“Mr. Manning, isn’t that like saying, I didn’t find the defendant’s fingerprints, but if I had found them they’d be there?”
“Objection.”
“Sustained.”
“Mr. Manning, how can you testify that scratches that aren’t there probably exist?”
Manning smiled. “Because I have matched the bullet. So I know if the gun barrel hadn’t been defaced, those scratches on the test bullet would match those on the fatal bullet.”
“Isn’t that circular logic, Mr. Manning? You know those scratches exist because the bullets match, but you base your conclusion that the bullets match partly on those scratches that you assume must be there.”
“Objection.”
“Overruled.”
“No, I do not. And I think I’ve made a fair and accurate appraisal of the evidence, and given you my professional opinion.”
“All right,” Steve said. “Let’s move on to the other pictures. Did you bring in the photographs of the other test bullet, the one fired from the gun, People’s Exhibit Three?”
“Yes, I did.”
“Could you produce those pictures, please?”
“Your Honor, I object to the introduction of these pictures in evidence,” Vaulding said.
“We’re not introducing them in evidence now. We’re marking them for identification.”
“Nonetheless, I object to them.”
“Your objection is noted. The court reporter will mark the pictures. How many are there?”
“Four,” Manning said.
“Very well. Let’s have them marked Defendant’s Exhibits B-One-through-Four.”
When the pictures had been marked, Steve Winslow selected one and approached the witness. “Mr. Manning, I hand you a photograph marked Defendant’s Exhibit B-Two and ask you what it depicts?”
“That shows a test bullet fired from the gun, People’s Exhibit Three, on the comparison microscope with the fatal bullet.”
“The bullets are aligned?”
Manning frowned. “Once again, the bullets are not aligned. An attempt was made to align them, which I could not do. Let me put it this way. The bullets are aligned in as much as it was possible to do so. There was only one real point of similarity.”
“And what does that indicate to you?”
“That the bullets don’t match.”
“I know. I understand that’s your contention. I mean, what do you think that point of similarity represents?”
“That would be an example of class characteristic.”
“The class characteristic caused the match?”
“That’s right.”
“Tell me, would that be the same class characteristic that is shown in the test bullet fired from People’s Exhibit Four?”
“As to that, I’m not sure.”
“Well, take a look.”
Steve handed him back the other photo.
Manning studied the two photographs side by side. “It would appear to be the same mark.”
“The same class characteristic?”
“That is correct.”
“So these photos show the fatal bullet and the test bullets in basically the same position?”
“Yes, they do.”
“I see. Tell me, Mr. Manning. Did you by any chance compare a test bullet from the gun, People’s Exhibit Four, with a test bullet from the gun, People’s Exhibit Three, on the comparison microscope.”
Manning stared at him. “Of course not. What would be the point? We know they’re from different guns.”
“But they each lined up with the fatal bullet. At least in this one regard. It makes me wonder how well they would line up with each other.
“Your Honor, at this point I would like to ask that the witness be instructed to make that comparison.”
“Oh, Your Honor,” Vaulding said. “That’s totally irrelevant and immaterial. We’re talking about two separate guns.”
“And bullets that match, at least in one respect.”
“It’s not a case of these bullets possibly matching. We have the guns here in court. Each one fired a bullet. The test bullets we fired ourselves. We know they don’t match. There’s no reason we should have to prove that.”
“I’m obviously not trying to prove that, Your Honor,” Steve said. “Both bullets do match the fatal bullet, at least in one aspect. I think I have a right to know how well they match each other.”
“I think so, too,” Judge Hendrick said. “And it is so ordered. Mr. Winslow, will that conclude your cross-examination at this time?”
“Yes, Your Honor.”
“Mr. Vaulding, do you have any redirect on the evidence so far, or would you care to wait till the witness is recalled?”
“You’re bringing him back again, Your Honor?”
“I’ve already said so, Mr. Vaulding. You may question the witness then, now, or both. What is your intention?”
“I have no questions at this time.”
“Very well. The witness is excused, but you will return tomorrow morning, having made that comparison.”
“Yes, Your Honor.”
“Very well. Call your next witness.”
“Call Donald Walcott.”
As Donald Walcott took the stand, it occurred to Steve maybe he should have coached him a little. The young man exuded resentment. Steve realized Vaulding probably would have had no problem getting him declared a hostile witness. Still, there was no need to dump it in his lap.
When the witness had been sworn in, Vaulding stood up and said, “State your name.”
“Donald Walcott.”
“What is your relationship to the defendant, Russ Timberlaine?”
“I am engaged to his daughter.”
“And were you a guest at the Timberlaine mansion on the weekend of the murder?”
“Yes, I was.”
“When did you arrive?”
“Friday afternoon.”
“And when did you leave?”
“I haven’t left.”
“You’re still there?”
“Yes, I am.”
“And how long do you intend to stay?”
The witness glared at Vaulding. “Until this matter is resolved.”
“I see,” Vaulding said. “Tell me, Mr. Walcott, the weekend you were staying there-the weekend of the murder-did you have any conversations with your fiancee’s father, Russ Timberlaine?”
Donald Walcott set his mouth in a firm line.
“Please answer the question, Mr. Walcott,” Vaulding said.
When Walcott still hesitated, Vaulding said, “Your Honor?”
Judge Hendrick leaned down from the bench. “Young man?” he said.
Donald Walcott looked up at him defiantly. “Yes.”
“Call me Your Honor.”
Walcott took a breath. “Yes, Your Honor.”
“You have been called as a witness in a court of law. It is your duty to answer questions, unless they are objected to and I rule you need not answer them, or unless you should refuse to answer on the grounds that an answer might tend to incriminate you. Otherwise, you must answer or I will hold you in contempt of court. Is that clear?”
Walcott took a breath. “Yes, Your Honor.”
“Fine. Court reporter will read back the question.”
There was a pause while the court reporter shuffled through his tapes. Then he read, “‘Tell me, Mr. Walcott, the weekend you were staying there-the weekend of the murder-did you have any conversations with your fiancee’s father, Russ Timberlaine?’”
“Yes, I did.”
“Fine,” Vaulding said. “Tell me, in any of these conversations did Russ Timberlaine mention a gun?”
“Objection, leading and suggestive.”
“Overruled. The witness is clearly hostile. Answer the question.”
Walcott took a breath. “Yes, he did.”
“Would that be the Colt.45, the Pistol Pete gun?”
“Yes.”
“Mr. Walcott, we have two guns present in court. People’s Exhibit Three, which is the gun found next to the body of Jack Potter. And People’s Exhibit Four, the gun found in Russ Timberlaine’s holster on his bedside table. We have also heard testimony from Lieutenant Sanders that Russ Timberlaine identified the gun, People’s Exhibit Three, as the original Pistol Pete Robbins gun that he owned, and the gun, People’s Exhibit Four, as the gun he found substituted for it. Now I ask you, in any of those conversations you had with Russ Timberlaine, did he make any claim about a substituted gun?”