James Sheehan - The Law of Second Chances

“What did she say?”

Jack was on his feet. “Objection, your honor. Hearsay.”

“Sustained.”

“Your honor, I’d like to be heard on this,” Spencer protested. “May we approach?”

The judge gave Spencer an annoyed look. “Come along,” he motioned to the two lawyers.

“Mr. Taylor, when it is obviously hearsay we don’t need to come to the bench to make a record.”

“I understand, Judge, but I’m not offering it for the truth of the matter asserted.”

Langford Middleton rolled his eyes at that one. It was an argument every lawyer tried at one time or another, but it was rarely successful. He let Spencer continue, though. “Carry on, but make it brief.”

“Mrs. Holloway merely reported that she heard the shot, came to her window, and saw someone kneeling over the deceased. She couldn’t identify him. This evidence was already entered through yesterday’s testimony and I don’t think counsel has disputed it. I’m only trying to create my time line without having to bring another witness in.”

It was a clever way to put it, appealing to the judge’s desire to move things along. The judge looked at Jack. “Well, Mr. Tobin?”

“It’s cumulative, Judge. He’s trying to get a third witness to say my client was kneeling over the deceased without bringing her in.”

“I’m going to allow it. If necessary, Mr. Tobin, I’ll let you call Ms. Holloway. As it stands, Mr. Taylor has the right to establish a time line with Detective Severino. Objection overruled.”

Spencer gave Jack another peek at his perfect teeth as they left the sidebar, smiling broadly as he gloated. Twenty years ago Jack might have gone after him right there in the courtroom, but he had learned to squelch those urges. If it was meant to be, the worm would turn eventually.

Spencer and Tony Severino went on and on for the rest of the morning. Spencer asked Tony about his expertise with firearms. Besides his experience as a detective, Tony was a certified firearms expert, which partly explained to Jack why Spencer called him rather than Nick Walsh as a witness. Spencer might still call Nick, but if the prosecutor was looking to get this case over as soon as possible, probably not. Spencer had Tony talk about the slug that was taken out of Carl’s skull and establish the chain of custody from that moment to his appearance at trial. He then introduced the bullet into evidence. Jack had no objection. It was a bullet without a gun. Yes, it killed Carl, but who was at the other end of the gun was the issue in this case. Spencer had Tony describe the bullet in great detail.

“It’s a nine-millimeter Parabellum, commonly known as a Luger cartridge,” Tony told him. “As you can see, it’s not in very good shape. It’s distorted. Once a slug like this hits bone, it starts to break up a little.”

“Were you able to establish the type of gun that this bullet was fired from?”

“Yes.”

“How do you do that?”

“It’s a little technical, but I’ll try to explain it as best I can. Each gun has distinctive markings in the barrel. They’re called lands and grooves. The grooves are cut into the barrel of the gun in a spiral; the lands are the spaces between those grooves. When the gun is fired, the spiral grooving makes the bullet spin so that it flies straight. The heat inside the chamber makes the slug softer and makes it conform to the spiraling and the grooves in the barrel. If the slug is not damaged too badly you can examine those impressions and determine the make and possibly the model of the gun.”

“Was the slug that you retrieved from the deceased’s cranium in decent enough shape to make that examination?”

“Barely.”

“And did you make that examination?”

“I was present when it was done. I’m no longer a full-time firearms examiner, but I was present when this examination was made.”

“And did you determine the make and model of the gun that killed Carl Robertson?”

“Yes. It was a Glock nine-millimeter semiautomatic weapon-probably a Glock 17. It’s a handgun manufactured by the Austrian company Glock. It has a unique barrel groove, and we could see that in this bullet even though it was distorted considerably.”

“What does the term semiautomatic mean?”

“It means that the gun can be fired like an automatic weapon-that is, it can fire multiple rounds rapidly-but unlike a true automatic weapon you actually have to pull the trigger each time.”

“In this case, from the evidence presented, how many rounds were fired?”

“One.”

“How do you account for that with this semiautomatic weapon?”

“The person firing only pulled the trigger once.”

“Thank you, Detective Severino, I have no further questions.”

“Cross-examination, Mr. Tobin?”

“Yes, your honor.” Jack walked to the podium and looked at Tony Severino.

Trials were often won or lost on how an attorney cross-examined key witnesses. In Jack’s mind, Tony Severino was a key witness in the case. It was very difficult to make a prosecution witness your own, especially a seasoned police detective who had hundreds of hours of courtroom testimony under his belt. One mistake and the whole process could backfire.

Jack was not a seasoned criminal lawyer, but he understood the art of cross-examination better than most other trial attorneys on the planet. You had to lead the witness down the road without letting him know where he was going-keep the pace up, cut off exits, until eventually he found himself on a dead-end street with no way out. He was about to try to do that with Tony Severino.

“Detective Severino, you told Mr. Taylor that the motive for this murder was robbery, is that accurate?”

“Yes.”

“Can you be more specific?”

“We think he stole ten thousand dollars from Mr. Robertson’s inside jacket pocket.”

“You do concede, however, do you not, that Ms. Vincent cannot say for certain whether Mr. Robertson had that money on him on September 1, 1998?”

“Yes, she said that.”

“And there is no other evidence to establish Mr. Robertson had that money on him that night, correct?”

“That is correct.”

“There were three individuals who immediately went to their windows after they heard the shot and saw someone kneeling over the deceased’s body, correct?”

“That’s correct.”

“And two of those individuals, Mr. Cook and Mr. Frazier, identified that individual as the defendant, correct?”

“That’s correct.”

“Ms. Holloway could not?”

“No, she could not.”

“Is it also accurate that nobody saw this individual take anything from the deceased’s body?”

“Yes, that’s accurate.” Tony was beginning to look bored. This was all set out very clearly in the police reports that were already in evidence.

“How do you square that with what you just testified to-that he took the money out of Mr. Robertson’s inside jacket pocket?”

“He took it before they got to the window and looked out.”

“And nobody saw this individual carrying a gun-this Glock 17 that you just told us about, correct?”

“Correct.”

“And he certainly didn’t drop it at the scene because you didn’t find a gun at the scene, did you?”

“No, we didn’t.”

“And you never found the gun-the murder weapon, is that accurate?”

“That’s accurate.”

“In your analysis, what did he do with the gun?” Spencer couldn’t object to this line of questioning even though it was speculation. He had put Tony on the stand in part to explain how the murder occurred. He would be annihilated in each juror’s mind if he now objected that his own witness was speculating on that exact issue.