Judge: Ian Miller (University of Oklahoma)
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 July 13, 2020 08:22:13PM EST by Sumin Park
Posted at July 14, 2020 10:31:15PM EST by Saanvi Kumar
Posted at July 15, 2020 09:47:14PM EST by Sumin Park
Posted at July 17, 2020 01:13:22AM EST by Saanvi Kumar
Same Citations as Opposition Constructive.
This match has been completed. Show the Decision.
Submitted at July 19, 2020 01:57:06PM EST by Ian Miller
|Category||Sumin Park||Saanvi Kumar|
|Use of evidence:||4.4||4.5|
|Coherence of arguments:||4.5||4.5|
|Responsiveness to opponent:||4.3||4.5|
|Identification of key points:||4.6||4.7|
|Comments:||You had good points - but I would try to argue for forensic science being something that the UN has specific jurisdiction or ability to do.
I think that if you tied your arguments more to forensic science then you could avoid a lot of the more broad general arguments your opponent is making about the UN.
|Great speeches. I would try to impact your arguments out a little bit more. (example: if countries don't join they might have conflicts with each other which causes a lot of global instability)|
The decision is for the Opposition: Saanvi Kumar
Reason for Decision:
This was a good and very close debate. I ended up voting for the opposition.
I ended up being persuaded that a large scale uniform change to the criminal justice system would be impossible due to differing policies between countries.
The opposition reasoned out a lot of their arguments specific to the UN being a poor actor for reform which made sense to me, especially when it was supported by a lot of examples.
I think that both sides would do better if they were more specific about forensic science in particular and if they impacted out their arguments more.