Mis-trial and Missed Justice

The following is an excerpt from Part Two:



The first day of our trial is devoted primarily to jury selection. The next day the actual trial begins. That is when the prosecutor’s star witness, who has already undergone five or six coaching sessions, introduces conflicting information to the jury. He is accompanied by his foster dad, the “mentor” from the high school. A newly-manufactured count of first degree molestation is introduced, yet it is inconsistent with the story he presented to the Grand Jury many months earlier.

All of a sudden he is “remembering more.” It is now a year later than when he “remembered” it the first time. The prosecutor admits he is fully aware that the testimony would be introduced. He corroborates that he instructed Cole to do so. They cannot keep track of which lie fits where. The result is a mistrial. (Not a single word about misconduct on the part of the prosecution makes the news, not one mention of it.)

During the preliminary stage-setting statements, Cole was careful to paint a scene of a pleasant home life. There is no dissatisfaction worth mentioning. Beaver Cleaver couldn’t portray more wholesomeness. It is not anywhere near the truth, as is evidenced when the mistrial is over and the pleas copped.

Cole is then given the opportunity to offer a statement to the court. The jury has been excused and we go through the rigmarole of signing agreements. The terms of our release and probation are clearly gone over (terms which we later discover change by the minute once probation begins). The final mockery on the agenda is to be subjected to Cole’s outlandish presentation, made from the witness stand. There is not much point to it except, perhaps, to admonish us publicly. The whole thing is a sorry joke.