All the evidence thus far has been pretty damning. Pointing to intent. More witnesses will take the stand. Who knows where the egg dance of words and questions and answers and more questions will go…
Is it presumptuous or naive to hope (or wish?) for justice to prevail? In a more perfect world, where justice could enjoy its rightful amount of respect and regard, it would be pretty normal to expect just that of a court of law. However, holding your breath and having no idea of which way things can go, is rather the order of the day. Shrewd jurists go the ironic extra mile in their interrogations – appearing more often than not to lose sight of how imperative it is for justice to take its full course… A slip of the tongue by a nervous witness under severe pressure has the potential to swing an entire case – regardless of the facts. But who cares about facts? Are they not what is primarily withheld in a court of law?
Scenario: a tragedy occurs involving two role players. Enter more role players to assess the nature and extent thereof, to scrutinize and unravel – with a view to finding and providing sufficiently adequate puzzle pieces for an accurate and reliable reconstruction of the occurrence. Enter yet more role players – to deliberate; to argue for and against; to strive for the proof of innocence or guilt. The ultimate goal: to taste sweet victory – regardless?
The circumstantial evidence tells a story. Graphic, elaborate, gruesome and substantial. This is supplemented by more stories from the witness box. Not enough. Not good enough. We need to – no, we have to – know the intention that preceded and prompted the drama. The intent. Or the absence thereof. A psyche must be analysed. Someone must get inside the head of the accused. And the heart. The gut. Is this ever possible without the volunteered collaboration of the only reliable source?
FREE… to walk
How is it ultimately to be understood: an individual desperate for acquittal against all odds – sitting there day after day, listening… perhaps sometimes not listening… stressing… recalling… never sharing the simple but crucial information that would save weeks, months and millions? Just not divulging the truth. Is the freedom to walk really worth all of that?
Super ironically, the true best interest of the accused is most probably often denied and avoided in this lengthy, financially crippling process.
Serious issues, personality disorders, character flaws, psychological intricacies – all of which could be addressed and dealt with if the plot would unfold before court and the presiding judge as it really was – are brushed aside and removed from the equation despite the glare.
Depending on which way the pendulum swings, they could remain unchecked and we could see a free and miserable individual with burdens of baggage rejoining society. Unrehabilitated.