I ask the court to break for the funeral, which is at three, but Grider instructs us to give our opening statements now, saying he wants to complete the trial by tomorrow afternoon if at all possible. Jill seems about to protest (Grider has us both off balance), but comes forward to the podium and tells the jury that while this case is circumstantial, the lies told by the defendant will convict her of the first-degree murder of her husband.
Standing calmly in front of the jury rail, Jill, without a single note, tells the jury that it won’t be able to understand this case until it understands Leigh’s upbringing, and begins by tracing Leigh’s devotion to her father and to Christian Life.
“The defendant’s parents will tell you what their youngest daughter was like before she met the victim. As a child and as an adult until she married Art Wallace, the defendant was devoted to her father and his church, making numerous trips overseas with him to help those less fortunate….” As Jill catalogs Leigh’s Christian virtues before she met Art, I watch the faces of the jury, who already seem intrigued by the story. Tales about the Devil’s work fascinate all of us, and this is where I assume Jill is going with it.
“However, the defendant began to change,” Jill continues, “after her marriage. Pastor Norman will tell you that her husband turned out to be something other than a devout convert to Christian Life. In fact, only weeks after his marriage to the defendant. Art Wallace began to withdraw from the church, and soon so did his wife.
Christian Life, Pastor Norman will tell you, is a way of life. It’s not just a matter of showing up on Sunday.
Laura Partrain, a member of the defendant’s ‘church family,” as they are called in Christian Life, will tell you also that a few months after the defendant’s marriage, Leigh Wallace not only quit her job in the church office but participated less and less in the activities in the church to the point where she only saw her on Sunday mornings, when before she had seen her four or five times a week. Mrs. Partrain will tell you that more than once she confronted Leigh about her absence but was met with a defensive and guilty attitude. Her father and mother, who, by the way, will tell you they believe their daughter is innocent, will also tell you of many conversations with Leigh on the subject of her husband and their near total withdrawal from church activities. Their daughter’s reaction over several months was one of denial and excuses, which brings us down to the night before Art Wallace was murdered.”
Having effectively set the stage, Jill retreats behind the podium, where she has her notes, and begins to summarize the testimony of the witnesses, beginning with the next-door neighbors, the Wheelers, who “over heard the defendant from a distance of several feet admonish her husband to quit saying ugly things about her father.”
The jury noticeably reacts to this bit of information.
Several shift in their seats and lean forward as if they are about to hear some particularly juicy gossip.
“The afternoon after her husband of less than a year is shot to death in his study with a twenty-two-caliber pistol with out a sign of any forced entry suggesting an intruder, the defendant is questioned by the police. She tells them a series of lies designed to mislead them into believing she had actually been at Christian Life at the time of the murder and only discovered her husband’s body when she brought home an older acquaintance to have lunch.”
Jill stops speaking and walks quickly over to a chalk board and writes in a large clear hand: “Lie #1 what the Defendant told her father the day before the murder.” Walking up to the jury rail, she drops her voice almost to a conversational tone and tells the men and women, who are listening as avidly as children to a ghost story, that Shane will testify that he had encouraged Leigh the day before to come the next morning to a workshop led by a Guatemalan missionary and she had assured him that she would. Returning to the chalk board, Jill writes: “Lie #2 Defendant’s story to the police.” Now, moving slowly from one end of the jury box to the other, Jill recites Leigh’s story to the cops and summarizes the testimony of each witness who will contradict it.
Jill concludes by hitting hard at the absence of signs of forced entry.
“Forensic investigators have been all over the house and study where the victim died. They will testify they found absolutely nothing to suggest that anybody was there that morning except Leigh Wallace and her husband. The only reasonable conclusion you can come to, ladies and gentlemen,” Jill winds up, leaning on the jury rail, moving her head from side to side, “is that Leigh Wallace, perhaps in anger, perhaps for some other undisclosed reason, walked into her husband’s study and shot him through the heart with a twenty-two-caliber pistol. Then, disposing of the pistol who knows where, she drove to her father’s church, where she pretended to have been all morning. To divert suspicion from herself, she invited an unsuspecting friend home to help discover her husband’s body, and thus began the web of lies I’ve just told you….”
As I get to my feet, I fight the usual temptation to begin arguing the case, which, of course, is not permitted in the opening statement. Concentrating primarily on the most sympathetic-looking member (a Mrs. Holland seated in the middle of the second row and the only Catholic), I announce to the jury that Leigh will admit that she lied to the police but that she did not kill her husband.
“Leigh will tell you her reasons for her deception, and you will learn they had nothing to do with the murder of her husband. In some respects, Leigh’s testimony will be similar to what you’ve just heard the prosecutor say her father and other witnesses will tell you.
It is true that Leigh grew less active in the church due to her husband’s influence, and Leigh herself will tell you that she felt guilt over this, but none of that proves she’s a murderer. Unfortunately for Leigh Wallace, her husband was not what he seemed when she met him.
You will learn that Mr. Wallace had recently stolen two hundred thousand dollars from the owner of a video store in San Francisco that specialized in pornography.
You will further hear a taped conversation with an investigator from a fire insurance company in San Francisco that the owner of the same video store in San Francisco hired an individual to burn the store of a competitor. And Leigh Wallace will tell you she was afraid for their lives as a consequence of her husband’s theft.”
I pause to let this sink in and move over to the blackboard and take the eraser and wipe out Jill’s questions.
I have decided not to mention Shane in my opening statement. I want to keep him guessing. When I finish, I write on the board, trying to make the words legible:
“Who wanted Art Wallace dead?”
“The point is, ladies and gentlemen, that Art Wallace had enemies who played rough. The medical examiner will put his death no earlier than ten-thirty that morning, and it is undisputed that Leigh wasn’t even at home most of that time.
Leigh will tell you that she was frightened for herself and for her husband, but that she loved him and wanted to please him. She will also tell you that she loved her father and wanted to please him, too. Neither action makes her a murderer.”
I walk to the front of the podium and scan the jury.
Every one of them has secrets, Chet pointed out the night we worked on jury selection. The trick, he said, is to get as many as possible to identify with some part of your client. We’ve all done shameful things, but those acts don’t make us murderers. According to Chet, if a couple of people can imagine themselves in your client’s situation, you’re halfway to an acquittal, no matter how bad the evidence appears. I home in on Mrs. Holland, a solidly built woman in her thirties with large brown eyes that seem to melt a little every time she looks over at Leigh. As a nominal Catholic, I know she is familiar with guilt.