The Orthogonal Galaxy
Chapter 7

With acommanding presence, Warron slid his seat back deliberately, causing a slightsqueak as it rubbed on the tile floor. He stood erect and turned to face the jury. Beginning at the lower left of the jury box,Warron ensured that he had the attention of each juror. Scanning the last juror seated in the upperright corner, a young male college student, he felt confident on whom he shouldfocus to provide the desired results.

Obviously,he needed all twelve to be able to acquit his client, and that was the ultimategoal. However, success could also bemeasured with a single “not guilty” verdict, since a hung jury would reset theentire legal cycle, which favored his client in two ways. First, it gave Warron even more time to builda better case through the learning he had acquired during the first trial. Second, lengthy legal proceedings wouldstretch the resources of the district attorney’s office, causing thestate-appointed counsel to weary of the case.

“Ladies and gentlemen of the jury,” he began. “You will recall that when you were selecteda little over two weeks ago, Judge Etherton shared with you some instructionsthat you must apply during your tenure as a juror in this court. First, he mentioned that the defendent mustbe presumed innocent until proven guilty. As you look over at Mr. Joonter, I trust that none of you have looked athim as a guilty man during the course of this trial. When you walk into your room to deliberate,you must then decide whether there is ample evidence to convict this man of theserious crimes with which he is charged. Because my client is innocent of any wrong-doing, you hold the fate ofhis future in your hand.

“Second,”the lawyer started pacing slowly along the jury in order to make direct eyecontact with each of its fourteen members, “the judge instructed that you donot need to determine his guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt, but instead, youmust determine whether there is ‘reasonable doubt’ in the evidence presented toyou by the prosecution. With that said,it is my duty to convince you that there is most certainly reasonable doubt inthis case. In talking with my client, inreviewing the details of this case, in hearing the arguments put forward by thedistrict attorney, I can certainly assure you of that fact.

“Take alook at the character of Mr. Joonter. Hewas born into the most unfortunate of circumstances. His parents, murdered by a carjacker, lefthim orphaned at the age of two. A kindcouple adopted him and gave him a chance to succeed in life. As an adolescent, he admits that he wasgrateful to his adoptive family, and yet always felt that he didn’t quite fitin, being the only athlete in a family of cultured artists and intellects. We have learned how devastated he was whenhis athletic ambitions ended prematurely from an unfortunate injury that heincurred while playing freshman football. And even in that time of tremendous depression and soul searching, hewas reached out to and befriended by his football coach, who saw greatpotential in him. Stunned that his coachwould take such a personal interest in the life of a youngster who could nolonger play for him, Paol grew curious about the life of this good man. Finding out that he was a devout Christian,he sought religion in his life, and has become an admired member in hiscongregation today.

“I havebrought before you many of the acquaintances of this fine man: neighbors,fellow parishioners, co-workers. Allhave vouched for his character. All haveconfirmed that the crimes committed are not only inconsistent with hischaracter, they are simply inconceivable. Consider that while this business deal turned out very unprofitable forhis high-tech company, we have shown convincingly that there have been otherdeals which he has championed that have even gone worse. Yet, nobody associated with that dealmentioned that it angered or embittered him to any degree. He simply learned from his experience, andcapitalized on his mistakes to improve the quality of business.

“Nowlet’s review some of the details of the case. The district attorney has reminded us that fingerprints leapt off of thegun, yet surveillance video shows that he wore latex gloves during theincident. Why would my client buy a gun,smear his fingerprints all over it, and then wear gloves during the shooting?

“Andwhat of the discovery of the murder weapon? It was found in a dumpster of the Atlanta Airport, where four differenteye-witnesses claimed they saw Mr. Joonter in the airport terminal in the latenight hours of the 28th of March. Yet,his itinerary showed that his flight was not until the 30th, because he had yetanother day of meetings on the 29th. Why, then, would he go through the trouble of driving to the airportjust so he could discard the weapon there, and then show his face in such acrowded public location, only to drive back to his hotel and surrender to localauthorities in his hotel room?

“Butthen we must ask ourselves, what of the audio and video? As for video, we know that it is too easy thesedays to create very realistic masks of anybody. Halloween shops are able to receive portrait and profile photos of anindividual and create a very personalized mask that will fit a specific personused to masquerade as somebody else. Several suspects have been acquitted in other cases where thistechnology was utilized in order to frame the suspect of a crime he or she didnot commit.

“As forthe audio, experts have said that—and I quote—‘the quality of the speechwaveforms implicated Mr. Joonter, although they did not match his voiceperfectly.’ Under oath, they pointed outthat the voice was slightly deeper than that of my client, even though theshape of the waveforms were sufficient to give ‘a high degree of confidence’that the voice recorded at the scene of the crime was that of Mr. Joonter.

“I nowask you jury members, how confident are you? Experts did not say that they knew ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. They said, ‘with a high degree ofconfidence.’ There are many questionsthat remain unanswered in this case. Does that not give you ‘reasonable doubt’?

“Finally,let me remind you that one of your peers has already been removed from theirservice by the court for suspicious interactions, leaving two alternates lefthere today. We do not know exactly whatthese interactions entail, but we believe that they were approached by anunscrupulous individual seeking a verdict against Mr. Joonter. It was a very odd development in the casewhich only left this courtroom filled with more questions, and fewer jurors.”

Warronpaused to take a deep breath and looked earnestly over at his client. “This man, Paol Joonter, is a good,hard-working businessman, whose award-winning accomplishments as CTO ofLifeTech, Incorporated are widely-known in his industry, and arewidely-appreciated in our homes and lives. I implore you to know what I know—that this man is innocent of thecrimes for which he is being charged, and to return a verdict of not guilty. Thank you.”

With hiscase closed, he nodded to the judge as he took his seat. Without fanfare, the judge gave finalinstructions to the jury, and adjourned them for deliberations. Paol Joonter watched as the jury was led outof the courtroom by the court clerk. As thedoor closed, he knew that the fate of his future—and that of his family—wasleft in the hands of this group of people who certainly did not know who thereal murderer was any better than he did. He was completely powerless in the matter now. The jury now contained full discretion overhis future.