March 31, 2014 Club Meeting

The following is a summary of the minutes from our March 31st meeting.

Meeting Location:   San Mateo City Hall, San Mateo, CA     6:00 p.m. – 7:15 p.m.

Attendees:

Present at the meeting were: Samya Boxberger Oberoi, Brenda Chung, Eric Jones,  Lara Miller, Suzanne Mulcahy, David Nazzaro, Martin Quan, Xin Tang.  There were three guests: Glenn, Terry, and Nathan.

Lara was the Toastmaster; Samya was the General Evaluator; Eric was the Timer, Martin was the Grammarian, and Brenda was the Ah Counter.

Speaker #1:  Samya:  “The Agenda”

Advanced Manuel:    “Speaking to Inform”

Samya went over the opening of the meeting and the officer’s roles at the meeting.  She then went over the agenda.  The roles are posted in the back of the Communication Manual.  The clubs may vary, but follow this basic format.  When you are new and take on one of these roles, you can contact a more experienced member and seek advice.

·       Toastmaster:  Sets the agenda, organizes and runs the meeting.

·       General Evaluator:  Makes sure the evaluation team is complete.  This team includes:  The Grammarian, Ah Counter, Vote Counter, Timer, and Speech Evaluators.

·       Speakers:  Members are chosen the week before, and prepare their speeches to the specification of the project number.

·       Table Topics Master:  Member is in charge of the impromptu speaking.  He/she asks members questions based on the theme of the meeting.  The members answer spontaneously.

Samya did this speech at the last minute.  The guest speaker was unable to attend. 

Speaker #2:  David:  “Defense of Insanity Plea”

Advanced Manuel:  “Speech to Inform”

David explained the legal definition of how to use the "insanity plea".  It does not follow the medical model.  You must use one of the following insanity test measures:

1   1.   McNaghten Test:  The defendant did not understand “right” from “wrong” during the time he committed the crime.  This is a very difficult standard to meet.  If you run away or try to cover up your crime, you can’t use this defense.

2   2.  “Irresistible Impulse”:  (Focuses on the act) You are unable to control your actions.

3   3.   Mens Rea Defense:  There is some kind of defect in the person’s mind.

4   4.   Durham Rule:  This is a rule in New Hampshire.  A psychiatrist states that there is a defect of mental capacity.

David gave a last minute speech as well.  The second speaker also could not attend the meeting.

Evaluation:  Suzanne evaluated Samya.  She began by stating that the speech was very clear and easy to follow.  It was valuable information, especially for the new members.  Samya used the visual of the CC Manual to indicate where the information could be found.  It would have been better to use more visuals to indicate the specific roles but, since this was a spontaneous speech, there was no time to prepare for this.

Samya’s overall speech was very effective and satisfied the objective of speaking to inform.

Evaluation:  David’s speech received a group evaluation.  It was stated that David was well organized and articulate.  "He expresses legal terms at a level that the audience can relate to and understand this difficult subject.  Lara gave the comment that David gave an excellent speech and used the board to write down the legal terms.  She suggested that he put his speech on a power point.    

The theme of the meeting was: “Merry Pranks” and the Word of the Day was “Mischievous”.   David was the Table Topics Master.  

Samya asked for the guests remarks and then closed the meeting. 

Meeting was adjourned at 7:15