With a Foundations of Law assignment due at 3pm, most of the first-year law cohort was stressing out, refining their meticulously crafted essays and desperately editing their footnotes to be comma-perfect. But for former high school debating legend Albert Rimmington, this day couldn’t have been more chill.

“I’ve been preparing for this my whole life,” Albert claimed, “it’s basically just a short preparation debate, but a law essay instead of a topic about whether we should ban school uniforms.”

Albert’s classmates were intrigued at how he would manage to write a 2000-word assignment in only an hour, but Albert’s insistence that his faultless silent brainstorming technique would maximise efficiency assuaged their fears.

When asked what sources he would use to justify his position, Albert said “I’ll just BS it to be honest. That’s what worked when we won the 11.4 premiership. It’s not like examples and sources really matter much when the adjudicator doesn’t know if it’s real or not.”

“I’m not an ‘adjudicator’, I’m a career expert in constitutional law.” lamented seminar leader Stohn Muart-Jill.

Albert defended his take by suggesting “what if the negative team just asserts another fake statistic back?”

“That isn’t how this works,” responded Stohn, “hopefully Albert will learn when he gets his mark back”.

Four (if not even lower) to come.