The following suggestions have been developed from previous experiences in training mock trial teams. Encourage students to inquire, discuss, and practice as a team and to have fun while learning.

1. Carefully examine the entire set of materials, taking care to note all conflicts and information that is unclear. Discuss the information that is unclear. Discuss the information, procedures, rules used in the mock trial tournament.

2. Formulate theories of the case and consider what problems attorneys will have proving each theory.

3. Even though a team represents one side in a case during a mock trial, all roles in the case should be assigned and practiced. This will help in analyzing the case, as well as in preparing for future rounds.

4. Students acting as witnesses need to really "get into" their roles and attempt to think like the persons they are playing. Students who are witnesses should read their statements (affidavits) many times until they have the facts down "cold" and work closely with the student attorney who will do the direct examination. Another team member can play the role of opposing counsel and cross-examine the witnesses.

5. Team members are responsible for deciding what questions they will ask each witness on direct and cross-examination. This work can be done through group work. (Based on experiences from other mock trail tournaments, the best teams generally had their students prepare their own questions, with the teacher-coach and attorney-coach giving continual feedback about the questions.)

6. After the questions are prepared, a team should hold practice sessions where attorneys question witnesses, and the rest of the class or team evaluates which questions are good, and which might be dropped or added. These sessions also help prepare the witnesses for the tournament.

Based on the experiences of these practice sessions, attorneys should revise the questions, and witnesses should restudy parts of their witness statements where they were weak.

7. Sample opening statements and closing arguments should be written by team members. Legal and non-legal language should be avoided where its meaning is not completely understood by attorneys and witnesses.

8. Closing arguments should not be totally composed before trial, as they are supposed to highlight the important developments for the prosecution/plaintiff and the defense which have occurred during the trial. The more relaxed and informal such statements are, the more effective they are likely to be. Students should be prepared for the interruptions by judges who may question the attorneys, especially during closing argument. In a mock trial, an outline could be prepared for the closing argument, particularly where the facts are known and limited to what is in the witness statements/affidavits.

9. The ability of a team to adapt to different situations is important in a mock trial since each judge has his/her own way of doing things. Since the proceedings or conduct of the trial often depends on the judge who presides, student attorneys and other team members should be prepared to adapt to judicial rulings and requests, even if they appear contrary to tournament procedures and rules.

Some of the things most difficult for teams members to do are:
1. To decide which are the most important points to prove their side of the case and to make sure such proof takes place

2. To tell clearly what they intend to prove in an opening statement and to argue effectively in their closing argument that the facts and evidence presented have proven their case

3. To follow the formality of court, e.g;., standing up when the judge enters; or when addressing the judge, to call the judge "your honor," etc.

4. To phrase questions on direct examination that are not leading (carefully review the rules of evidence and watch for this type of questioning in practice sessions)

5. Not to ask so many questions on cross-examination that well-made points are lost. When a witness has been contradicted or otherwise discredited, student-attorneys tend to ask additional questions which often lessen the impact of points previously made. (Stop. Recognize what questions are likely to require answers that will make good points for your side. Rely on the use of these questions. Avoid pointless questions!!!)

6. To think quickly on their feet when a witness gives an unexpected answer, an attorney asks unexpected questions, or a judge throws questions at the attorneys or witnesses. (Practice sessions will help prepare for this.)

7. To consult co-counsel if you're stuck.

8. When an objection is sustained, to think of ways to get all relevant evidence to the court