The Wall: Chronicle of a Scuba Trial
Chapter 9

Day 5, Friday - Decision

It's all theatre, isn't it? The arguments, the interrogation of witnesses, the courtroom posturing. 'Have I Got A Show For You! could be the title of each main event. The only question -- will the audience like it, or will they be turned off?

Millions of dollars spent on Broadway productions don't guarantee a predictable answer to this question, and there is no reason to suppose that lesser amounts spent on jury trials should guarantee one either. Like Broadway producers, good trial lawyers resign themselves early on to the vagaries of the courtroom. Assuming that each side shows up and presents some type of arguement, no matter how ridiculous, the outcome is just as apt to correlate with the height of the tides and the sign of the zodiac as with anything else.

Height of the tides? Sign of the zodiac? How else to explain that John Jones kills Bill Smith in Missouri on Monday and hangs, but kills him on Tuesday in Kansas and goes free. Or that Tom Black robs Apex Grocery store one cold night in Buffalo and goes to jail for 5 years, but robs Zenith Grocery one hot night in Atlanta and gets 30 days probation? Or that Mike Brown breaches a business contract with Jane Doe in February in Seattle and is ordered to pay big bucks, but breaches the same contract in July in Houston and pays nothing?

And don't think this is a geogaphy or time-of-year phenomenon. It is not. The same John Jones or Tom Black or Mike Brown trial could have opposite outcomes in any particular place and at any time of the year - just by varying the judge or the jury or the breakfast food of the lawyers.

Competetive professional sports provides the best analogy. On any given day team x can beat team y, on any other given day team y will prevail. No one can predict who will win ahead of time, but post-game analysis makes the result seem so, well, predictable. So too, the outcome of a trial may appear to have been foretold after the fact. But foretold before? Hardly ever.

Perhaps the worst trait of attorneys - apart from outright lying and gross incompetence - is hubris, an assumption that he or she is master of the courtroom and that vagaries don't count. "Because I performed 'x' we achieved outcome 'y'." Such an attitude belies the extent to which courtroom outcome is so often dependent on pure whim and luck and a range of personalities that, with all the conceivable permutations, is probably what scientists mean by "chaos." And don't forget the height of the tides and the sign of the zodiac.

The jury deliberated about an hour and a half on Thursday but no decision was reached, or at least none was announced. On Friday, the fifth morning of trial, several gallery viewers assemble outside the courtroom, in the roomy, vaulted hallway. The lawyers don't wait there, but in their offices a block or so away; they will be summoned when the jury reaches a verdict.

Being Friday, there is a sense the jury will come to a quick decision and not let this go into the weekend. But whether the decision will come at 9 a.m. or 3 p.m. is a guess. Beyond 3, and it is likely the judge will postpone everything until Monday.

At 5 minutes to 11 the bailiff comes into the hallway and announces to everyone within ear shot:

"The following announcement is for anyone involved with Knowlton vs. Ocean Realm International. Judge Whittaker has convened her court for 11:30 a.m., approximately one half hour from now." With that, the bailiff disappears into the courtroom.

The jury has reached a decision.

DECISION OF THE COURT

YOU ARE THE JURY.

Yes, there are eight jurors, but we are not allowed into the jury room. And you know as much as they do. True, you didn't see the witnesses in the flesh, or the videos that were shown, or the pool demonstration, or Mrs. Knowlton fainting, or the smirks of attorney Pearson, or the stares shared between Mr. Archer and Mr. Kirkland. But you know the evidence, and you have had ample time to weigh it.

But you are prejudiced, aren't you? Perhaps you are a dive professional and therefore clearly sympathize with the defendant. Or you are a parent who couldn't care less about scuba diving, and pity the Knowltons. Or a plaintiff's attorney even, and side with them. No matter what, chances are you find it difficult to be objective, but that is what the jury is charged with. Being objective, weighing all the evidence as it was presented in court. In the end you must make a decision, and it should be only on the evidence you heard.

The ending is up to you.