Superposition Read Free Page A

man who might have made a killing as a defense attorney but who had chosen to be a prosecutor out of a sense of conscience. I might have been impressed with him myself, if he weren’t trying to get me sent away to prison for life.
    â€œLadies and gentlemen,” he said, pivoting and raising his hands. “This case is about murder.” The courtroom was packed with journalists and gawkers, but Haviland addressed himself to the jurors, not to the crowd. I studied them—six men and six women of a variety of ages and races—trying to gauge whether they were likely to be sympathetic or not. It was difficult to tell.
    â€œMurder, pure and simple,” Haviland continued. “The taking of another man’s life. You have never met Brian Vanderhall, and now you will never get the chance, but let us not forget that he was a very real person. Just like your own husbands or fathers or sons. Was he a flawed person? Perhaps. Aren’t we all? That doesn’t mean that at thirty-eight years old, he deserved to have his life torn away from him.
    â€œMr. Sheppard is going to try to convince you that this case is about technology. He’s going to make your mind spin with words like ‘quarks’ and ‘leptons’ and confuse the facts with expert testimony about science that only a few people in the world understand. It’s nothing more than a conjuror’s show, designed to distract you from the evidence. And the evidence, ladies and gentlemen, is very clear. The facts will show you that Mr. Jacob Kelley murdered Brian Vanderhall in cold blood.” As he said my name, Haviland leveled an accusing finger at me. I wondered if they taught him to do that in law school, or whether he’d just picked it up from the movies.
    â€œYour task, ladies and gentlemen, is to find the truth. In our great country, we don’t believe the highly educated or the very rich are more qualified to find the truth than you are. Truth is something we can all recognize and understand. That’s why we choose to put the safety of our homes and neighborhoods in your hands. We trust you to have the courage to convict Mr. Kelley”—the pointing finger again—“of the heinous crime of murder.”
    One juror’s eyebrows furrowed slightly, and I thought Haviland might have gone a bit too far with the word heinous . If he wanted to project himself as a man of the people, he was going to have to keep his vocabulary down.
    â€œYou’ve all heard the term ‘beyond reasonable doubt,’” Haviland continued conversationally, starting to pace a little and rub his chin. “I want to explain to you what that means. Sometimes people get the idea that you can’t convict a man unless there is no possible way he could be innocent. That’s not true. The word reasonable is crucial: Is it reasonable to think that Jacob Kelley is innocent? Given the amount of evidence that you will see, would that evidence be enough to convince you, as a reasonable person, to take action on an important matter in your own life? That’s what the law means, and Judge Roswell will tell you the same thing. Even Mr.—”
    â€œExcuse me, councilor,” the judge interrupted. “You have a great deal of latitude in your opening statement, but I am going to ask you to refrain from giving my opinion, about which you can have little insight.”
    Haviland was instantly contrite. “My apologies, Your Honor.”
    â€œMembers of the jury,” the judge went on. “I will remind you that opening statements are not evidence, nor are they law. They are an opportunity for the councilors to introduce their cases to you, but you are not to hold their words as having any weight in this case. The witnesses they call will provide the evidence, and I will explain the law.” She nodded at Haviland. “You may proceed.”
    â€œThank you, Your Honor,” Haviland said, although