Part 5: Episode 1, Trial: A Perfectly Reliable Witness
Part 5: Episode 1, Trial: A Perfectly Reliable Witness
We're really going to have the witness, who "saw" our defendent fleeing the scene of the crime, be named "Saw It"?
Oh, that's the murderer from the prologue. This whole thing is a setup.
Here's the profile for our "witness".
Please tell the court what you saw on the day of the murder.
Well, this segment looks special.
Music: Questioning - Moderato
During this entire sequence, the word "Testimony" is flashing in the upper-left, to remind us that we're doing something special here.
There's the flashback shot from the prologue.
Thinking it strange, I looked inside the apartment.
I quailed in fright and found myself unable to go inside. I thought to call the police immediately! However, the phone in her apartment wasn't working. I went to a nearby park and found a public phone.
The man who ran was, without a doubt, the defendant sitting right over there.Well, I can find two holes in this testimony right now. How did he know the phone in the apartment wasn't working if he never set foot in the apartment? And he said the time he found the body was 1pm, but the autopsy report said the time of death was 4pm. Also wouldn't there be a record of when the call went in to the police?
Music: Silence
On its own though, that testimony definitely shows that Larry had the opportunity to commit the murder. Showing the means is a simple deduction of him having the strength to wield the murder weapon, which was likely nearby at the time. Right now, we're pretty much screwed.
(I can't defend you against a testimony like that!)Oh, relax. We still have our side to present here.
Your Honor, at the time of the murder, there was a blackout in the building.
Aren't phones supposed to work during a blackout? Yes, However, some cordless phones do not function normally.
This line doesn't quite make sense - Mr. Sahwit saw the phone, but he didn't use it because it didn't work. Maybe a translation error?
Your Honor...
Noon to 6pm covers both the 1pm time that Mr. Sahwit said he found the victim, and the actual 4pm-5pm time of death. I actually went and double-checked the time of death from the autopsy here, just to make sure I was remembering right.
I couldn't object during the testimony itself, but we'll still get our chance to cross-examine this sleazebag!
Assuming Mia doesn't kill us first...
Music: Telling the Truth
Uh... what exactly am I supposed to do?
Lies! What?! He was lying!?
Then that witness must have lied in his testimony! Or is your client really... guilty? !!! How do I prove he's not?
Compare the witness's testimony to the evidence at hand.
I'd like to think that in the real world they would've found this discrepancy long before the trial itself, but here we are.
Um... okay.
Okay! I know this is just the beginner case, but knowing where to start here feels good.
Music: Questioning - Allegro
Here's how this is going to work. We repeat every line in the testimony one by one, and can choose whether to "Press" the witness on what he said, or "Present" contradicting information from the Court Record (or do nothing at all). As far as I can tell, these options are mutually exclusive. Now, I could fiddle my way through this cross-examination myself line-by-line, but where would be the fun in that? Let's have you all weigh in here! There are ten lines of dialogue in the testimony, so I need ten inputs from you all. If "Present" is selected, I'll figure out what to present from there myself, or you can suggest options in the thread.