disorder which all psychologists agree exists and which is included in DSM , which is the standard by which all psychiatric disturbances are identified, isn't that a fact, sir?
STENNER: It can be faked. You can't fake two plus two, but you could sure fake a fugue state.
VAIL: I see. And how many people do you know for a certainty have faked a fugue state?
STENNER: None.
VAIL: How many people do you know who have had experiences with faked fugue states?
STENNER: None.
VAIL: Read a lot of examples of faking a fugue state?
STENNER: No.
VAIL: So you're guessing, right?
STENNER: It's logical. If there is such a thing, it could certainly be faked.
VAIL: Have you asked a psychiatrist if it's possible?
STENNER: No.
VAIL: So you're guessing, Lieutenant, yes or no?
STENNER: Yes.
VAIL: Ah, so your reason for doubting Aaron Stampler's statement is that you guessed he was faking - or lying, right?
STENNER: That is correct.
VAIL: So you assumed that Aaron was lying and that he killed Bishop Rushman, correct?
STENNER: It was a very logical assumption.
VAIL: I'm not questioning the logic of your assumption, just that it existed. You assumed Stampler was guilty, right?
STENNER: Yes.
VAIL: At what point, Lieutenant, were you positive from reviewing the evidence that Aaron Stampler acted alone?
There it is again, St Claire thought. Christ, had there been someone else in the room?
STENNER: From the very beginning.
VAIL:… Aaron Stampler tells you that he blacked out when he entered the bishop's room, correct?
STENNER: Yes.
VAIL: What did you do to disprove his allegation? In other words, sir, what evidence or witnesses can you produce that will verify your contention that he was alone in the room and that he acted alone?
STENNER: Porensics evidence, physical evidence, just plain logic…
VAIL:… I have a problem with some of these logical assumptions that have been made during this trial. Do you understand why?
STENNER: Most of the time -
VAIL: Lieutenant, my client's life is at stake here. 'Most of the time' won't do. And so much for logic and a preponderance of evidence. Dr Danielson says he cannot say for sure that Aaron was alone in the room, cannot say for sure that only one person actually stabbed the bishop, and cannot prove evidentially that Aaron even came in the back door or brought the knife to the murder scene, yet you assumed Aaron Stampler lied to you because it wasn't logical, right?
STENNER: (No response.)
VAIL: The fact is, Lieutenant, that you are willing to accept on faith that Christ was crucified and died, that he arose from the dead, and went to heaven. But you don't choose to believe the fact that a person, under extreme stress or shock, can black out and enter a scientifically described limbo called a fugue state. So you never actually tried to prove that Aaron Stampler was lying, did you?
STENNER: It's not my job to prove the defendant is innocent, it's
