Ducks

There had been mention on an ornithologist on the witness list, so when the Defense said that they would be bringing in "the ducks," that they would be kept out of the courtroom until the last minute, that they would be in a sack--well, I thought we had real ducks coming. No. Three ornamental ducks, two of which used to be in the foyer of the Coopers' home. The third was on the refrigerator. In a photo of the foyer (taken when? I don't remember) the ducks were missing. One of Nancy's friends pointed that out and it became part of the theory of the crime: Brad and Nancy struggled in the foyer and the ducks were broken, subsequently removed.

It turns out that Brad's mother packed them away and they eventually went to the attorney who represented Brad in the custody case as partial payment for her services. Brad's mother was on the stand to identify the ducks.

The Prosecution was livid about the ducks being produced at the last minute. Mrs. Cooper was asked, did she not know where the ducks were all along? Why did she not say earlier? She must have known their significance; did she do it on purpose to make the Prosecution witnesses look like liars? Her answer was, no one asked her.

The Defense will probably rest today--although we can expect rebuttal witnesses on both sides, I should think. The Defense's case has been aggressive. Out of the presence of the jury, both attorneys have argued forcefully for their evidence and experts and have objected just as strongly. They've won some and lost some. I would like to see how they have scored their own performance.

I'm not sure it's right to call the Defense's presentations a "case." They don't have to prove anything after all, just raise reasonable doubt. The elements of doubt: two witnesses who say they saw Nancy jogging that Saturday morning; experts who say that Brad's computer may have been tampered with while in the possession of the Cary Police Department, and at the very least was mishandled by the CPD to the point that anything or nothing can be believed; ditto Nancy's Blackberry; a neighbor said that he and Nancy may or may not have had sex about nine months before the younger child was born. How can he not know? They were both very drunk; numerous people who knew Nancy and Brad said that she never expressed fear of him, that they didn't argue in public, that they never heard him raise his voice to her, that even though Nancy was on a budget, neither she nor the girls seemed to lack for anything.

Guilty or innocent? This would be a good time to give the jury a Not Proved option. Without that, at this point neither verdict will surprise me. I would give the edge to guilty, though, because I think that the experts will cancel each other out, the friends and loved ones will neutralize each other, the people who believe they saw Nancy are mistaken, and the jury will be left with means, motive, and opportunity.