Lawyer O’Brien asked, “Have you ever socialized with Doctor Smith?”
And Bill Bradfield replied, “Never.”
Then Bill Bradfield gave a great deal of testimony regarding a mustache that Jay Smith had had in August of 1977 at Ocean City (the courier was clean-shaven) and how his hair never had any gray in it (as the bogus couriers did) and how Jay Smiths mustache then had been the same as it was this day in court. And since no one else had ever seen Jay Smith with a mustache until this very day in court, Bill Bradfield went on to say that they had joked about his growing a summer mustache on that August day.
When it was the prosecutors turn to cross-examine, there was a great deal of testimony as to how Bill Bradfield got around to remembering the date that he’d seen Jay Smith at the shore, but he didn’t tell his “I had a dream” experience.
He had to repeat it all again, about how he’d been driving along in the Cadillac, and how he stopped at a restaurant because he hadn’t eaten all day. And there was Dr. Smith, and they talked, and decided to visit Fred because Dr. Smith “suggested we not eat.”
“That’s why you didn’t eat?” the prosecutor asked.
“That’s correct,” Bill Bradfield testified.
“Not to be facetious,” the prosecutor said, “Doctor Smith’s judgment overprivileged you?”
And there he was, Bill Bradfield, in front of twelve good men and true, and a courtroom full of people, and members of the press, and a few teacher witnesses who knew him. He was being asked publicly if Dr. Jay C. Smith could overrule Bill Bradfields hunger pangs with a mere suggestion.
Bill Bradfield lost his professional demeanor. He got mad. He said, “It wasn’t a judgment of privilege!” And he started stammering. “That didn’t … the present interest was …”
The prosecutor tried to speak but got cut short by Bill Bradfield who said, “I don’t think that is relevant at all! I don’t think it was a judgment of privilege!”
“Just answer the questions,” the judge advised. “Just answer the questions.”
Bill Bradfield eventually testified to driving around lost with Jay Smith as his helpmate. (The prosecutor asked if Dr. Smith was his “co-pilot.” It was droll, rather the opposite of having God as your co-pilot.) And they drove around and around until they found a man working in his garden. His named turned out to be Rudy. And they were directed to Fred’s and knocked and left a note and departed.
“Can you identify Rudy here in the courtroom?” the prosecutor asked.
“I don’t know,” Bill Bradfield replied.
“Would you know Rudy if you saw him?”
“I don’t know that I would.”
Then the prosecutor said, “Isn’t it a fact, Mr. Bradfield, that you didn’t meet Rudy until 1978? And never saw him in the summer of 1977? Isn’t that a fact?”
“I saw Rudy with Doctor Smith on August 27th of 1977!” Bill Bradfield said. “Mr. Wattenmaker told me that Rudy said two tall men in a red Cadillac came looking for directions.”
“So if Rudy said he didn’t meet you until 1978, that would be inaccurate?”
“That’s correct,” Bill Bradfield testified.
And then Bill Bradfield added a little detail that made it as vivid as alligator shoes. He said that when they returned to the restaurant Dr. Jay Smith had stuck him with the check. He looked toward the jury, but no one smiled.
Fred Wattenmaker’s neighbor Rudy was called as a witness by the commonwealth and testified that he had seen Bill Bradfield at the shore. But it was lust year. He denied that he’d seen William Bradfield or Jay Smith or anybody else in 1977.
“I’m in my seventies,” Rudy testified. “But I still have a good working mind.”
After less than two hours of deliberation the jury returned with a verdict of guilty in the theft at the Sears store in St. Davids.
That wasn’t the worst of it, not for Bill Bradfield. The jury foreman was interviewed by the press as to the alibi testimony of William S. Bradfield, Jr., and the juror said, “We sure didn’t believe that teacher!”
The juror’s comment was in all the newspapers the next day.
Sue Myers said that Bill Bradfield was furious. It wasn’t so much that Jay Smith had been convicted. It was that the jury hadn’t believed him. He was depressed for days.
William Bradfield was too busy in June to remain depressed for long. He had arrangements to make with Shelly and Rachel who were both finishing their college semesters.
His unique relationship with each of the women in his life is best described by the women in question, and can be because of his reluctance to discard any proof of their love and devotion.
Whereas Susan Reinert’s letters often contain references to sexual love and her need for more of it than he was willing to give, and Rachel’s letters are loaded with obscure sentiments as to philosophical and psychological need, Shelly’s letters are written by a nineteen-year-old girl in love with religion and books and love itself:
Dear Mentor,
In reference to your letter of the fifth, this from Sonnet 25: “Then happy I that love and am belov’d …”
I thank you for the Kenner reference list. What is my library going to look like when I’ve finished the book? My husband may have to cut my chocolate chip allowance to give me more book money. I haven’t gone any farther in The Pound Era than the first chapter, but I’ve read that twice. Maybe when I get to the last chapter I’ll understand his English even if I don’t know what he’s referring to.
I knew some of the terms you wanted me to look up from Greek, and I’m pretty sure I understand the others. You’ll just have to see me in person to quiz me, won’t you? (Heh heh. Devilish laugh. I’m so devious.) When we’re bound for Greece, I’ll get up every morning and declaim from “The Seafarer” or “The Wanderer.”
I was reading a book by C. S. Lewis the other day and it captures perfectly a certain type of happiness. What I’m building up to is that if your letters or visits or love makes me cry, it also makes me feel like having a great deal of buttered toast.
Love always
Chastity until their inevitable marriage is also on the girl’s mind, even as passion awakens.
Dearest Love,
I’ve been to see the monsignor about your annulments. He says there should be no problem about Fran since she married outside the Catholic Church. The problem comes up with Muriel. The Church considers a civil marriage between two Protestants valid, so we have to know if you were validly married according to civil law.
On to more pleasant topics. I love you madly, passionately, eternally, and infinitely. There, I’ve been wanting to get that off my chest. Seriously, I miss you so terribly. Do you know what I’ve been doing? Whenever I come into my room, if there’s no one there, I kiss my pillow and pretend it’s you. I can’t believe how silly I am.
I tell myself I will not be ruled by my passions, that it’s silly to think I’m not strong enough to get through college without you, but I’m lying through my teeth. I want you, heart’s-all-beloved-my-own, and I need you to be with me. I don’t see how I can survive days, let alone years.
Will anyone ever recognize the quality of our love? I think not, but somehow I don’t care.
I’m enclosing St. Josephs prayer for you to replace the copy I gave you. You are my dearest darling.