Twisted

doubt that Hartman had planned out Valdez’s murder ahead of time, went looking for him, and killed him under circumstances that showed no heat of passion or emotional turmoil.
    But there were several other charges included in the indictment too: murder two and manslaughter. These were backups—what were called “lesser-included offenses.” They were easier to prove than murder one. If the jury decided, for instance, that Hartman hadn’t planned the murder ahead of time but decided impulsively to kill Valdez, they could still convict for second-degree murder. He could go to prison for life for this type of murder but he couldn’t be sentenced to death.
    Finally Tribow included the manslaughter charge as a last-ditch backup. He’d have to prove only that Hartman had killed Valdez either underconditions of extreme recklessness or in the heat of passion. This would be the easiest of the crimes to prove and on these facts the jury would undoubtedly convict.
    That weekend the three prosecutors prepared questions to ask the jury, and over the course of the next week they battled Hartman’s impressive legal team during the voir dire process. Finally, on Friday, the jury was empaneled and Tribow, Wu and Viamonte returned to the office to spend the weekend coaching witnesses and preparing evidence and exhibits.
    Every time he got tired, every time he wanted to stop and return home to play with Danny Junior or just sit and have a cup of coffee with his wife, he pictured Jose Valdez’s wife and thought that she’d never spend any time with her husband again.
    And when he thought that, he pictured Ray Hartman’s arrogant eyes.
    You’re going to lose this one. . . .
    Danny Tribow would then stop daydreaming and return to the case.

    When he’d been in law school Tribow had hoped for the chance to practice law in a Gothic courthouse filled with portraits of stern old judges and dark-wood paneling and the scent of somber justice.
    Where he plied his trade, however, was a brightly lit, low-ceilinged county courtroom filled with blond wood and beige drapes and ugly green linoleum. It looked like a high school classroom.
    On the morning of trial, nine A.M. sharp, he sat down at the counsel table, flanked by Adele Viamonte—in her darkest suit, whitest blouse and most assertive visage—and Chuck Wu, who was manning his battered laptop. Hundreds of papers and exhibits and law books surrounded them.
    Across the aisle Ray Hartman sat at the other table. He was surrounded by three high-ticket partners in the law firm he’d hired, two associates, and four laptops.
    The uneven teams didn’t bother Tribow one bit, however. He believed he was put on earth to bring people who did illegal things to justice. Some of them would always be richer than you and have better resources. That was how the game worked and Tribow, like every successful prosecutor throughout history, accepted it. Only weak or incompetent DAs whined about the unfairness of the system.
    He noticed Ray Hartman staring at him, mouthing something. The DA couldn’t tell what it was.
    Viamonte translated. “He said, ‘You’re going to lose.’ ”
    Tribow gave a brief laugh.
    He looked behind him. The room was filled. He nodded at Detective Dick Moyer, who’d been after Hartman for years. A nod too and a faint smile for Carmen Valdez, the widow of the victim. She returned his gaze with a silent, desperate plea that he bring this terrible man to justice.
    I’ll do my best, he answered, also silently.
    Then the clerk entered and called out, “Oyez, oyez, this court is now in session. All those withbusiness before this court come forward and be heard.” As he always did, Tribow felt a chill at these words, as if they were an incantation that shut out reality and ushered everyone here into the solemn and mysterious world of the criminal courtroom.
    A few preliminaries were disposed of and the bearded judge nodded for Tribow to start.
    The prosecutor rose and gave his opening statement, which was very short; Danny Tribow believed the divining rod that most effectively pointed toward justice in a criminal case wasn’t rhetoric but the truth as revealed by the facts you presented to the jury.
    And so for the next two days he produced witness after witness, exhibits, charts and graphs.
    “I’ve been a professional ballistics expert for twenty-two years. . . . I conducted three tests of the bullets taken from the defendant’s weapon and I can state