Lost Twice by Lunch, So the Team Changed Its Name

Case one. Dover prosecute Rochester Grammar School for Girls, in front of a jury half of which has come from Rochester. The defendant is found not guilty. Dover lose.

Case two. Chaucer Technology School arrive with a laptop. In 2002 a laptop in a courtroom was the legal equivalent of arriving by helicopter. Opposing counsel take Dover’s case apart, and Dover, in their own words, “lost miserably”.

Lunch. Paid for by Mr Crofts, the teacher in charge, and the newsletter adds, in capitals, that he paid AGAIN.

The makeover. With one case left and nothing to lose but the case, the team decides to change its image and its name. It becomes Team plus the surname of the classmate playing that afternoon’s defendant, and adopts what the report calls an easygoing, comical aspect. The opponents are Cranbrook, whom the report concedes are a far superior team. Comical is a bold choice of defence.

Case three. Dover defend, and the case is going the other way, until their defendant steps into the dock to help two struggling teammates out. The prosecution asks: “You say you HIT the traffic. What do you mean?”

“No, I HIT the cyclist and OVERTOOK the traffic.”

Sniggers, says the report, went through the courtroom.

The verdict. Not guilty. Dover win. This jury, the report notes, was half Dover.

The points. Dover lose all three cases on points, because a mock trial is marked on performance, not on what the jury decides. A pupil’s report of the 2024 national final confirms it is still scored that way, verdict or no verdict. The acquittal is a souvenir. The report ends by looking forward to 2003, which after a day like that is either optimism or a threat.

I took the method to our quiz team in March. After losing the first two rounds we had a makeover over the crisps, renamed ourselves after my husband, who was in the loo at the time, and played the music round in an easygoing, comical aspect.

We came last. On points.