TRIAL DAY TWO SESSION 3 TRUTH REDIRECT

Judge Lynch opened the afternoon session promising the jury more frequent breaks as he believed lunch tended to allow sleep to surround the jury box.  He also cautioned the attorneys that he would not tolerate jury sequestering due to unnecessary squabbling.  Truth took a seat in the jury box.

“You are still under oath and are required to tell the truth,” said Judge Lynch as if he had rehearsed that line.  His broad grin and glance over the gallery suggested this might be a Kodak moment.

Mr. Finch approached Truth while sporting dark sunglasses.”Mr. Truth, you testified under cross examination that you could only tell the truth.  The adept opposing counsel suggested through his questions.”

“Objection, Leading,” said Howe.

“Mr. Finch appears to be rephrasing your question, albeit it in a round about manner.  But I will allow it so long as it ends in a question that ,Howe’s cross examination brought to bear,” said Judge Lynch with a smiling glare aimed at Finch.

“The question that Mr. Howe brought up about men and concept suggested that men lie and therefore truth lies.  Does truth lie?”

“Truth does not lie.  However since more than one truth can exist, the ultimate truth must come from the facts.”

“Are you suggesting that by not telling the truth one could be lying?”

“The absence of truth is not a lie by itself.  People do not say anything in order to prevent the truth from being revealed,” said Truth.

“You mean like pleading the Fifth?”

“Objection, leading,” said Howe rolling his eyes which seemed to reflect Judge Lynch’s  favorite behavior.

“Abstained.  Mr. Finch, you asked a question that called on witness to render an opinion,” said Judge Lynch.

“Your Honor, he is an expert in Truth and in clear response to Mr. Howe’s question he stated that the absence of truth is often a form of preventing the truth from being revealed, “argued Finch.

The judge paused and seemed to reconsider, “Ask your question in a different way,” said Lynch.

“Mr. Truth, as an example of hiding the truth could you see pleading the Fifth as such a demonstration of hiding information?”

“Yes, that does fit the criteria,” said Truth/

Howe realized that by objecting, he allowed Finch to repeat, clarify and deepen  the definition.  This meant that if his clients plead the Fifth they would be seen as hiding the truth.  He vowed to be more cautious in his objections and he also had to figure out a way to neutralize this ploy by Finch.

“I’m not clear on something you said in response to Mr. Howe’s question.  You said there could be more than one truth and you clarified that only Fact could clarify.  So why do we need Truth at all?”

Howe did not ask that question but when he heard the question by Finch tended to think this was another trick by the prosecutor and did not respond..  Besides he wanted to hear the response and knew that Lynch thought he was in a philosophy class and that Lynch also wanted the answer.

“There are big Truths with a capital T and small truths with a lower case t

.”Would you explain for the jury?”

“As an example. say someone physically injured another person with the intent to do harm.  It becomes the duty of the police, jury or authorities to decide that truth with a small truth.  The larger Truth is that injury to someone is viewed as an accepted Truth.  The Truth is that we do not physically injure another with that intent in mind.”

“Thank you,” said Finch as he sat down.

The goal of the prosecutor is to present incomplete truths that the defense attorney must negate.  Some attorneys can’t think under the gun and occasionally a half truth gets through.  Other counsel can’t see the kernel to be negated.  Some just fall asleep at the switch and are off their game.  Finch just needed to validate the level he suspected from Howe.

“Recross? Mr. Howe,” asked Lynch.

“Just one question.  In your example, if the physical harm was the result of  an intent by a person to defend himself from imminent harm or death, how does big Truth solve this situation?”

“At that juncture proving the truth of ‘who dunnit’ is not the issue.  Rather the Truth of Reason and Fact decide the capital T.”

“Thank you.”

The judge thanked and dismissed the witness and sent the jury for a break. “We have time to start another witness.  Who will that be Mr. Finch?”

“I will call Honesty to the stand.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s