The Trial

END OF STATEMENT

Now, to wind it up, I'll give you the closing statement by the defense:

DEFENSE CLOSING STATEMENT:

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, your minds have been filled with so many facts and details today. It makes me suspect that you are in a state of data-overload. Much has been said about a seemingly endless mass of evidence. I'm not going to say that the information you have received is not important, because it is. You have some facts and you have some conjecture. It's my job to make sure that you know the difference. It's a fact that Mr. Champion was badly injured. It's a fact that Mrs. Champion was killed. It's a fact that Cecil Grayson pulled the trigger in both cases. It falls to you to determine if he was justified in doing that. You have to determine if it was murder or just an unfortunate but understandable reaction to a perceived danger. You have all the facts in what I just told you. Everything beyond those facts is conjecture.

The prosecution has a story that they want you to believe. Let's call it the Prosecution Tale. To boil their tale down to a few sentences, they would have you believe that Mr. Champion just happened to be driving his car down the freeway when a neighbor lady called to inform him that two boys were breaking into his house. She had already reported it to 911.

It just happened that he was only two exits from the road leading to his house when that call came in. He was able to get to his house before the police arrived. He assumed that the boys were going to burglarize his house. The door was unlocked and the alarm system was off. When he entered the house, he heard some noise coming from the guest bedroom. The door was locked, but he kicked it open. He was surprised out of his mind to see his wife and those boys on the bed. They were all naked and were having sex. He assumed that she came home from work for some reason and surprised the robbers. They decided to shift gears and rape her instead of completing their robbery. The robbers-turned-rapists were holding her at gunpoint.

Seeing the gun, he decided to assume the role of mediator. While he was meditating, Cecil shot him. Shortly thereafter, Mrs. Champion ran to the aid of her husband. While doing that, she tried to call 911. Knowing what that call would mean to the future of the two brothers, Cecil shot her. That's the short version of the Prosecution Tale, and guess what---it's pure conjecture.

How about the Defense Story? Ok, I'm not going to further tax your brain with pertinent and impertinent facts. I'm not going to take much of your time. I'm just going to ask you to put all of that data-overload aside for a few minutes and use your common sense.

Let's get started. If any of you have seen the old TV show called "Get Smart," you probably remember all of the "Would you believe?" questions that Maxwell Smart made famous. Regardless, I'm going to ask a few of my own.

Would you believe that a person who plays poker at a professional level and writes books about it would miss every sign of his wife having an on-going affair? An excellent poker player has to be very observant. He has to be a people-watcher. He needs to watch for "tells." He watches to see if his opponents do something when they have a good hand that they don't do when their hand is not so good. Mr. Champion was very good at doing that. He was super-observant; except for seeing signs of his wife's affair. Yeah, right!

Would you believe that every minute of the affair happened, not in a hotel, not in her lover's apartment, not in some secret rendezvous, but right in her own house? The house that she shared with her husband?

Ok, here comes a big one: Would you believe that it went undetected and even unsuspected by her husband for FOUR WHOLE YEARS?

Finally, would you believe that I'm not going to ask you to believe those things? But that's exactly what the Prosecution Tale asks you to believe.

Using nothing but common sense, we know that the whole scenario doesn't make sense.

Now, let's use our common sense some more. Let's take a case where the husband was out of town nearly every weekend. Also, he usually spent one night a week playing an all-night session at a casino. Maybe he saw some suspicious things at home. Hell, he may have even figured it all out, but he wasn't all that concerned. Wouldn't it be likely that it was a two-way street? All of those weekends and nights away from home did not necessarily equate to time spent all alone, if you get my drift. Maybe it was a goose and gander situation.

While we are considering all of this, what if things suddenly changed. Let's say the husband stopped traveling on weekends and playing all-night casino sessions. He settled into a different task and a new routine. He began creating the novel that he always wanted to write. He did his writing at the office of a publisher right downtown during daytime hours. He was home every night of every week.

Suddenly, his wife's extracurricular activities---let's make that "extramarital activities" ---became more difficult to hide. Besides, he had more time on his hands, which equated to an increased probability of discovering her "misdeeds" --let's make that her "adultery."

If, as improbable as it seems, he hadn't suspected anything before, he now had more time to observe her and to observe "other things" at home. It's not a stretch to assume that he found evidence of the cheating that was still going on in his own house. It could have been as simple as making an innocent call to her office on a Wednesday afternoon and learning that she had taken the afternoon off. When it was nearly bedtime and she hadn't mentioned taking off, perhaps he asked her how her day went. Perhaps the words she said were less incriminating than the guilty look she couldn't hide.

Let's just say that something happened to convince him that all was not well. That, in turn, led to contemplating what he should do to end her humiliating betrayal.

Broadly speaking, there are two possibilities. He could try to recover and preserve his marriage, or he could move towards divorce. Within those two paths, there were several options. The most obvious, fair, honorable, and safe approach, would be to say those five words that no spouse wants to hear: "Honey, we need to talk." Then sit down over a cup of coffee and have a difficult conversation that would ultimately lead to a solution. Hopefully, a mutually acceptable solution. The problem with that approach is that she could just deny everything. He had no hard evidence to present. He had no proof.

There are many ways to obtain evidence. It could be as simple as purchasing a few small recording devices that could be easily hidden in strategic locations. Perhaps the guest bedroom and kitchen. Maybe even her car.

If more was needed, small devices are available to take videos. Many of them are disguised to look like smoke detectors or other common household items. They are readily available online.

The gold standard is to hire a private investigator to do it right and document everything. It's expensive but risk-free.

If he had taken any one of those options, we probably wouldn't be here today. Instead, he chose the riskiest option possible. He chose to personally catch them in the act.

What if there was a nosy neighbor that could keep watch for him? How long would it take for the neighbor to find out when the lovers got together? Once he had that information, the confrontation was a piece of cake, so he thought.

All he had to do was enlist the neighbor in a conspiracy to bring the whole house of cards tumbling to the ground.

The plan was to catch them red-handed. He would fabricate a tale to account for him coming home early. He would have his phone primed and ready to get some porn-site-worthy videos. It would be easy as pie. But, of course, even the best-laid plan can go astray.

The big fly-in-the-ointment was the gun. He didn't know that his wife, knowing there was a chance that he would eventually catch her, took steps to ensure that he would not have access to his gun. He didn't anticipate that she would take the gun with her to the guest bedroom. The gun being in that room was a game-changer.

He expected to confront three surprised and unprepared cheaters in that bed. Instead, he found himself staring down the barrel of a Magnum pistol in the hands of a naked and panicky young boy.

There was only one thing to do. He had to take the gun away from the boy. He tried, but it didn't go well. The scared-out-of-his-wits boy, with a knee-jerk reaction, fired the weapon. It was a pure and simple act of self-defense.

The cheating wife, coming to her senses, ran to the aid of her wounded husband. She immediately determined that he needed professional help ASAP. She took his phone---the one that was supposed to be taking a video by now---and began dialing 911. That scared young man could only conclude that the police would be among the responders, and that meant life as he knew it would be over. He could see his future as well as that of his brother going up in smoke. So, once again in an act of self-preservation, he pulled the trigger.

I want to leave you with three important thoughts. First, Mrs. Champion was the instigator of the affair. When a mature woman dangles herself in front of a young and hormone-laden boy, can you blame the boy for what ensues?

Next, you must remember that the boys were in that room because they were invited. They were not robbers or rapists, they were guests.

Finally, Cecil pulled the trigger, but Mr. Champion designed the confrontation that led to it. It reeks of entrapment. It's as simple as this, if there had been no entrapment, there would have been no trigger pulling.

Your common sense is telling you not to ruin the future of two young boys over defending themselves in a situation that was designed and created by Mr. Champion to punish his wife. Listen to that voice of common sense and cast your vote for acquittal.

END OF DEFENCE STATEMENT

I think the defense tried to convince the jury that my grandpa knew about the affair since it went on for four years. Is it impossible that he didn't know? If so, why is the word "clueless" in the dictionary? He trusted his wife! Is that wrong? Was it his fault that it all went bad? I don't think so.

Then there's the argument that the boys were enticed to do what they did by my grandma. Come on, do you really think she forced them to have sex with her? Give me a break!

They tried to make the trial about the affair instead of the murder. The trial was not about my grandma's affair, it was about her murder.

I don't know what to think about my grandma. In the end, she meant to end her affair; but as I mentioned before, timing is everything. She waited too long! I think, or at least I hope, that she did love my grandpa. I'm sorry, but I still cry when I think of what happened to them. I should have let someone else clean out the attic.

Grandpa Champion died of a brain infection nine years ago. It was related to the damage he received when he was shot. His Will stated that he had created a trust fund for his grandchildren, should he be so blessed. Each of them would be required to take a test ten years after his death. The trust fund would be split equally among the ones that passed the test. Yet another mystery to contend with!

As I said, I'm going to give all of this information to any family member that has an interest in the trial. I'm going to start with my Uncle David. I need to have a long conversation with him. I also need to have a very different conversation with my cousin, Bruce. He will get the surprise of his life! With the information I have at hand, it appears to me that we will both be rich soon! Of course, that's if we pass the infamous test.

At this point, I've given you all of the information that I have. You know as much as I do about what happened to my grandparents.

So, I began this story with a question and I'll end it with one. If you had been on the jury, how would you have voted?

Memory Refresh:

The three counts are:

#1 Cecil Grayson: Attempted Murder of Victor Champion

#2 Ronald Grayson: Accessory in Attempted Murder of Victor Champion

#3 Cecil Grayson: Murder of Donna Chapman in the second-degree

What sayest thou?

[I think this is where the story should end, but I know from experience that LW readers hate loose ends. At least, please decide how you would vote before you read the following paragraphs. Thanks.]

* * * * *

I'll admit to a bit of prejudice in favor of my grandpa. How I wish things could have been different. I think it would have been fantastic to have had him in my life, but I fully understand why he felt betrayed by his children and remained estranged from them.

Mom's note said that charge #1 ended in an acquittal since the jury bought the argument that Cecil probably thought that he was facing bodily harm from Grandpa. They bought the self-defense argument despite the contrary evidence from the CSI team.

Charge #2 also ended with an acquittal since the jury didn't believe that Ronald should have been charged at all.

Charge #3 was different. Cecil was in no danger of bodily harm from Grandpa or Grandma at that point in time, so the self-defense argument was out the window. He shot Grandma while she was trying to help Grandpa. He shot her in an attempt to avoid being captured by the police. He was convinced that both Grandma and Grandpa would die. If he and Ronald could escape unseen, they might avoid any and all consequences. The jury saw that as cold-blooded murder. That was the only conviction. It required every vote, and it got them.

Grandpa's Test:

Finally, the day arrived when we were meeting with Grandpa's attorney about the trust fund. He explained the secret requirement that we had to satisfy. We had to pass a polygraph test consisting of only one question: "Have you ever been a participant in an adulterous relationship?" The attorney explained that Grandpa had his own definition of "an adulterous relationship." Simply stated, if either one of the parties in the relationship was married, he considered it to be an adulterous relationship for both participants if there was also vaginal penetration. If we answered that question in the affirmative, we would inherit nothing from him.

I remember thinking that Bruce was home-free since he had never married. As it turned out, however, it presented a potential problem for both of us.

I had dated a professor in college. He was in the middle of a divorce, but it was not yet final. Luckily, the professor and I had done some heavy petting, but there had been no vaginal penetration. All I needed to do was convince the polygraph machine of that!

Bruce, on the other hand, had participated in two relationships with married women. Both had included vaginal penetration.

I passed the test. Bruce didn't.

The current amount of the trust was considerably more than ten million dollars! I was a rich woman, thanks to a Grandpa that I'd never met.

I consulted a highly recommended financial advisor, Jeff Madison, to assist me with the necessary monetary planning. I had my husband and Bruce come with me to see Mr. Madison.

Here's the deal, the relationships that Bruce was penalized for did not cause the involved marriages to fail. In both cases, the divorce was well underway before he met the woman and neither relationship was long-term. They were both nothing more than flings.

I can see why Grandpa would set up such a definition as a part of his stipulation, because of what happened with Grandma. As for me and this situation with Bruce, however, I thought the stipulation to be a little too harsh. I asked Mr. Madison if we could set it up to let Bruce and me share the money. He said it was my money and I was free to do whatever I wanted to do with it.

Forgive me, Gramps, but Bruce is your grandchild just as much as I am. Neither of us has done anything close to what Grandma did. I'm convinced that, in the end, you intended to do something nice for your grandchildren since they were not participants in your betrayal. While I'm at it, I also believe that when all is said and done, my mom and Uncle David never stopped loving you. They continued to love you no matter what.

So do I.

The End