A Hole In One Paul Weininger (list of ebook readers .TXT) 📖

twelve leather armchairs located to his left. LED lighting made the room bright with what appeared to be sunlight, though it was composed of fourteen recessed light fixtures. The floor was made of dark stained oak. The bench where the judge sat was made of Brazilian walnut and looked like an exquisite piece of furniture. The room was centrally air-conditioned. The court had been renovated less than five years earlier.

Due to the city of Sedona being as small as it is, the court’s docket was not normally remarkably busy, but on this Monday the court was packed with newspaper reporters and TV reporters, along with their camera operators, from all the cities in Arizona. The group was split with seventy percent men and thirty percent women.

The vois dire process for picking a jury involved twelve jurors plus three alternates. The alternates would sit in during all the testimony provided to the jury and the showing of all exhibits of evidence, but would not be permitted to deliberate with the jury.

Alternates may be used in case a juror is dismissed by the judge if he or she gets ill and must resign from the jury or is rejected by either the prosecution or the defense. There were approximately seventy-five people called for jury duty, but the defense rejected everyone living in Sedona, out of concern that the local TV and newspapers had influenced the jury pool.

Albert Jaxson was the defense attorney for Rabbi Bloom. He insisted on a different venue and requested that the trial be held in Scottsdale, where the vois dire jury pool would not be as affected by the media publicity of the case, as opposed to the public in Sedona, which read or heard about the case daily.

The D.A. objected to the venue change requested by the defense counsel, countering the prosecution would not object if the court were willing to provide buses to bring a jury pool from Scottsdale. They were then to be put up in a hotel in Sedona with meals, for the period of the trial. If it took longer than four weeks, the busses would return the jury back to their homes for weekends with their family. The jurors had to return by a specified date as assigned by the court.

Judge Eustice Garnett upheld the prosecution’s alternative as reasonable. He did not wish to have the case appealed should the verdict go against the defendant and a biased jury became an issue. Defense Attorney Jaxson agreed that the prosecution’s alternative of importing a jury from Scottsdale, was acceptable. The judge excused the remaining jury pool citizens from Sedona who had been waiting to be questioned. Seventy-five people, all living in Scottsdale, were issued Jury Duty notices and were brought by two air-conditioned busses. Some were excused by the judge because they would not be able to remain in Sedona for the length of the trial, like medical professionals; others were dismissed for illness, disabilities, or work requiring their presence at the job. These were usually CEOs or VPs of companies. This left fifty-three people in the jury pool.

The vois dire process was uneventful, as each side ruled out who they believed to be anti-Semites, racists, or those with some other form of bias. Those were the issues the attorneys had to discover through their carefully targeted interviews of each juror.

A jury of twelve, plus three alternates, was eventually chosen to sit for the trial. The rest were all taken back to Scottsdale by the two busses. Then the busses returned empty to Sedona in case the trial were to end quickly.

The court clerk faced the courtroom gallery of 120 people, including the media, and hollered out “Hear Ye, Hear Ye, Department One of the Sedona Criminal Section Court is now in session. All rise! The Honorable Judge Eustice Garnett, presiding.” Judge Garnett entered the court, sat down and the clerk said to the gallery, “You may be seated.”

Seated on his throne, the judge welcomed the gallery and jury. “Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Calling the case of the People of the State of Arizona to be referred to as the Prosecution versus Rabbi Bloom, the defendant. Are both sides ready?” he asked.

“Ready for the people your honor,” replied District Attorney Stanford.

“Ready for the defense your honor,” answered Defense Attorney Jaxson.

“Will the court clerk please swear in the jury?” said the judge.

The court clerk directed the jury, “Will you all please stand and raise your right hand,” which they all did. “Do each of you swear that you will fairly try the case before this court, and that you will return a true verdict according to the evidence and the instructions of the court, so help you God? Please answer with “I do.”

They all said, “I do.”

He directed,  “All be seated please.”

As each witness was called to the stand, the clerk officially swore them in and asked for their name and address for the record maintained by the court reporter.

The judge began the trial. “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, since it’s the state’s case to prove that the defendant is guilty, District Attorney Stanford, you will begin. Also, from this point on, I will refer to you as Madam D.A. You may make your opening remarks.”

“Thank you, Your Honor.” She stood from behind the prosecution’s table, approached the jury and was careful to look at each juror in the eyes as she spoke.

“Ladies and Gentlemen, the defendant, Rabbi Bloom, is charged with the murder of a John Doe. We have not been able to identify the body, but it is a male according to the coroner’s office. The defendant has been charged with the crimes of murder, desecrating a body, and unlawfully cremating it. We expect to be able to identify the body relatively soon. The state will not only prove to you that Rabbi Bloom is the murderer, but we’ll also prove to you that he is not necessarily the only person that should be sitting in the defendant’s chair.”

Observing she