by Scott Turow is the trial of his stepson, Aaron, charged with murdering his girlfriend, Mae.
The opening statements of Jackdorp and Sabich are fascinating as they explore the evidence to be heard in far more depth than would occur in a Canadian jury trial. Both are good lawyers. Jackdorp seeks to hammer home the expert evidence he will need the jury to believe in order to convict. Sabich responds with comments on the weaknesses in that same evidence.
Sabich, a man I would consider suave and urbane, manages to speak in a folksy country tone while not talking down to the jury.
I wondered what alternative to Aaron might be provided by Sabich. Murder by a mysterious stranger is a hard sell to juries. An alternative in this case requires delving into, even attacking, Mae’s character and lifestyle. It is a delicate process for the defence. Sabich must be careful not to antagonize the jury.
How do you approach questioning Mae’s grieving mother, Charmaine, who is in a wheelchair? She has evidence that would help Aaron.
The State calls Cassity who is Aaron’s best friend. Her evidence demonstrates the risks of not fully questioning a potential witness before trial. Lawyers dream of being able to cross a friendly prosecution witness. Sabich always does his homework.
Sabich faces a great challenge with a witness eager to help the defence. If believed, the witness will be helpful. He knows the witness will be savaged on cross. He knows far better than Aaron and Bea the consequences of a defence witness considered a liar by the jury.
Sabich’s representation of Aaron is tearing at his relationship with Bea just as he expected.
Turow ratchets up the tension when Sabich bolts awake in the middle of the night with the realization there is an alternative killer he had never considered.
Aaron’s Grandpa Joe, with his migrant beginning, working man background, military service and blunt speech is a hit with the jury. He has the best response I have ever heard or read by a witness asked if he would lie for someone he loved:
“Oh, me,” says Joe. “Hell yeah. If it was the right thing to do, I’d lie for certain.”
Sabich’s cross of the State witness George Lowndes, who loves to hear himself talk, is deft and deflating. Turow is great at creating trial testimony.
The intensity of trial work and the challenge of being old affects Sabich. He is as exhausted as Sandy Stern was in The Last Trial.
As inevitable in major trials there is evidence that surprises. Looking at photos requires careful attention. Cell phone records, while often tedious, can be important. Turow does not overlook such evidence in his books.
Seeking to score verbally in argument and comment during a trial with a clever remark is often ill-founded. Sabich comes to regret a somewhat flippant remark in his opening address. It should have been saved for closing.
Foot and tire impressions prove more absorbing than I would have expected. There is a Hollywood moment in the trial when Sabich is able to have an important People’s Exhibit struck which he then dumps into a garbage can. Jackdorp compounds the power by retrieving it and then being directed by the Judge to give it to her. She puts it out of sight. I was reminded of the real life Bruce Cutler defending John Gotti and expressing his opinion of the indictment by firing into a garbage can.
At the end of the trial the decision comes on whether Aaron will testify. Sabich cannot decide for him. It is very hard for the defendant to be objective. My experience is that accused are well advised to listen to the recommendation of their lawyer. It is the lawyer who has the experience in trials.
If he does not testify the jury will decide if the State proved its case. If he testifies the focus shifts from the State’s evidence to Aaron. If he is believed he will walk out of the courthouse but if the jury does not believe him he will walk into a jail cell for the rest of his life.
Aaron wants to testify. As clear from The Last Trial Turow is clearly of the school of defence counsel that the accused should not testify in a criminal trial. There are great risks that the accused will lose control on the witness stand or be forced to admit contradictions or simply not be believed by the jury.
If Aaron testifies Sabich is rightly concerned that Aaron’s criminal record, not revealed during the State’s case, will be in evidence and tarnish him. In Canada, the record would not be available for cross-examination if the accused does not lead evidence of good character.
The moment of the decision was the second most gripping moment of the trial for me.
Most gripping was the verdict. There is no greater moment of tension in a courtroom than a jury coming back with its decision.
While I found the first 90 pages tedious at times the final 150 pages were absolutely compelling.
I was surprised that Jackdorp and Sabich each tackled this case on their own. It is a complex murder trial. Each has an investigator aiding them Each investigator is experienced and helpful but they are not lawyers. Normally Jackdorp and Sabich would have had at least one lawyer assisting them.
Each could have benefited from having a second lawyer. In particular, for Sabich in his mid-70’s another lawyer would have eased the burden of all the trial responsibilities. There are financial issues with hiring another lawyer but they were ready to hire a lawyer at the start of the case. Returning to The Last Trial, Sandy Stern had his daughter and legal partner, Marta, with him.
I expect it was because there is a perception of less drama in having two counsel rather than a lone litigator standing between the accused and a jail cell.
It is a twisty legal thriller in Turow’s best tradition. It would have been wonderful if it had been 350 instead of 534 pages.
****
No comments:
Post a Comment