Jury Duty: Flashback 3 - Who To Believe?...

Recap:

-Trial has begun, attorneys start with Opening Statements
-This turns out to be a case of Spousal Abuse, but belies the complexity that lies within the case
-Mrs. S takes the stand


Mrs. S walks up to the witness stand. Her stride is filled with nervous energy with nowhere to go. She fidgets in her chair before being sworn in.

Prosecution launches into their questions. At the time of the incident, she admitted that she and her husband were both drunk. Her husband did throw a glass at her, most likely sparked by the argument they had. Mrs. S continued to live with her husband 4 months after the incident, and said she "does not want to see him get in trouble."

Defense's turn. They establish that the events that took place prior to the incident were the same, but the way it ultimately played out differed. Defense asks where in relation Mr. S was to Mrs. S at the time of the throw. Mrs. S says she was 10 ft. away from her husband. This time she says that she was NOT hit "directly" by the glass. Mr. S had thrown the glass, but it was directed toward a bonfire that was lit in their backyard. The glass had "ricocheted" from the cement ground, and a piece of it had flown right at her face. She didn't see the glass coming 'cause she was talking to her niece at the time of impact. Defense goes further and asks if this was an "accident."

"Yes," she says.

Defense has no further questions. Prosecution rockets up and out of their chair, not looking pleased at all.

"So, TODAY you're saying that this was an ACCIDENT?," asks the Prosecution.

"Yes," Mrs. S replies again.

Prosecution goes on to call in two officers to testify. The first was one of the arresting officers (A Caucasian fluent in Spanish) from that night. He testified that while taking Ms. S's statement, she had told him that her husband threw a glass at her, but at no time did she mention the word "accident" in her statement. Furthermore, Mr. S had signed a statement - a form that was written in Spanish - attesting to the fact that he did throw a glass at his wife. He did not write down that it was accident on his written statement.

Defense was curious as to why no one thought to look for the glass in question. "Since the story of the event had been fully corroborated by both parties, it was deemed unnecessary," the officer said.

Yeah, we could have really used that glass.

The second officer was a native Spanish-Speaker. He had called up Mrs. S the next day, asking her about the incident over a phone interview. Once again, Mrs. S told the police that her husband threw the glass at her, but did not mention it was an accident. So after 24 hours, she had not changed her statement.

Defense asked if there was a record of the questions and answers that the officer received from Mrs. S, and of course, there was NONE. The only record to prove that the officer called at all is a Log Report that showed he did call Mrs. S and ask the follow-up questions.

Facts and testimony flew fast and furious around the courtroom that afternoon. My pencil was worn down to a nub by the end of the day.

When we finally walked out of the courtroom, Mr. S was sitting between his wife and daughter, holding their hands tightly, his eyes pleading to the jurors.

Too many pieces weren't making sense or adding up - or we just didn't like the way things were adding up towards.

Only one more testimony to go, and we were all curious to hear what their Daughter had to say.

TO BE CONTINUED... ;)