“Yes, I was.”
“And did you identify it?”
“Yes, I did.”
“Whose body was it?”
This time his whole face seemed to quiver. Tears brimmed in his eyes. He opened his mouth to speak, choked back a sob. He exhaled, took a breath, then croaked, “It was my son. David.”
Stanley Castleton dissolved into sobs.
Dirkson paused a moment before saying softly, “Thank you. That’s all.”
Judge Wallingsford said, “Does the defense wish to cross-examine?”
Fitzpatrick looked a question at Steve.
Steve looked over at Stanley Castleton weeping on the witness stand. There was no way he could cross- examine him without alienating the jury. Hell, some things worked and some didn’t. Steve took a breath. He shook his head. “No questions, Your Honor.”
“The witness is excused,” Judge Wallingsford said.
Stanley Castleton might not have heard him. He just sat there, sobbing. Dirkson had to come forward, put his hand on his shoulder, lead him from the witness stand.
Steve Winslow gritted his teeth. It was a hell of a moment, guaranteed to prejudice the jury against the defendant. But there wasn’t a damn thing he could do about it.
When Stanley Castleton had finally been escorted from the courtroom, Dirkson recalled Detective Oswald from the Crime Scene Unit, who testified to finding a gun next to the decedent. The gun was produced, identified and marked for identification as People’s Exhibit 3.
He also testified to finding a folded piece of paper in the decedent’s pants pocket. The paper was produced, identified and introduced into evidence. Oswald then read what was written on it into the record. The paper proved to be a note, written in ink, of an address and apartment number. Oswald was able to testify that he had personally gone to that address and could verify that it had turned out to be the apartment of the defendant, Kelly Clay Wilder.
That caused some raised eyebrows in the courtroom. Dirkson hadn’t even mentioned the note in his opening statement. Obviously this was a case where the prosecution had more evidence against the defendant than it could ever possibly need.
Finally Oswald testified to developing and photographing latent fingerprints in the decedent’s apartment, and photos and fingerprint lifts were received into evidence.
Steve Winslow took him on cross-examination, which created a stir of interest among the jurors. Up till now they seen only Fitzpatrick. And Fitzpatrick looked like a lawyer. But what was this young man with long hair and sloppy clothes up to?
Naturally, the jurors expected Steve to cross-examine Oswald on the gun and the note.
He did neither.
“Officer Oswald,” Steve said. “You testified to taking photographs in the decedent’s apartment, did you not?”
“Yes, I did.”
“Now, in addition to taking the photographs, you were a witness to what you photographed, were you not?”
“Yes, of course.”
“You examined the apartment for evidence, did you not?”
“Yes, I did.”
“Was there a computer in the apartment?”
“Yes, there was.”
“Does it show in the photographs you took?”
Detective Oswald frowned. “I’m not sure.”
Steve picked up the stack of photographs from the court reporter’s desk and handed them to the witness. “Well, take a look and see.”
Detective Oswald thumbed through the photographs. “Yes, here it is,” he said. He held up the photograph and pointed. “You can see it here, in the upper left-hand corner.”
“Which photograph is that?”
Oswald turned it over and looked at the back. “That is People’s Exhibit Five-N.”
“I see,” Steve said. “And does the computer show in any of the other photographs?”
Oswald riffled through them. “No, it does not.”
“I see,” Steve said. He took the photographs back from the witness. “And since you weren’t sure if the computer was in the photographs at all, and since it only appears in one of them and only in the background, and since these are photographs of the objects from which you obtained latent fingerprints, am I correct in assuming you got no fingerprints from the computer?”
“That is correct.”
“Is that unusual?”
Oswald shook his head. “Not at all. A computer keyboard is like a typewriter. The keys are struck many times. There’s no hope of getting a clear latent print. Only indecipherable smudges.”
“Which is what you got in this case?”
“That is correct.”
“Then let me ask you this. Is there any chance those indecipherable smudges might contain enough whorls and arches, no matter how fragmented, to be able to attempt a comparison with the prints of any known person?”
“I would say no.”
“But that is just your opinion?”
“It is an expert opinion.”
Steve smiled. “Yes, it is. But the manner in which you just expressed it was, ‘I would say no.’ You didn’t
Oswald shook his head. “There is no doubt in my mind. If I misspoke myself, I apologize. What I said was a figure of speech. If you want to build on it, I can’t stop you. But the fact is, I would say no, because the answer is no, so that’s what I would say.”
That sally brought smiles to the faces of some of the jurors. Dirkson grinned approvingly.
Steve Winslow took no notice. “That may well be,” he said. “But I’d rather let the evidence speak for itself. Tell me, did you photograph the keyboard of the computer?”
“No, I did not.”
“Why not?”
“I told you. Because there were no legible prints.”
“Which you have no way of proving, since you didn’t take the photograph of the keyboard.”
“Objected to as argumentative,” Dirkson said.
“Sustained.”
“Objected to as already asked and answered.”
“Sustained.”
Steve Winslow frowned. “No further questions.”
In the back of the courtroom, Mark Taylor nudged Tracy Garvin. “What’s he up to now?”
Tracy leaned over to whisper. “Giving the impression the prosecution’s hampering his investigation by being overly technical.”
Taylor grinned. “You’re gettin’ good at this.”
Next, Dirkson called Phillip Riker from the police crime lab, who testified to examining the fingerprints that had been received in evidence.
“Mr. Riker,” Dirkson said. “Did you compare those prints with the known prints of any person or persons?”
