âBoboâ character, here, is the result of good police work, which gives Mr. Evans the chance to demonstrate what a great citizen he is. But isnât the truth of the matter that the only reason heâs here isbecause the police have him on a criminal matter, and have offered him a deal if he comes here and implicates someone else? Isnât that the real story?
Â
Does it really surprise anyone that a man who is capable of robbing a drugstore, and he has admitted to doing just that, who then sells the loot from the robbery, and he has admitted to that, and who is caught with drugs, and he has admitted to thatâthen tries to get a lighter sentence by testifying against another person? Isnât his character, if you can call it character, clear? Hasnât he proven by his own admissions who he is? What he is?
Â
Camera pulls back from POV of JUDGE. We see only MR. and MRS. HARMON on one side of COURTROOM, a few strangers on the other side. The COURTROOM is nearly empty. The camera pans to COURT CLERK, who is going through mail. Then to court STENOGRAPHER, who takes down proceedings. Then to COURT OFFICER, who is nodding, close to sleep.
Â
BRIGGS
Â
What I submit to you, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is that Mr. Evans made the mistake of selling the cigarettes he stole during the robbery. Did he do the shooting? I donât know. But naturally he says he didnât do it. If he had sat up there on the witness stand and said he did the shooting, he would never have been offered the deal he got. The only way out for him is to look around and find somebody else to accuse. And thatâs precisely what he did. He could have picked anyone else in the neighborhood. Half the young men of that age group are either unemployed or underemployed. He happened to pick Mr. King.
Â
The State did not produce one witness to the murder. They produced one witness, Miss Henry, who said she saw Mr. King in the store. Where was her mind at the time? According to her testimony, it was on the health and wellbeing of her grandchild. Could she havemade a mistake? Evidently she has. Not that she did not see someone in the store, but whom did she see? She was taken to the police station and given a set of photographs. From these photographs she picked, at police urging, Mr. King. But she didnât pick out this photo from a thousand photographs, or a book of photographs or even 50 photographs. She was shown a handful of photos and asked to pick one. Later, when she had to pick someone from a lineup, what was she doing? Was she picking out the man she saw in the drugstore, or was she picking out the man the police had given her in the photographs? Thatâs for you, the jury, to decide. We heard Mrs. Moore testify that James King was at her house at the time of the incident. Shall we assume that every person who is related to an accused person is going to lie? I donât think so. The prosecution, Miss Petrocelli, paraded in front of you a bunch of admitted criminals, people who have participated in stickups, buyingand selling stolen goods, you name it. She has asked you to believe them. Then she asks you not to believe Mrs. Moore, who has never committed a crime in her life. Think about it. If you met these people on the street, which would you believe, which would you trust?
Â
As for Osvaldo Cruz, he is putting as much distance between himself and this crime as possible. All he was supposed to do was to stand outside and push a garbage can in front of a potential pursuer. But there wasnât a pursuer, because Mr. Evans and whoever he was withâif indeed he was with anyone elseâmade sure of that. And think about this: Lorelle Henry, who seemed for all the world like a decent, law-abiding human being, testified that she was sure that there were 2 men in the store, 2 men involved in the robbery. And we have 2 men who have admitted participation. I submit to you that thereâs no need
Â
Does it really surprise anyone that a man who is capable of robbing a drugstore, and he has admitted to doing just that, who then sells the loot from the robbery, and he has admitted to that, and who is caught with drugs, and he has admitted to thatâthen tries to get a lighter sentence by testifying against another person? Isnât his character, if you can call it character, clear? Hasnât he proven by his own admissions who he is? What he is?
Â
Camera pulls back from POV of JUDGE. We see only MR. and MRS. HARMON on one side of COURTROOM, a few strangers on the other side. The COURTROOM is nearly empty. The camera pans to COURT CLERK, who is going through mail. Then to court STENOGRAPHER, who takes down proceedings. Then to COURT OFFICER, who is nodding, close to sleep.
Â
BRIGGS
Â
What I submit to you, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is that Mr. Evans made the mistake of selling the cigarettes he stole during the robbery. Did he do the shooting? I donât know. But naturally he says he didnât do it. If he had sat up there on the witness stand and said he did the shooting, he would never have been offered the deal he got. The only way out for him is to look around and find somebody else to accuse. And thatâs precisely what he did. He could have picked anyone else in the neighborhood. Half the young men of that age group are either unemployed or underemployed. He happened to pick Mr. King.
Â
The State did not produce one witness to the murder. They produced one witness, Miss Henry, who said she saw Mr. King in the store. Where was her mind at the time? According to her testimony, it was on the health and wellbeing of her grandchild. Could she havemade a mistake? Evidently she has. Not that she did not see someone in the store, but whom did she see? She was taken to the police station and given a set of photographs. From these photographs she picked, at police urging, Mr. King. But she didnât pick out this photo from a thousand photographs, or a book of photographs or even 50 photographs. She was shown a handful of photos and asked to pick one. Later, when she had to pick someone from a lineup, what was she doing? Was she picking out the man she saw in the drugstore, or was she picking out the man the police had given her in the photographs? Thatâs for you, the jury, to decide. We heard Mrs. Moore testify that James King was at her house at the time of the incident. Shall we assume that every person who is related to an accused person is going to lie? I donât think so. The prosecution, Miss Petrocelli, paraded in front of you a bunch of admitted criminals, people who have participated in stickups, buyingand selling stolen goods, you name it. She has asked you to believe them. Then she asks you not to believe Mrs. Moore, who has never committed a crime in her life. Think about it. If you met these people on the street, which would you believe, which would you trust?
Â
As for Osvaldo Cruz, he is putting as much distance between himself and this crime as possible. All he was supposed to do was to stand outside and push a garbage can in front of a potential pursuer. But there wasnât a pursuer, because Mr. Evans and whoever he was withâif indeed he was with anyone elseâmade sure of that. And think about this: Lorelle Henry, who seemed for all the world like a decent, law-abiding human being, testified that she was sure that there were 2 men in the store, 2 men involved in the robbery. And we have 2 men who have admitted participation. I submit to you that thereâs no need
Similar Books
