Mickey Haller 4 - The Fifth Witness

allow me to replay a portion of the Trammel interview. Permission granted, I fast-forwarded the playback, keeping my eye on the time code at the bottom. I slowed it to normal play just in time for the jury to watch the exchange centering on Trammel’s denial of being near WestLand National.
    “Did you go by WestLand National this morning?”
    “No. Is that what this is about?”
    “So if someone said they saw you there, they would be lying?”
    “Yes, who said that? I have not violated the order. You—”
    “Do you know Mitchell Bondurant?”
    “Know him? No. I know of him. I know who he is. But I don’t know him.”
    “Did you see him today?”
    “Yes, I saw him.”
    “But you just said you didn’t go on WestLand property.”
    “I didn’t. Look, I don’t know who told you they saw me at the bank. And if it was him then he’s a liar. I wasn’t there. I saw him, yes, but that was at the coffee shop, not the—”
    “Why didn’t you tell us that this morning at your home?”
    “Tell you what? You didn’t ask.”
    I stopped the video and looked at Kurlen.
    “Detective, where is it that Lisa Trammel contradicts herself?”
    “She says right there that she wasn’t near the bank and we have a witness who says she was.”
    “So you have a contradiction between two statements by different people, but Lisa Trammel did not contradict herself, correct?”
    “You are talking semantics.”
    “Can you answer the question, Detective?”
    “Yes, right, a contradiction between two statements.”
    Kurlen didn’t consider the distinction important but I hoped the jury would.
    “Isn’t it true, Detective, that Lisa Trammel has never contradicted her statement that she was not near the bank on the day of the murder?”
    “I wouldn’t know. I am not privy to everything she has ever said since then.”
    Now he was just being churlish, which was fine by me.
    “Okay, then as far as you know, Detective, has she ever contradicted that very first statement to you that she was not near the bank?”
    “No.”
    “Thank you, Detective.”
    I asked the judge if I could replay another segment of the video and was granted permission. I moved the video back to a time spot early in the interview and froze it. I then asked the judge if I could put one of the prosecution’s crime scene photos on one of the overhead screens while leaving the video on the other. The judge gave me the go-ahead.
    The crime scene photo I put up was a wide-angle shot that took in almost the entire crime scene. The tableau included Bondurant’s body as well as his car, the open briefcase and the spilled cup of coffee on the ground.
    “Detective, let me draw your attention to the crime scene photo marked People’s Exhibit Three. Can you describe what you see in the foreground?”
    “You mean the briefcase or the body?”
    “What else, Detective?”
    “You’ve got the spilled coffee, and the evidence marker on the left is where they found a tissue fragment later identified as coming from the victim’s scalp. You can’t really see that in the photo.”
    I asked the judge to strike the part of the answer concerning the tissue fragment as nonresponsive. I had asked Kurlen to describe what he could see in the photo, not what he couldn’t see. The judge didn’t agree and let the whole answer stand. I shook it off and tried again.
    “Detective, can you read what it says on the side of the coffee cup?”
    “Yes, it says Joe’s Joe. It’s a gourmet coffee shop about four blocks from the bank.”
    “Very good, Detective. Your eyes are better than mine.”
    “Maybe because they look for the truth.”
    I looked at the judge and spread my hands like a baseball manager who just saw a fastball down the pipe called a ball. Before I could verbally react the judge was all over Kurlen.
    “Detective!” Perry barked. “You know better than that.”
    “I’m sorry, Your Honor,” Kurlen said contritely, his eyes holding on mine. “Mr. Haller somehow always seems to bring out the worst in me.”
    “That’s no excuse. Another one like that and you and I are going to have a serious problem.”
    “It won’t happen again, Judge. I promise.”
    “The jury will disregard the witness’s comment. Mr. Haller, proceed and take us away from this.”
    “Thank you, Your Honor. I’ll do my best. Detective, when you were at the crime scene for seventy-two minutes before leaving to question Ms. Trammel, did you determine whose coffee cup that