His legs were crossed, and he was
leaning back in his chair, his fingers interlaced behind his head.
He was smiling.
Take a moment and picture this
scene in your mind. A man with his legs
extended, leaning back comfortably in his chair.
He was clean cut, nothing about
him appeared untoward.
Beside him was sat his
attorney.
This was the defendant, at about
ten minutes after the arrival of the jurors into the courtroom.
I recall noticing how at ease he
was. He was the picture of
relaxation. He didn't appear to be at
all concerned with the fact that before him were the men and women who were to
decide whether he would languish behind bars, or be released back into society
to enjoy his freedom.
What did it mean?
I would have expected to see, at
this point, a man with both feet firmly planted on the ground, sat bolt upright,
and with hands either self-restrained (possibly with his hands clasped and
fingers interlaced, or sitting on his hands) or performing some sort of
pacifying motions, like rubbing his thighs or neck.
If it had been me in front of a
jury with my liberty at stake, I would have been a bundle of nerves.
But he wasn't.
His body language was
extraordinarily contrary to what I ought to have seen.
But again, why?
I reasoned that there were two
possibilities - the first was that the defendant was convinced of his innocence
and that the facts surrounding the case were so obviously self-evident, that
the trial was a mere formality. The
second and more sinister conclusion was that the man, despite his wholesome
appearance, was no stranger to a courtroom and had appeared so often in one to
make an accounting of himself for previous crimes, that the processes of the
judicial system had become familiar enough to him that the prospect of
appearing in a courtroom no longer riled his nerves.
But which scenario was more
likely?
An examination of the prosecuting
attorney displayed a confident individual.
When addressing the jury box, he took an open stance, made strong eye
contact, and was not hesitant in his speech patterns.
After the prosecuting attorney
was through addressing the jurors, the defense stood. By contrast, he stammered often, crossed his
arms to the point of appearing to hug himself in a self-assuring way whenever
he faced the jury box, and avoided eye contact.
The behavior of the two attorneys
rounded out the data set I needed. It
was now highly unlikely that the first of the two possible conclusions could be
true - the defense was frightened by the jury box, the prosecutor was poised
and confident. He was secure in the
strength of his case and therefore the defendant's comfort in the courtroom had
to have come from a comprehensive experience within its walls.
I was dismissed from the case
subsequently, and was not able to witness the actual trial.
However, a public record search
of the court records after the conclusion of the jury trial disclosed that the
defendant had been found guilty of all five counts and that he had an arrest
record that was staggering and which spanned nearly a decade.
My deductions had proved correct.
Sadly.
Outstanding story. I loved reading all of it!
ReplyDeleteDavid