A Reasonable Doubt Susan Sloan (chrysanthemum read aloud TXT) 📖

-- hypothetically, of course,” Lily pressed, “that Jason Lightfoot had consumed, let’s say, seven shots of alcohol between eleven and eleven-thirty that night.  What would you expect his blood alcohol level to have been at twelve-thirty-five the following day?”

“It most likely would have been zero,” the technician said.

“And can you explain for the jury how you would reach that conclusion?”

“Well, the body expels roughly an ounce of alcohol an hour,” the technician explained.  “A shot of liquor is generally assumed to be around an ounce and a half.  Which means that seven shots would add up to roughly ten-and-a-half ounces.  So, twelve hours after someone had drunk seven shots of alcohol, his blood alcohol level would pretty much test out at zero.”

“So, someone who had perhaps been functionally drunk at midnight, could have tested totally sober twelve hours later?”

“Sure.”

. . .

“Is it possible,” John Henry inquired on re-direct, “that the defendant’s blood alcohol level could have been the same twelve hours earlier as it was when you tested it?”

“Of course,” the technician replied.

“Under what circumstances would that have been the case?”

The technician shrugged.  “If he hadn’t been drinking.”

. . .

“So, how do you think things are going?” Carson asked his daughter, when Dancer was finally able to get her out of the office and drive her home.

“Not too bad, I guess,” Lily said.

“From what I saw and heard,” her father said, “you held your own.”

He had, of course, been watching the proceedings on the local cable channel.  And, in fact, if the trial weren’t being broadcast, he would have managed, somehow, to be in the courtroom.

“Well, there’s nothing like a compliment from the master,” Lily said with a chuckle.  “I think I might just have boxed in the police officer that found the body and then beat Jason to a pulp when he tried to run,” she added.  “And I think I also may have put a little bug in the jury’s ear about the blood alcohol test being something less than reliable.  But we still have a long way to go.”

“Do you have a plan?” her father inquired.

Lily smiled.  “Of course,” she said.  “Don’t you always tell me that, no matter which side of the aisle I’m on, I have to have a plan?”

. . .

On Wednesday, Dr. Stanley Bellerman, the fulltime pathologist at the Port Hancock Medical Center, and Jackson County’s part-time medical examiner, took the witness stand.  A thirty-year veteran, the steel-haired doctor detailed for the jury the condition of Dale Scott’s body as he had found it on the morning of the murder.  With the benefit of slides, he described the bruises and abrasions he had noted on the deceased, as well as the bullet wound.  He had a fatherly demeanor, he spoke slowly, clearly, and without affect, and he answered every question the prosecutor asked in layman’s terms.  The jury loved him.

“Were you able to determine a time of death?” John Henry asked.

“Yes,” he replied. “I was able to put the time of death at between midnight and one o’clock on the morning of February 10th.”

“And that determination was based on. . . ?”

“It was based on the condition of the body, as I found it, on the liver temperature, and on the extent of rigor mortis,” Bellerman said.  “I also took into account the weather conditions at the time.”

“And what did you determine about the weather conditions?”

“According to the information I was provided, it had been clear during the night,” Bellerman reported.  “Then around five o’clock in the morning, heavy marine air had moved in, and it was still around when I got to the scene, which was, I believe, just after seven-thirty.  In addition, I was able to confirm that the temperature during the night and into the morning hours had been above freezing, and ranged between thirty-five and forty degrees.”

“And can you tell the jury what the condition of the body was when you first saw it?”

“It was damp, but not soaked through,” the medical examiner replied.  “The blood on the ground was not completely dried.  I noted a number of bruises and abrasions on the victim’s face and torso that I judged to be about seven to seven-and-a-half hours old.  The cause of death was a bullet that had been fired into the left side of his head.”

“From how far a distance would you say the bullet was fired?”

“Judging from the amount of stippling that remained -- I mean, the gunpowder residue that remained on the skin -- I would say that the bullet was fired from no more than two or three inches from the point of entry.”

“Could you determine Detective Scott’s position when he was shot?”

The medical examiner provided a demonstration to answer this particular question.  Using an articulated dummy provided by the prosecution, he showed the jury what the angle of the bullet had been when it entered Dale Scott’s head, and the position he believed the victim had been in when the bullet was fired.

“My conclusion was that the victim was kneeling when he was shot, in what I call an upright fetal position, which was most likely in response to the serious bruising to his abdomen -- and the shooter was standing to his left.”

“Is it possible that this shot was fired by accident?” John Henry inquired.  “As in ‘I was too drunk to know what I was doing, and the gun was in my hand, and it just happened to go off’ before I could stop myself’?”

“From the angle of the bullet’s entry,” the medical examiner replied, “which entered directly into the brain, that would seem unlikely.  In my opinion, the shot was deliberately aimed, it was not accidental.”

“Thank you, Dr. Bellerman,” John Henry said.  “I have nothing further.”

. . .

“It would seem unlikely that the shot to Dale Scott’s head -- the shot that killed him -- was accidental, is that your testimony, Dr. Bellerman?” Lily inquired on cross-examination.

“Yes, it is,” the medical examiner replied.

The defense attorney frowned.  “Is that something a medical