completely reliable: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-humes-forensic-evidence-20190113-story.html
Posted at July 2, 2020 11:46:20AM EST by Albert Khawam
Posted at July 3, 2020 06:50:15PM EST by Ava Angeles
Forensic science putting innocent people in jail: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-humes-forensic-evidence-20190113-story.html
Criminal Justice Reform: https://eji.org/criminal-justice-reform/
This match has been completed. Show the Decision.
Submitted at July 5, 2020 12:05:38AM EST by Saianurag Karavadi
|Category||Ava Angeles||Albert Khawam|
|Use of evidence:||4.2||2|
|Coherence of arguments:||5||2.5|
|Responsiveness to opponent:||5||2|
|Identification of key points:||5||2.5|
|Comments:||I really enjoyed listening to your speeches and thought they were well developed and argued!!||Focus a little more on the evidence, do some more research to accurately understand mass incarceration, and make sure you negate the aff. Nonetheless, I appreciated the opportunity to judge you and think you're a great debater!!|
The decision is for the Proposition: Ava Angeles
Reason for Decision:
I think the aff has won this round because they have proven that sentencing reform is good. I think the neg is proving why forensic science might be useful or good, but is not answering the aff responses and isn't accurately explaining the relationship between mass incarceration and either side's arguments. The aff has also pointed out a contradiction in the neg arguments. Finally, the biggest issue is that the neg has not proved sentencing reform isn't a good idea or that forensic science reform is somehow better while also being mutually exclusive with the aff (if they can happen at the same time, then there is no reason forensic science being good would mean that we shouldn't affirm that sentencing reform is good).