Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Wanted: Serious Firepower for the Defendant

Defendant’s attorney Bruce Brooke examines witness for the defendant Jose Aruco. I got the distinct impression Brooke had never spoken with this man before as it is fairly commonplace (?) to prep your witness before the trial. Half way through the morning Judge McCalla stopped the questioning to tell Aruco that this line of questioning requires only very narrow factual answers and that the attorney will let you know if you a more expansive answer is required. No matter by that time I suppose. Between the translation and multiple sidebars (where the two sides quarreled about the credentials of Aruco) it was all lost in a haze. Brooke would ask a short question and Aruco would talk until the jury’s eyes were rolling out of their heads. I secretly hoped Carranza could do a better job then this. This was not the adequate representation they were talking about in the U.S. Code Books. This was a bit of train wreck. I leaned over to Professor Karl, now sitting in the gallery on the same aisle as me and pointed to the remark I had written on my page, “witness apparently called by defendant to confuse the jury???” It was actually a bit of joke that didn’t go over very well (wouldn’t be the first time). She did tell me that the University that the witness taught at had recently been shut down for academic fraud. That’s grim. David Esquivel wasted no time cutting to the heart of the matter. Aruco is an agronomy and religion professor who may have a law degree but is not qualified to speak on El Salvadorian politics, history, or the military. Is this sort of like being an untrained auto mechanic with no wrenches and a field full of broken cars? I smelled big trouble. Brooke became agitated at one point after the morning break verbally brawling with Esquivel when the white noise maker was turned off and quite near the gallery’s sitting area. I wasted no time cocking my ear in that direction. The translator was standing there with the witness as well. Some sparks flew with lots of scattered conversation in both languages. I’m not sure Aruco was much help to Carranza’s case. I understand two other witnesses (the two I missed who testified in the afternoon session – when yours truly is out making a living) were not much help to Carranza either. This according to one of plaintiff’s team members I spoke to in the break room while I ate my 75 cent granola bar.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home