Our evidence is not exactly ironclad, but we’re just trying to convince one or two jurors. We just don’t have the ammunition to get all twelve; the limited goal is to hang this jury and live to fight another day.
Part of me relishes this moment. After playing defense throughout the trial, this is the time we get to go on the attack. We are in control of what happens over the next few days. It’s much better to punch than to be punched.
But fear is there as well. If we, if I, don’t get it done, then a person I believe to be innocent is going to be in prison for the rest of his life. I am not crazy about many things in lawyering, especially the intense work that comes with each and every case, but the worst part is this fear.
Speaking of worst parts, Hike comes over to help finalize our preparations. Once we’ve done that, Hike shakes his head and says, “No way the jury would buy this, but it’s not going to matter. The judge won’t let it in.”
That’s my Hike.
“The defense calls Laurie Collins.”
Laurie stands up and walks to the stand. Every eye in the courtroom is on her, but she is used to that. When you look like Laurie, it’s the rare eye that is not staring at you.
For all of the pressure of the moment, I’m reminded of the scene from My Cousin Vinny when Marisa Tomei as Mona Lisa Vito takes the stand. I half smile to myself as I expect to hear Laurie say, “You can’t make those marks without positraction, which was not available on the Buick Skylark!”
I briefly take Laurie through her work history, the highlights of which are as a lieutenant in the Paterson Police Department, and as chief of police in her hometown of Findlay, Wisconsin. “What is your job now?” I ask.
“I’m a private investigator. Employed by you.”
When I introduce a photograph of Freddie Siroka, Jenna asks if we can approach the bench. Once we do, she says, “Your Honor, before we go down this path, can we at least have a good faith showing that it’s not a fishing expedition and is in fact relevant?”
“Your Honor,” I say, “we will demonstrate relevance very quickly. And since Ms. Silverman has seen our discovery documents, she knows that as well as I do. I would respectfully suggest that she be proactively prevented from what are likely to be constant interruptions.”
“Thank you, Mr. Carpenter, I deeply appreciate your advice on how to run my courtroom. I’ll allow you to proceed for now, subject to your delivering on your promise to quickly demonstrate relevance.”
I resume my questioning, asking Laurie if she has ever met Freddie Siroka, and she confirms that she has and gives the date of that meeting.
“Where did this take place?”
“At Hinchliffe Stadium, in the general area of where Kristen McNeil was killed. We were visiting the scene to gather information.”
“Why was Mr. Siroka there?”
“We had determined that he had been following you. When we confronted him, he became violent. One of my fellow investigators subdued him, and then we detained and questioned him as to his motivation for doing the surveillance on you.”
“Did he admit that he was in fact following me?”
She nods. “He did.”
“Did he say why?”
“He said that he was hired by a Mr. George Taillon to do so, and that it was in reference to the Kristen McNeil case.”
Jenna does not bother making a hearsay objection because she knows what’s coming. She’s heard the tape as part of discovery.
“Are you positive you are relating the substance of what he said accurately?”
“I am. I surreptitiously made a tape of it as he was talking.”
I introduce the tape as evidence, in addition to an affidavit from our voice expert, a professor at Rutgers, that it is in fact Siroka. He has compared the voice on the tape to the voice on Siroka’s voice mail. “Our expert is in the courtroom if Your Honor wishes to hear from him directly,” I say.
Neither Judge Stiller nor Jenna considers it necessary; since the professor has already provided the affidavit, they both know what he will say. We play the tape, confirming all that Laurie had said.
“If you know, where is Mr. Siroka now?” I ask.
“He is dead.”
“Natural causes?”
She shakes her head. “He was shot in the head.”
Jenna starts her cross by asking if Laurie is familiar with Siroka’s arrest and conviction history.
“Yes, I am.”
“So you know about the nine arrests, four convictions, and three prison terms?”
“Yes.”
“As a former police officer, did you find that you could rely on people with that kind of record to be truthful?”
“Sometimes they are, and sometimes they are not.”
“I see,” Jenna says. “I notice nowhere on that tape did Mr. Siroka say what the purpose was in following Mr. Carpenter. He just vaguely mentioned this case, but did not say what he or his employer had to gain by the surveillance. Is there something I missed?”
“I don’t know what you missed or didn’t miss,” Laurie says, twisting the knife, “but you are correct that Siroka did not say that.”
“Did he have listening equipment with him?”
“No.”
“Binoculars? Night-vision goggles?”
“No and no.”
“So he was just watching Mr. Carpenter as he went through his day?”
“Apparently.”
“If Mr. Carpenter went to the supermarket, or the post office, Mr. Siroka would report that?”
“I don’t know what he would report or not report.”
“You said your other investigator subdued him, and then you questioned him. Is that correct?”
“That is correct.”
“Is it possible that he feared being subdued even harder if he didn’t come up with a story for you?”
“I don’t know what was going through his mind. But as you heard on the tape, we did not threaten him.”
“Thank you. No further questions.”
Jenna has done an effective job on cross, but we still did well by having the jury hear a tape of Siroka admitting that the surveillance was related to this case. Had Laurie not made the tape, our case would be coming to a screeching halt right now.
But instead we move on.
Kyle Wainwright has gone back and forth since his conversation with Jeremy Kennon.
His decision was whether to tell his father that Carpenter might be coming after him. Kennon had said he wasn’t sure; he admitted it was possible he misread the signals that Carpenter might or might not have been sending.
But Kennon was a smart guy whom Kyle respected, so he figured chances were good he was right. Carpenter might be intent on slandering Arthur Wainwright in a very public way, accusing him at least indirectly of having an affair with Kristen and maybe even being involved in her murder.
Kyle’s relationship with his father had been checkered at best. Kyle respected Arthur’s intelligence and his accomplishments. But on some level Kyle considered him a fraud, especially for his charitable efforts. He believed Arthur wanted to look good, rather than do good.
Arthur had sold his expensive home in an exclusive Englewood Cliffs neighborhood when his second wife passed away. He had divorced Kyle’s mother when Kyle was ten years old, a defining event in Kyle’s life because of how bitter the divorce was and how little his mother was left with. She had since died as well, leaving Kyle with no mother and a lot of resentment toward his father.
Arthur took a penthouse apartment in a Fort Lee building, with a spectacular view of Manhattan. It was easier for him to manage, and closer to the office. He no longer had an outdoor and an indoor pool or a tennis court or a private gym. That was okay with him because he didn’t swim or play tennis or exercise.
Kyle rarely came by; he had only visited three times in the two years Arthur had lived there. They saw each other in the office all the time, but their work life was much more interactive than their pr
ivate life. Kyle doubted Arthur could pick his granddaughter out of a kiddie lineup.
Besides the personal aspect to the current situation, Kyle agreed with Kennon that a pressing business interest was here. Sliming Arthur’s reputation, even if not proven, could be a major problem for NetLink with its clients. Kyle was someday going to inherit a controlling interest in the company, so he had a lot to protect.
So when Kyle called and said he was coming over to talk, Arthur knew that the subject was going to be significant. But he did not expect what was coming.
“Andy Carpenter is coming after you,” Kyle said.
“Coming after me? What does that mean?”
“I’m not positive, but I think he’s going to claim that you had an affair with Kristen, and—”
“That’s insane!” Arthur screamed, showing more emotion than Kyle thought he had ever seen from him.
“I’m not finished. He might also be pointing to you as the killer.”
“Where are you getting this from?”
“Jeremy. He had a conversation with Carpenter, and this is the feeling he got. He’s not sure, but we thought you should know so you can be prepared.”
“Just let him try it. He has no evidence. I will sue him for every dime he’s ever made or ever will make. I will grind him into dust.”
“He is a well-respected attorney; I don’t think it’s a good idea to underestimate him.”
“Into dust. Into dust.”
So Kyle left, having fulfilled his duty. He was not sorry he’d warned his father that Carpenter was going to be making the accusations.
He was also not sure that Carpenter wasn’t right.
My next witness is Pete Stanton.
I know how much he hates testifying for the defense because he told me that if I made him do this, he would hunt me down after the trial, shoot me, and feed my body in pieces to a tank full of piranhas.
Pete and I are really good friends.
“Captain Stanton, did you hear the tape that was played earlier in this courtroom? The one that testimony demonstrated was the voice of Freddie Siroka?”
“Yes.”
“Did you hear him say that he was hired by George Taillon to follow me?”
“Yes.”
“Were you familiar with Taillon? Could you describe what you knew about him?”
“He was a known criminal for hire. He had a lengthy arrest record, but was a suspect in far more crimes than he was tried for. Witnesses had a way of disappearing or recanting.”
“So a bad guy?”
Pete nods. “A bad guy.”
“Did I come to see you to discuss both Taillon and Siroka?”
“Yes.” Pete is testifying as if he is paying by the word.
“Why did I say I wanted to talk to you?”
“They had both been murdered the night before, and you said you had information about it that could be helpful to the police.”
“Could you describe the circumstances of those murders, as you know them?”
“They were each shot in the head in Pennington Park and their bodies left there. They were discovered approximately twenty-four hours later.”
“What information did I have for you?”
“You told me the circumstances of Siroka following you, and his mentioning Taillon as his employer. You basically described what was on the tape.”
“Did you give me any information in return?”
“Yes. I told you that Taillon had an associate named Mitch Holzer, a known criminal who worked with Taillon. I warned you that he was dangerous, and that you should be careful if you attempted to talk to him.”
“Did we have another conversation two days later?”
“Yes.”
“Who precipitated that conversation?”
“I did. I was hoping you might have information regarding the murder of Mitch Holzer.”
“The Mitch Holzer we spoke about two days earlier?”
Pete nods. “Yes.”
“He was murdered during the course of those two days?”
“Yes.”
“What did I tell you in our second meeting?”
“That you had spoken to Holzer, and he had revealed to you that he believed that the person Taillon and Siroka were working for was a man named Arrant. Holzer believed that Arrant might have been the killer.”
“Did you do any research into who Arrant might be?”
“Yes. His full name was Charles Arrant. He was wanted for a decade by Interpol, with arrest warrants in three European countries. He was wanted for murder and various serious financial crimes.”
“Also a bad guy?”
Pete nods. “A very bad guy.”
“All of these murders we have been talking about … Siroka, Taillon, and Holzer. Is Noah Traynor a suspect in any of them?”
“No.”
“Because he has been in jail this entire time, awaiting trial?”
“That is correct.”
I turn Pete over to Jenna, who feigns boredom with the whole thing, as if this is just something we need to get through before the jury can vote to convict Noah.
Her questions are brief and to the point. “All of these people you are talking about, Siroka, Taillon, Holzer, and Arrant, they are all likely murderers?”
“I can’t be sure about all of them, but it’s a decent bet,” Pete says.
“In your experience, are murderers violent people?”
“Yes.”
“And sometimes they die violently?”
“Sometimes.”
“Did any of them have their skin fragments under the fingernails of Kristen McNeil?”
“No.”
“Thank you.”
“The defense calls Corey Douglas,” I say.
Corey comes to the stand. For him, a cop for many years, testifying in a trial is nothing close to new.
I take him through his work history, his recent retirement, and his work for us as an investigator. He also talks about Simon, and their work and personal life together. I’m quite sure that at least some members of the jury must have seen coverage of the hearing in which we secured Simon’s early retirement.
Within ten minutes, I’ve turned Corey’s attention to the night I was walking in the park with Tara and Sebastian. “You were there watching out for me? Protecting me?”
He nods. “Yes. You were not aware of it.”
“Can you describe what happened?”
“An assailant was lying in wait for you in the park. He was preparing to shoot you, so I ordered Simon to attack him. Simon subdued him, and I was able to get his gun. I ordered him to stand and turn around, so that I could handcuff him.”
“Did he obey your orders?”
“He started to, but he had another concealed weapon that he revealed and attempted to fire at me. I shot him in self-defense, and the wound was fatal.”
“Did you learn his identity?”
Corey nods. “Yes. His name was Charles Arrant.”
“The Charles Arrant that Mitch Holzer mentioned to me? The Charles Arrant that was wanted by Interpol?”
Corey nods again. “One and the same.”
I would judge the first day of the defense case to be a modest success.
First and most important, no objections were successfully lodged on admissibility grounds. We are definitely home-free on that front because from here on we will be talking more about Kristen McNeil.
We have shown the jury that a lot of murders have been committed around here, none of which Noah Traynor is responsible for. We have not made an ironclad connection between those murders and this case, but we’ve established a strong inference.
We need to drive that home.
Laurie, Ricky, and I have a nice dinner, during which murders and trials are not mentioned. I’m feeling bad that I haven’t been spending as much time with Ricky as I should; I rationalize it to myself that I am busy trying to prevent Danny Traynor from never spending time with his own father again.
After dinner the phone rings and Laurie answers it. She tells me that it is Herbert Hauser on the phone. I’ve never met Hauser, but I know of him. He’s a corporate attorney and litigator, probably the most successful in New Jersey.
I no sooner say hello than he starts to unload on me. “It has come to my attention that you are preparing to slander my client Arthur Wainwright in open court.”
I suspect that Jeremy Kennon told Wainwright of this possibility, and he freaked out. “Let me guess. You’re calling to warn me against doing that.”
“That is exactly correct. Mr. Wainwright has many options to deal with this kind of disgraceful behavior, and I will personally see to it that he uses them to maximum effect.”
“Could you repeat that? I can barely hear you, what with my heart pounding and my knees knocking.”
“You are obviously living up to your reputation. But you should think long and hard before you slander Mr. Wainwright.”
This guy is really on my nerves. “Is this what you called to tell me, or do you have something to say that I give a shit about?”
“You have been warned, Mr. Carpenter.” Click.
When I get off, Laurie asks, “What was that about?”
“Wrong number.”
I’m not worried about the threats from Arthur’s lawyer.
I will simply be presenting evidence in open court, and every bit of it will be true and accurate. No one is going to perjure themselves. So I will not spend another moment thinking about that.
Much more concerning to me is that I don’t have much to tie Arthur Wainwright or anyone else to the actual murder of Kristen McNeil. I’ve just got to get at least one person on the jury to believe me.
Once I’m done doing what I can to provide reasonable doubt, I’m going to have to make the key decision of the trial, the key decision of every trial: whether to have the defendant testify.
I can’t remember the last time I encouraged a defendant to testify. It brings with it enormous risks. Usually the potential upside doesn’t nearly justify doing it, but this case might just be the exception to that rule.
Dachshund Through the Snow Page 15
