Berg stepped over to the lectern to address the court. She looked pained as she adjusted the level of the microphone.
“Thank you, Your Honor,” she said. “Simply stated, the wallet remains missing. Over the past two days, Detective Drucker has conducted an investigation and is here to testify if necessary. But the wallet was not found. The People concede that the video evidence presented by the defense Monday is conclusive in that regard — there does appear to have been a wallet in the victim’s back pocket at the time the body was discovered in the trunk of the defendant’s car. But it was not among the personal property that was later turned over to the LAPD at the coroner’s office.”
“Have you determined when it was taken or by whom?” Warfield pressed.
“No, Your Honor,” Berg said. “The procedure is that the body would have been transported to the coroner’s office, where it would have been placed in the prep room. That’s where clothing and property is removed and the bodies are prepared for autopsy, while the property is sealed and held for the police. In this case specifically, the body was discovered in the evening and therefore not delivered to the prep room until approximately two a.m. This means that autopsy prep would not have occurred until the morning.”
“So, the body would have just been sitting there unattended?” the judge asked.
“Not exactly,” Berg said. “It would have been moved to a large refrigerated crypt that is part of the coroner’s office.”
“So, it was in with other bodies.”
“Yes, Judge.”
“Not isolated.”
“Not beyond being in a crypt where authorized access is required.”
“Did Detective Drucker check to see if there are any surveillance cameras in the area?”
“He did and there are no cameras.”
“So we have no way of knowing who may have gained access to this crypt and taken the wallet.”
“That is correct at this time.”
“At this time? Do you think that is going to change?”
“No, Your Honor.”
“What is it that the People suggest I do about this, Ms. Berg?”
“Your Honor, the People make no excuse for the loss of this property. However, it is a loss that impacts both sides equally. Neither the People nor the defense has the opportunity to access the wallet and whatever case information, if any, it contained. Therefore, it is the People’s position that while we accept responsibility for the loss, the damage — if any — is equal.”
Warfield digested that for a few moments before responding.
“Something tells me that Mr. Haller is not going to agree with that assessment,” she said. “Would the defense like to respond?”
I was up quickly and to the lectern almost before Berg had time to step away.
“Yes, Your Honor is exactly right,” I said. “The damage to the defense and prosecution can in no way be considered equal. The state sits fat and happy with the case just as it is, Your Honor. They have a body in the trunk of a car and they’ve charged the driver. No need to dig deeper than that. Case closed. They didn’t even raise a question about the missing wallet until the defense did. They clearly weren’t interested, because the wallet and what ID the victim was using could lead to what Sam Scales was up to on the last days of his life, and that might not fit with the neat package they have put together on me. It is clear, Judge, that the damage here is to the defense, not the prosecution.”
“Say I agree with you, Mr. Haller,” Warfield said. “What is the remedy the defense seeks?”
“There is no remedy. The defense wants the wallet. That’s the remedy.”
“Then, what is the penalty? There appears to be no evidence of sinister behavior by those involved in the investigation. The wallet appears to have been stolen by someone who had access to the body while it was in the custody of the coroner’s office. The matter will certainly be referred for internal investigation by the coroner, but the court does not feel inclined to punish the prosecution for this unfortunate set of circumstances.”
I shook my head in frustration even though I knew this was heading toward the outcome I had expected and, based on the morning’s discoveries, wanted.
“Your Honor,” I said. “For the record, then, I want it noted that the investigation of the missing evidence carried out by the prosecution was conducted by the same detective who was in charge of protecting the crime scene and the evidence in this case.”
“So noted, Mr. Haller,” Warfield said. “Any other matters before we adjourn?”
“Yes, Your Honor,” Berg said.
I relinquished the lectern to her and headed back to my seat, shaking my head as if frustrated by the judge’s ruling.
“Excuse me, Ms. Berg,” Warfield said. “Mr. Haller, I noted your demonstration. Are you upset with the court’s decision?”
I stopped in my tracks.
“Your Honor, I’m just frustrated,” I said. “I am trying to put together a defense and it seems that at every turn, I am thwarted. The People lost the wallet — by negligence or malfeasance doesn’t really matter — and I will pay for it. That’s all.”
“I advise counsel on both sides to keep their emotions and demonstrations in check,” Warfield said. “Particularly when we go to trial. The court will have no patience for such outbursts then, not in front of a jury.”
“Judge, I would not call it an outburst. I was just—”
“Are you going to argue with the court now as well, Mr. Haller?”
“No, Your Honor.”
I continued to my seat and Warfield tracked me with her eyes in case I so much as frowned. Finally, she broke away and looked at the prosecutor.
“Ms. Berg, continue,” she said.
“Judge, yesterday we received the first witness list from the defendant,” Berg said. “It had only two names on it — the defendant himself and his investigator. This from a defendant who has twice come before this court to complain about discovery issues, and he has the audacity to put just two names down on his witness list.”
Warfield looked like she was either weary of the constant cross fire between the prosecution and defense or was being hit with fatigue from the two martinis she’d probably had at the judges’ lunch. I was sure the alcohol was what had inspired her to snap at me. Before I could object to Berg’s complaint, Warfield held her hand up to me, indicating that she was not interested in my response.
“It’s early, Ms. Berg,” Warfield said. “We are still almost thirty days out, and there will be an update on the lists from both parties next week and every week after. Let’s wait a bit before we panic about whom he plans to call. Anything of a more serious nature?”
“No, Your Honor,” Berg said.
“No, Your Honor,” I said.
“Very well,” Warfield said. “Then we are adjourned.”
26
Having not had time to eat before the hearing, I went to the Little Jewel for a shrimp po’boy sandwich directly after court. I was joined by everyone on the defense team except Bosch. He was apparently off doing his own thing again and was incommunicado. I told the team that the defense had turned a corner with the case knowledge gathered in the last forty-eight hours and that it was time to start thinking in terms of presenting the case to a jury. We could clearly anticipate what the prosecution presentation would be, because it had not really changed since the start of the case. We could prepare for that but what was more important was preparing to tell our story.
A trial often comes down to who is a better storyteller, the prosecution or the defense. There is evidence, of course, but physical evidence is at first interpreted for the jury by the storyteller.