Animal Instinct by Rosenfelt, David (novels for students TXT) 📕

outstanding, highly trained medical examiner, but if she were a poorly trained plumbing-supply salesperson, she would still be able to tell that Gerald Kline had his throat slashed and he bled to death.

Andy doesn’t question her assessment in his cross-examination; instead he asks her about her experience working with me when I was on the force. She has nothing but praise for my professionalism and says that when she heard I was arrested for the murder, her first reaction was that it couldn’t be true.

“Is that still your reaction today?” Andy asks.

“It is,” she says, before Dylan can object.

The forensics specialist that Dylan calls is Sergeant Luis Claudio, a twenty-year veteran of the force. I worked with Luis a couple of times, but don’t really know him. His reputation is excellent.

Dylan starts with the DNA and spends almost an hour getting Claudio to say that it is absolutely, positively my DNA on the clothing, along with Kline’s blood. Claudio quantifies the odds against it as one in a couple of quadrillion; at least that’s what I think he says. Anything over a gazillion and I tune out.

I honestly don’t think there is a person on the planet who doesn’t believe that DNA is ridiculously accurate, so I don’t know why prosecutors spend so much time convincing juries of it. I can see the jurors’ eyes glazing over as the testimony drones on.

More interesting to them is the blood. That my clothes are saturated with it is interesting to the jurors; they perk up when the subject is raised. Dylan gets Claudio to say that the blood would spurt from the neck wound, making it impossible for a person making the slashing motion to avoid getting it all over him. Because it was a clean cut, Claudio says, it would be even more likely to spurt.

I can tell when Andy starts his cross that he sees potential for us in the blood testimony. “Sergeant Claudio, you testified that it would have been almost impossible for the slasher not to have gotten blood on him or her, is that right?”

“Yes.”

“What if the slashing had been done from behind?”

“I was not presented with that hypothetical.”

“Mr. Campbell told you that the slasher stood in front of the victim?”

“That was my assumption.”

“When did he tell you that? During your coaching session? Did he show you a video of the crime? Maybe we could all see it.”

Claudio is annoyed. “I was not coached.”

“Wonderful. So let’s start over. If the slasher came up behind the victim, grabbed him by the shoulder and slashed across the front, would the slasher’s clothes be covered in blood?”

“That would be unlikely.”

“Good. Please let me know if I say anything else that contradicts Mr. Campbell’s hypothetical.”

Dylan objects that Andy is being badgering and argumentative, and since he is, Judge Wallace sustains.

“You said that the blood on the knife found in the Dumpster was Mr. Kline’s. Was that the murder weapon?”

“I can’t say that for sure.”

“So it could have had the blood applied to it, then put in the garbage bag, without having been used to slash Mr. Kline?”

“It’s possible.”

“You said it was a clean cut, do you remember saying that?”

“Of course.”

“Did you examine the knife?”

“Of course.”

“It’s a serrated-edged kitchen knife. Do they make clean cuts?”

“They can.”

“Isn’t a serrated edge like a saw, with a jagged blade? Isn’t the very purpose of it not to make clean cuts?”

“I can’t speak to its purpose; I can only say that the wound could have been made by the knife we are talking about.”

Andy finally lets Claudio off the stand, and Dylan calls Sergeant Stew Metosky, another forensics officer who had been on the scene.

“Sergeant Metosky, you checked Mr. Kline’s house for fingerprints that night?”

“I did.”

“What did you find?”

“Well, obviously Mr. Kline’s were everywhere. There were also partial prints from three people that I could not identify, and then I found prints belonging to Mr. Douglas.”

“Where were they?”

“Well, there were some in the den, and then there were prints on the outside handle of the back door.”

Dylan pretends to be surprised. “He came in through the back door?”

“I have no idea, but he certainly touched the back doorknob.”

Andy’s cross is quick and to the point. “Sergeant Metosky, you said it was on the outside doorknob of the back door. Was it also on the inside?”

“No.”

“Are you aware that there was testimony that the prosecution theory is that Mr. Douglas went out the back, put a garbage bag full of obvious clues in a nearby Dumpster, and then came back in?”

“Yes.”

“How did he get out without touching the door?”

“I can’t answer that.”

“Did you examine the knife for prints?”

“Yes, there were none.”

“Which means he filled the bag with clothes containing his own DNA, hoping it would never be found, but took the time to wipe off his prints?”

Dylan objects and Wallace sustains, telling Sergeant Metosky that he doesn’t have to answer. I don’t think Andy cares; I think the point was to ask the question.

He lets him off the stand, and we’re out of here for the day.

Judge Wallace wishes the jury a nice weekend and tells them to be sure it doesn’t include media coverage of this trial.

Monday starts our defense.

ANDY has called Richard Mahler four times.

Twice at his office and twice on his cell phone, which Sam tracked down. Sam also set up an app on Andy’s phone that would let him record calls that he made or that came in. New Jersey is a one-person-consent state, so he could record any conversation legally. Sam probably wasn’t used to doing tech things that are legal, but he seems to have adjusted.

For the two office calls, Andy told the receptionist that it was urgent that he speak to Mr. Mahler, but each time she put him on hold, then came back and said that Mahler was out of the office.

On the cell phone calls, they went to voice mail, and Andy left an urgent message each time. The last one was an implied threat that it