The Drucker Proxy

by Lior Samson

  “Well, in a sense, it’s no different than if Stephen Hawking were to testify using his talking keyboard. The telepresence robot is just the mechanical aid by which the proxy can communicate.”

  “I do not see Hawking’s name on your list of witnesses, and he would, in any case, not be subject to summons. The California courts can and do make accommodations for persons with disabilities. However, the proxy, as you insist on calling it, is just software, a piece of computer code. Am I right? As such, it has no standing before the law. It is not a person, with or without a disability, for which this court could make accommodations.”

  “It is duly incorporated in the state of Delaware as Coleman Todd Drucker Proxy, LLC. Ample precedent at the state and federal level exists for the personal rights of corporate entities.”

  “In which case, Mr. Turndale, as a corporate entity it may have certain legal rights, but the hubristic corporate name notwithstanding, the corporation must have a representative before the court, an officer or duly appointed agent, an actual living person who is empowered to respond and act on behalf of the corporation.”

  “We have brought an additional action, now before the Second District Appellate Court, to have Coleman Todd Drucker Proxy, LLC, recognized as the duly authorized personal representative of the estate of Coleman Todd Drucker.”

  “Pending matters before other courts are not the concern of this court. If there is a person duly appointed to act on behalf of the corporation, you can put the name of that person on the list of witnesses you plan to call, but you cannot call a robot or a computer program—not yet, and not in my court. That is my ruling.”

  “Counsel for the defense enters an objection.”

  “Noted. You may proceed.”

  — —

  Once pretrial motions were settled, the proceedings moved on to jury selection, a protracted process that found both sides exhausting their allotments of preemptory challenges. Hal Workman did his best for the plaintiffs to exclude anyone who was a fan of science fiction on the theory that they would be more inclined to think of an embodied proxy as a legitimate and logical form of progress while Bannon Turndale did his best to stack the jury toward younger singles, who might be less inclined to sympathize with a widow and orphan. In the end, the seated jury and alternates reflected the racial diversity of Los Angeles County quite well, but not the ages of its population. Despite the fact that the forty-to-sixty demographic was not represented, both legal teams reassured their clients that they had been successful.

  On the appointed day, the hardwood-paneled walls of the courtroom turned a dozen quiet conversations and the shuffling of papers into an ebb tide of background noise. Rolf Nagy, hair pulled back in a neat man-bun and wearing a new Italian-tailored suit, came down the aisle toward the front. Dana gave him an approving smile. “Wow, it’s like an alumni weekend,” she said.

  “You know all these people?”

  “Most of them. Some better than others.”

  His shoulders slumped. “I take it from your tone that maybe at least one of these guys is more than an acquaintance.”

  She leaned in and lowered her voice. “You don’t have competition there, Rolfy. None of these guys are any threat to you. I mean, look at them. You really think I would ever go for one of these lawyer types?”

  “Well, not really. But I missed you. More than I realized. I haven’t seen you in months.”

  “With good reason. I was under house arrest, and then after the bullets started flying, I was keeping my head down.”

  “For real? You’ve been threatened?”

  “Not threatened, actually shot at.”

  “Wow, I’m so sorry. I just thought you were mad at me. Or fed up.”

  “I’ve never been mad at you. Disappointed, sure, annoyed, yes, but angry? Not yet anyway. Maybe that’s one of our problems: we don’t fight.”

  “If that’s a problem, I can fix it. We can start right here and now if you want.” He forced a false angry-face.

  “Thanks for the generous offer. Maybe I’ll take you up on that after we get through this.”

  Rolf surveyed the room. “I recognize the bereaved widow from the news. I assume the suits next to her are the not-your-type lawyers.”

  “Good people, just not close friends. But do let me introduce my friend Tonika Warner, here. Tonika, this is Rolf Nagy, an old friend.”

  Tonika put out her hand without getting up. “Yes, I’ve heard about you. I understand you’re testifying for us, for the plaintiffs. Are you psyched?”

  “About as much as before a teeth cleaning. But it’s good to see Dana again. And nice to meet you.”

  “Let me introduce you to our legal team,” Dana said, “even if they are not my type.” She led the way to the plaintiffs table where Barbra greeted her with a hug and Leah Goldstein and Hal Workman nodded as they continued to scribble notes on a couple of yellow legal pads and talk in low voices with a young associate.

  Rolf edged forward. “Can I ask a dumb question? Why do lawyers still use ‘legal pads’ when everything and everybody else has tablet computers?”

  Leah looked up, her face deadpan serious. “We use legal pads because we certainly wouldn’t want to be caught using illegal pads. Sorry, humor among the humorless is always a little lame. No, it’s courtroom decorum, where electronic notetaking is still frowned on. Or banned in some courtrooms, would you believe? Depends somewhat on the judge.”

  “And who is our judge?” Dana asked “Who did we get?”

  “Boy George Steadman,” she said, circling a line on her legal pad.

  “Boy George?”

  “Well, that’s what he’s called in our circles. Phillip George Steadman. From his middle name.”

  Hal Workman finally looked up. “And in recognition of his somewhat colorful taste—or lack thereof—in clothes. And makeup.”

  Leah manufactured an annoyed expression. “Well, meow, meow. Look who’s talking, our own Mr. Workman, with his peg-pants retro look and gelled coiffure. Feeling a little catty this morning?” She turned away. “Ignore him. He forgot to take his meds this morning.”

  — —

  The trial opened with a rapid verbal volley-for-serve as the parties vied to preempt the proceedings. The Existendia team kicked it off with a motion to dismiss. Judge Steadman listened patiently to the plea, but as soon as Bannon Turndale returned to his seat, ruled against the motion. Hal Workman then countered by entering a motion for summary judgement for the plaintiffs.

  “On what grounds, Counselor?”

  “Res ipsa loquitor. Location, instrument, and ownership, operation, and control over the cause of death.”

  “The facts, which you claim speak for themselves, have yet to be established. That is the first purpose of these proceedings, to establish the facts and thereby determine liability, if any. Motion denied.”

  The remainder of the first day was taken up by opening arguments, with the plaintiffs laying out their case as being straightforward and irrefutable on the face of it considering three incontrovertible facts: that the death happened on the premises of Existendia; that it was the result of equipment belonging to them; and that said equipment was connected to and under the control of computers and computer programs developed by them and operated by them. For his turn, Bannon Turndale, parading and gesticulating as if he were in a made-for-streaming Internet drama, told an elaborate story of incredibly complex systems and software that the company could not reasonably be expected to fully comprehend, much less be responsible for, especially since the alleged weapon was actually wielded under the intelligent control of the Drucker Proxy.

  Leah Goldstein jumped in. “Objection, the so-called proxy is not a party to this case and neither its intelligence nor its agency has been or can be established.”

  “Overruled. We are still in opening arguments, Counsel, and the Defense is afforded greater latitude at this point. Plaintiffs will have ample opportunity later to challenge their characterization of the soft
ware when you start making your case tomorrow. Defense may proceed.”

  Turndale took his time finishing his oration and Judge Steadman banged his gavel. “Court is in recess until ten tomorrow morning.” The buzz of dozens of conversations returned as Steadman exited.

  Dana, Rolf, and Tonika intercepted Barbra as she rose from the plaintiffs table. “So, what do you think? How did it go?” Dana asked.

  Leah looked up from her papers. “I should be asking you all. I was in the middle of it. You have the better perspective from the gallery.”

  “Really?” Rolf said. “Seemed pretty boring, to be honest.”

  “Boring is good at this stage, as long as you don’t put the jury to sleep or piss off the judge. You want to build your case to a climax, with the drama coming toward the end, when it can sway the jury and stick in their minds.”

  Dana raised her eyebrows. “You sound more like a playwright or a screenwriter than a lawyer.”

  “Well, that’s a step up from many of the things I’ve been called. But, yeah, there’s a little of that and a lot of knowing the law, plus remembering who the audience is, always addressing the court but playing to the jury.”

  Hal Workman seemed impatient to get into the conversation. “I’ll have to admit, I wasn’t bored. Yes, I know, technically, this is a civil case around liability, but it’s also more like a criminal case in a lot of ways, so both of us are reaching deep into our old kit bags. And we have the whole Drucker Unified team to back us up, including Doug Pulaski here.” He nodded to a portly young man whose gray pinstripes exaggerated rather than hid his bulk. “Doug came to us last year from the district attorney’s office. He was hoping to get away from the courtroom, but he’s been a big help in planning strategy.” Doug flashed a smile around the group and returned to reorganizing the contents of his briefcase.

  “And can you say more about that strategy?” Dana asked.

  “Not within earshot of Turndale and his team, I can’t, but it is a jury trial, and it is about life-and-death, so you can expect the dramatic tension to ramp up as we go.” He flipped back the top pages on his legal pad. “And your testimony, Dana, is scheduled for day after tomorrow. That should up the game a bit.”

  — —

  She did not find the tension ramping up, even when Leah skillfully drew out Dana’s own vivid testimony about coming on the murder scene. It wasn’t until she was under cross-examination that her anxiety rose as the defense attacked her credibility, questioned her about apparent inconsistencies in her recall, and challenged her interpretations of what she had seen. They hammered home the point that she was not an expert, not qualified to reach forensic conclusions about what had happened in her absence.

  She left the stand feeling like a failure, but at the lunch break, Hal and Leah reassured her that she had done fine. “Wait until you see what we do with your testimony this afternoon.”

  The afternoon and the following days were filled with a protracted parade of experts. Hal Workman, true to his retro attire, took a classic approach, methodically laying out his case for the plaintiffs, step by step establishing that Existendia, and specifically its Chief Technology Officer, Aram Netsky, was fully and directly responsible for the performance of the proxy software and all its associated equipment.

  Workman began by calling Lieutenant Darryl Brookwood, the police officer who had led the crime scene investigation.

  “And as to the tracks on the carpeting, what were your findings with regard to those?”

  “They were made by the wheels of the telepresence robot.”

  “Can you confirm that the telepresence robot you examined is in fact Plaintiffs’ Exhibit B, a U-mote Model F2F, serial number J52399AA26-US?”

  “Yes, that’s my initials on the evidence tag.”

  “Please tell the court the results of your examination.”

  “The face of the screen of the robot was splattered with blood and there was blood on the wheels of the robot which matched the blood on the tracks in the carpet and the blood of the victim.”

  “Objection.” Bannon Turndale’s voice bordered on weary. “The witness is a crime scene investigator, not a laboratory scientist, and would have had no access to any lab results at the time of his initial investigation.”

  “Sustained.”

  “Lieutenant Brookwood, did you have occasion to review laboratory results on the samples of blood taken from the scene?”

  “I did.”

  “This is a copy of Plaintiffs’ Exhibit C. Do you recognize this document?”

  “Yes, it’s the lab report on the blood samples taken from the scene. That’s my initials on the second line.”

  “And what are the conclusions of this report?”

  “That the blood on the carpet and on the wheels and display screen of the telepresence robot matched that of the victim.”

  “And what conclusion did you draw from the blood on the carpet and on the display screen?”

  “From the pattern of blood spatters on the chair and carpet, it is clear that the robot could not have been more than two feet from the victim when the fatal blow was struck.”

  “But Ms. Carmody has testified that when she entered, the robot was more than ten feet from the victim when she arrived.”

  “Correct, and that is where it was when I arrived.”

  “How did it get from near the victim to the other side of the room?”

  “Objection.” Turndale half rose from his seat. “Calls for speculation on matters not witnessed.”

  “Overruled. Defense has already accepted the Lieutenant as an expert witness and this is within his area of expertise.”

  “I will reword the question, Your Honor. Please tell the court your conclusions and their basis regarding the conflicting evidence of the blood spatters and the location of the robot when you arrived.”

  “Yes. The pattern of blood on the carpet left by the wheels of the robot indicated that it traversed the room under its own power.”

  “It was not dragged or manually moved?”

  “No, the wheels on that model lock when not powered, keeping the unit from rolling. If it had been dragged, the blood on the carpet would have been smeared, which it was not. And it clearly had not been lifted and moved. So, it was moved under power by remote control.”

  “Remote control? What do you mean by that?”

  “By whatever or whomever was connected to the telepresence robot at the time. In normal use, there would be a human operator at the other end with a joystick controlling movement of the robot.”

  “And in this case?”

  “The unit was under control of a software program, an artificial intelligence referred to by the company, Existendia that is, as a digital proxy.”

  “Objection. The witness is not qualified as an expert in information technology.”

  “Sustained.”

  “No further questions.”

  The parade of expert testimony continued until it was Rolf Nagy’s turn to testify as a robotics expert. With Hal walking him through a meticulous line of questioning, the workings of the robotics arm and Rolf’s findings on its operation were laid out in reasonably simple terms to make it easy for the jury to follow.

  On cross-examination, Turndale tried to undermine the conclusions, but Rolf held his ground. Turndale kept returning to the difference between certainty and Rolf’s insistence, as an engineer, on qualifying his statements. “So then, in wrapping up, can you say for certain, that the robot arm did not, in and of itself, simply malfunction in such a way as to cause the death of Mr. Drucker?”

  “From the tests I supervised, it would be virtually impossible for the arm to operate in such a manner on its own.”

  “Please answer with a simple yes or no. Could the robot arm have malfunctioned on its own in such a way as to deliver the fatal blow? Yes or no?

  “It’s a matter of—”

  “Your Honor,”—Bannon turned toward the bench—“please instruct the witness to answer the
question as asked.”

  The expression on Judge Steadman’s face suggested he was not unsympathetic with Rolf’s position, but he directed him to answer with either a yes or a no.

  Rolf frowned. “What was the question again? You asked it in more than one way.”

  “Is it … was it possible that the robot arm malfunctioned on its own in such a way as to deliver the blow that killed Mr. Drucker?”

  “Yes, it’s possible, but—”

  “No further questions.” Turndale turned his back on the witness and strode toward the defense table.

  Leah Goldstein stood as Turndale took his seat. “Redirect, Your Honor.”

  Steadman nodded. “Proceed.”

  “Mr. Nagy, you testified that the robot arm was operating under external control when it struck Mr. Drucker in the back of the head, is that correct?”

  “Yes.”

  “Objection. This has been covered.”

  “With the court’s indulgence, I am merely establishing context for my next questions.”

  “Objection overruled.”

  “Mr. Nagy, how do you know that the arm was operating under external control at that time?”

  “Because there is a record, a logger in the arm that automatically records every instruction the arm receives. We copied the contents of that chip as part of the forensic tests. The arm was instructed to do exactly what it did. It’s in our report.”

  “This report,”—she held up a bound sheaf of papers— “Exhibit D.”

  “Yes.”

  “So then, can you say with certainty that the robot arm was operating under external control when it delivered the fatal blow?”

  “Yes, with absolute certainty.”

  “Thank you. No further questions. The plaintiffs rest.”

  Judge Steadman called an early lunch recess.

  — —

  Dana was surprised by the abrupt end to their case, and during the break asked Leah why she wasn’t calling anyone from Existendia to try and establish some sort of culpability. “Because I can do that during cross as they try to paint their way out of responsibility. That way my questions come after theirs, and their answers will seem to weigh more heavily. Trust me, we know what we are doing. We stopped where it made most sense to stop, with Rolf Nagy’s testimony that the arm was under external control when the blow was struck. That way they can’t get off by implying it was a manufacturing defect. It was their computers running their software. We don’t have to know what those programs were doing or how they ended up sending the instructions to the arm. Existendia should have settled before trial. We’re going to win this, and we’re going to win big.”