In an organization, especially a national organization like the Ministry of Comrce, no one would reject a promotion. For soone like Sienna Thornton, who, once committed, strives for achievent, missing the position of Deputy Director because of an unforeseen disaster is a great regret and sorrow. It is unlike the nonchalant deanor she showed when comforting Simon Forrester.
On February 18, Sienna Thornton and Simon Forrester went to Los Angeles once again. Two days later, it would be the official trial for Zane Forrester’s rape and assault case. In fact, they should have gone earlier to prepare, but since Sienna Thornton was planning to take a long leave, so work at the Treaty and Law Departnt had to be settled first, so they delayed until that day.
Upon arriving in Los Angeles, their first action was to et Zane Forrester. The main objective was to find out from Zane who was the woman with him that night. If he was willing to disclose, and if the woman was willing to testify, the case could definitely be won.
Yet, on this matter, Zane Forrester maintained his previous attitude, refusing to ntion the woman who was with him that night.
Simon Forrester was so angry that his face changed, directly asking if he was lying and if the victim was the one in his room that night. When he heard his son suspect him of being a rapist, Zane Forrester showed a hint of indignation and wavering, but only for a mont, quickly returning to his stance of "I didn’t do it, but I’m not going to say."
Sienna Thornton continuously analyzed the seriousness of the situation to him. In the end, he directly told her that if she wasn’t confident, they could let other lawyers handle it.
Simon Forrester was so angry he couldn’t speak, and upon returning to the hotel, he wanted to pack up and return ho imdiately, but Sienna Thornton dissuaded him. Sienna figured, since Zane Forrester was unwilling to open up now, once the trial started, witnessing the unfavorable situation might change his mindset.
On February 20, Zane Forrester’s rape and assault trial began at the Los Angeles court.
Sienna Thornton appeared in court as the second chair lawyer, while Simon Forrester sat in the back of the gallery.
As the trial officially comnced, the prosecution directly presented several strong pieces of evidence to the judge and jury, and arranged for forensic officers and the victim’s roommate to testify. All evidence and testimonies were very unfavorable to the defendant.
The first witness to testify was the expert who examined the TT collected from the scene. After the prosecution’s questioning, the lead attorney conducted cross-examination.
Lawyer: "You stated that the bodily fluid in the TT belonged to the defendant. Was there any detection of the victim’s DNA on the exterior of the TT?"
Witness: "Because the TT was retrieved from the trash can, it was contaminated by other items in the trash, making it impossible to extract the victim’s DNA."
Lawyer: "May I ask the witness, can you confirm beyond a doubt that this TT was used by both the defendant and the victim?"
Witness: "...No."
The lawyer bowed to the judge: "Your Honor, I have no further questions."
The next witness testified, stating that the victim’s hair was found on the sofa in Zane Forrester’s room.
Lawyer: "At the cri scene, besides the victim’s hair, was there any collection of hair from others, besides the defendant’s?"
Witness: "Yes, we also collected several strands of black female hair at the scene."
Lawyer: "According to the prosecution, since the victim’s hair was found in the room, it’s inferred that the defendant and the victim had a relationship. Now that other people’s hair was found at the scene, can it not be said there was a third person, or perhaps it was just the defendant and a third person present?"
Prosecutor stood up: "Objection!"
The judge glanced at the lead attorney, banged the gavel: "Objection sustained, defense counsel, please mind your thod of questioning the witness."
The lawyer bowed to the judge: "We now call upon the first witness to testify."
The witness appeared, a middle-aged man with a big beard and glasses, who introduced himself as a professor of materials science and engineering at USC.
Imdiately after, several photos appeared on the courtroom’s electronic screen, showing the suit Zane Forrester wore when he appeared at the hotel restaurant that evening.
"Please, Your Honor and mbers of the jury, direct your attention to the screen. This is the suit the defendant wore that evening," the lawyer pressed a remote control, and another image appeared on the screen, "You can see the suit on the defendant matches the new spring collection of 2023 from the Italora brand."
The lawyer then presented proof docunts from the brand, confirming Zane Forrester indeed purchased such a suit two months ago from their Los Angeles branch, with purchase date, Zane Forrester’s signature, and paynt thod included.
The lawyer once again provided brand-issued material certifications and distributed the docunts among the judge, prosecution, and jurors.
Approaching the witness, the lawyer asked: "Based on your research in materials science, the suit worn by the defendant on that day, is it prone to static electricity due to seasonal dryness, thus attracting things like hair?"
Witness: "Yes. To shape and fortify the effect of the suit, many brands blend wool with cotton-polyester fibers. The suit worn by the defendant was of such material, and this material has a drawback—it generates static electricity from friction in a dry environnt, making it prone to attracting hair and similar items."
Lawyer: "After the suit has attracted hair, in what circumstances would it fall off?"
Witness: "In a dry environnt, it could fall off from friction generating static electricity, and might be attracted to another surface of similar material."
The lawyer then presented the fabric analysis of the cri scene’s sofa, distributing the reports among the judge and jury.
The lawyer continued to question the witness: "Would this kind of fabric be even more susceptible to attracting hair than the aforentioned suit material?"
The witness looked up at the material report on the electronic screen, pushed his glasses, and nodded: "Yes, the polyester blend ratio in this fabric is larger, making it even more prone to attracting hair than the suit."
Lawyer: "Is there a possibility that the defendant’s suit attracted the victim’s hair elsewhere, then upon returning to the room, the person sat on the sofa, and due to static electricity from friction between the suit and sofa, the victim’s hair was transferred from the defendant’s suit to the sofa?"
Witness: "There is that possibility."
Prosecutor: "Objection!..."
Lawyer: "Your Honor, I have no further questions."
Jurors at the jury table were taking notes.
Sienna Thornton looked away, nodding confidently at Zane Forrester.
The morning session of the trial was adjourned.
Before being taken away by the court officers, Zane Forrester cast a deep look at Sienna Thornton.
Sienna Thornton caught up and asked: "Is there anything you want to say to ?"
User Comments
0 comments from readers