Case Overview (Cross-Examination)

*Case Overview* is the first testimony of Detective Fulbright, and of the trial as a whole. Here, the detective discusses the reporting of the death, the discovery of the body, and the arrest of Nick Johnson.

## Text

1. *At 12:26 AM, we received a phone call from security at the Paville Research Institute, saying they found a dead body. Naturally, we came right over!*
2. *My officers and I arrived at the crime scene at 12:37 AM. As you'll see on the map I have prepared, the crime scene is inside a wide moat, with only one bridge across.*
3. *I lit and photographed the crime scene while my other men interviewed the Institute's own officers, who were already there, and searched the area. The scene of the crime didn't show much of interest, besides the murder victim.*
4. *The group working on interviewing established the security officers found the scene at 12:24 AM, and there were no hijinks there, and also interviewed a guard at the bridge on the moat.*
5. *That guard said nobody crossed that bridge after the time of death!*
6. *Those who searched the area found two things of interest. One was that both sides of the moat were hedged by untrampled flowers.*
7. *When we searched the building, we found only one person on it. The defendant, Nick Johnson, "stargazing." He refused to talk to us, so we immediately took him in as a person of interest.*
8. *On the basis of all the evidence we collected, we established that the killer couldn't have left the inside of the moat. And that only left one conclusion: Nick Johnson was the killer.*
9. *He knocked out the victim with chloroform and then strangled her to death!*
10. *We then arrested him. Still now, he refuses to talk to us. A crime against justice, for sure!*

## Pressed Details (summary)

- No aerial vehicles were used as a means of escape, period. The only way in or out of the crime scene was on a single bridge. (No, no grappling hook tricks or anything of the sort either! On foot is the only way.)

- Absolutely no one tampered with the scene of the crime.

- The footprints didn't leave heavy impressions, and there was not much to go by the dirt from the defendant's shoes either.

- The dirt wasn't measured, there wasn't really much of a cause to.

- At the time of the cross-examination, Fulbright's team was still looking into things that may have been thrown into the moat.

- They were certain of the location the struggle took place at the crime scene, thanks to the photo they took as well as the details of the autopsy.

- Chloroform does not work instantaneously, it would've been strange if there wasn't a struggle.

- The scratches as described on the autopsy were mostly inflicted on the back of the victim's hands. It seems likely they were by fingernails, but it's not certain.

- Co-workers gone on record to say that the defendant was never a nail-biter but did look a bit unkempt.

- The prosecution puts forth the idea that the killer put chloroform over the victim's mouth with one hand, and used the other to try and hold the hands back, leading to the struggle where the scratches were left on the back of the victim's hands.

- Between the defense and prosecution, there seems to be a thought that the killer wore gloves. As the victim's tablet is broken, it is impossible to test if it could've been operated through gloves (but it seems perfectly possible prints may have been wiped with a cloth, if any were on there).

- According to Detective Fulbright, when the police searched what was left of the victim's belongings at the crime scene, "cash, credit cards, and even jewelry was found left at the scene, but the tablet was damaged..."

DETAILS UP TO DATE STARTING AT PAGE 6 UP TO END OF CROSS-EXAMINATION

## Pressed Details (messy raw but still paraphrased cut and paste)

pg.6

(Crowe) "no gliders, ziplines, balloons, or flying machines were seen or found at all? Nothing a person could use to leave from an upper window of that building and escape the scene?"
(Fulbright) "No gliders, ziplines, balloons, flying machines, rockets! Pole vaulting and grappling hooks were tested and found to be completely infeasible! It's a wide moat, and there's not much to hold onto besides the bridge! And jetpacks would be way too noisy!"

pg.7

(Quintero, in relation to statement 3) " Mr. Fulbright, could you present the photo of the victim's body and of the crime scene? Even if there are no much things of interest in the scene it's nice to give it a look."
(Fulbright) ""One photograph of justice," yells Bobby, "coming right up! I took it myself when we got to the scene, as soon as we set up the lights! And don't even think about somebody tampering the scene while we were doing that!" (Crime Scene Photograph evidence produced.)

(Quintero, in relation to statement 5)  Alberto slamed the desk and shouted "Hold it! I need you to clear this, yesterday you slipped to the defense this map. (image of map evidence) I ask you when this scene in the map occurs?, I mean the guard said that no one passed through the bridge after the crime and as we can clearly see there's no murderer so I assumpt that this is after the murder, I don't think that the witness just stand there seeing a damsel on the floor, making me believe that he/she crossed the bridge. Now I ask who is the witness?"
(Judge) "As for your second question, Mr. Quintero... I'm confused. First, the court hasn't seen this map yet. It needs to be introduced. Second, I have a very hard time believing that the police just... forgot to put the killer on the map. Detective Fulbright just said, and I quote, 'When we searched the building, we found only one person on it. The defendant, Nick Johnson.' And then, how does that even connect to the witness?"
(Fulbright) "Actually, Justice Ayala," comments Fulbright, "the defendant isn't on there because we can only show one floor at a time. The defendant was there on the roof. It's just that we could only draw one floor. If the defense would like, we could put the defendant's location on there and make a note of it...?"
(Quintero) " Yes please, I was confused myself when recibing the map, Your Honor, can we add the map to the court record?"
(Map added to court record and edited to include location of defendant at time of arrest)

(Crowe) "Detective, those footprints... they're heavy. Are they consistent with the size and weight of the victim, defendant, and first discoverer of the scene, as far as we can tell? No way to match them exactly in that state. But let's rule out any contradictions." ""Did you check the soles of the defendant's shoes for signs he'd walked there? Bits of dirt or grass. You might not have found any. It was hours before he was arrested. They'd have time to come off. But if you have the shoes, check 'em, please."
(Fulbright) "Unfortunately, we couldn't determine much from the marks. They weren't that heavy, and they decayed in the hours since. We got even less information from Johnson's shoes - a regular amount of dirt. It doesn't give enough information to contradict anything."

(Tingling) "Excuse me, but could you explain what a 'regular amount' of dirt is?"
(Fulbright) "We didn't go and measure it. Just... as much dirt as you'd expect? It could that he had done nothing in particular, or that he was involved in a struggle hours ago, and any extra grass and soil naturally came off. It could be either."

(Crowe) "The defense suggested that our motive could be clearer. It'd help to know what the victim was doing that day, and whose offices she visited. I'm assuming there aren't any cameras in or around that building. But a six-story building should have an elevator. And I'd assume few, if any, people would've used it since the murder." "The most recent prints on the buttons would belong to the defendant, possibly the victim, and the investigators. They'd be the overlays, the prints on top. Detective, have you fingerprinted the elevator buttons? We may find out which floor or floors were visited... and from there, we'll see if we can pin this down further."
(in relation to Statement 9) "Now, detective... just to be clear, is this consistent with the marks on the victim's hands and wrists? In the movies, someone just puts a rag over someone's nose and they collapse. But in your experience, could someone struggle while being chloroformed?"
(Fulbright) "We've been so busy looking for evidence thrown away in the moat that we haven't looked much into the victim's other actions that day. Besides, the previous prosecutor said that it wasn't relevant... We can get you that information, but it'll take time! This building is smaller than it looks, but it's not as if this was the only building we have to check. The facility has a lot of other buildings! It's massive! I mean, you can't even see the parking lot on this map, can you?" "And yes, chloroform is far from instantaneous. It would have been surprising if there wasn't a struggle!"
(Crowe) "Take as much time as you need. But starting with the building at the scene seems best."

(Tingling) "So, were there any signs of this specific struggle, detective?"
(Fulbright) "Heavy marks at the ground from the crime scene photo, and according to the autopsy, 'minor unhealed scratches and bruises along the hands and wrists indicate a brief struggle before death'!"
(Crowe) "Objection," he says, without shouting. "I just asked the detective whether these wounds'd be consistent with the struggle. If you have a more specific concern, just say it. But if you're wondering, I doubt we found anything under the defendant's nails. He had hours to wash his nails, and the detective would've already said so if we had that evidence." A slight pause. "But if you think these wounds aren't consistent with self-defense against a chloroform attack, me and my assistant can show you how it might've happened. If Mr. Ledger is fine with that. And if the detective answers one more question... Detective, were the wounds and bruises on the palms and front of the victim's wrists, on the backs of the hands and the wrists, or both?"
(Tingling) "Aha. I can already picture all the ways that the struggle could have gone, don't worry! But, go on and answer the question, detective."
(Fulbright) "Remember, the victim was a VIP that day. There was probably somebody with her most of the day, and an itinerary! We'll get right on it!" Fulbright is clearly pumped for this part of the investigation. "Hmm... The autopsy said they were primarily on the back."

pg.8

(Crowe demonstrating theoretical deadly attack on Ledger) Crowe approaches Ledger from behind. "The defendant came from behind, then reached out and clamped the chloroform over her mouth with one hand, trying to use the other to restrain her hands." He slowly and carefully demonstrates the movement on Ledger with a fuchsia handkerchief, taking care not to move too sharply and spook him. "But chloroform takes time to work. The victim got her hands free and tried to pry the defendant's hands off her mouth. Ledger, please demonstrate, slowly and gently."Assuming Ledger does so, he then says, "The defendant then clawed and grabbed at her wrists and hands with his free hand, trying to get them away, like so." He reaches around with his free hands and grabs Ledger's, forcing them away from the hand holding the handkerchief. "And that's how the backs of her hands were wounded. Now, Detective, did these scratches look like fingernail marks or something else? Or is it impossible to tell?"
(Tingling) Isuzu nods. "Generally, if you'd imagine it, a normal person forced to defend themselves would likely throw their hands out. But having marks on the back of your hands... I would like to think that the killer attacked her from behind with the chloroformed rag. In this scenario, she may have tried to pull the rag off of her... But would that really leave marks on the back of her hands? Regardless, it's definitely plausible."
(Fulbright) "They looked like they were from fingernails, but you can never tell for certain."
(Crowe) "If a person had long nails, it'd be hard to make wounds like that through thin gloves without tearing them. But our defendant... seems like a nail-biter to me. Detective, does the defendant have long nails, or ones that're bitten down?" A pause. "But I'm getting ahead of us, aren't I? Does the defense agree that the killer most likely wore gloves?"
(Fulbright) "A bit long, actually. Coworkers said they were usually short, but never a nail-biter. Though they also thing he had gone a little unkempt lately..."
(Crowe) "Ah. So the ragged edges of his nails could have scratched the victim through thin gloves. Or his nails could have pierced through thicker gloves and scraped the victim's hands." He regards the judge apologetically. "There's a reason for this line of questioning, Your Honor. But before we go any further, I'd bet the defense agrees the killer probably wore gloves, based on a key piece of evidence. Right?"
(Tingling) "It's very likely that the killer used gloves, yes. But it's not impossible for them to have used, say, a cloth. After all, there was nothing to be found from the killer on the screen of the tablet, right? Speaking of which... Some touch-activated devices only respond to direct contact with the skin, right? Or at least, some replication of it. Papa hates stuff like that because he has to take off his gloves. Can you clarify whether this was such a device?"
(Crowe) "I've worked phones through nitrile gloves before. It's possible; the screens work by a capacitance sensor. But it's impossible to do through most cloth. And it's definitely impossible to use a cloth without wiping off the victim's fingerprints."
(Fulbright) Fulbright nods. "It should be possible with that model. We'd test with the device itself if it wasn't completely broken."
(Judge) "Very well, but I hope you're getting to the point soon."
(Crowe) "Your Honor, there's a point I'd like to settle. With your consent, I'll present the facts we've just uncovered to the court. If anyone sees a potential problem with them, we'll have to hash it out. If not, we can all agree this testimony about the state of the body and crime scene isn't worth chasing any further, and move on to the next witness. Is that agreeable?"
(Tingling) "Alright, thanks for clearing up my doubts. I suppose the defense will have to agree for now that the killer likely did use gloves of some description. Ah, rather, let me re-do that. The defense agrees that whoever operated the tablet other than the victim likely did use gloves. There we go!"
(Judge) "Interesting how the prosecution proposes that after what I assume are all the questions they care to ask. The defense still has a right to cross-examination, as long as the questions are admissible. Unless the defense waives that right, I can't allow your proposal to occur. That said, relevance is a very subjective standard, and this cross-examination has gone on for a bit... Unless the defense wants to negotiate this, I will allow the cross-examination to continue, but keep the questions relevant. However, I would be very happy to see something worked out."
(Crowe) "Hmm. Fair enough, Your Honor. the prosecution's given an account of the struggle, the state of the crime scene, the autopsy report, and all the other usual subjects for a first testimony. On that note, does the defense believe we've plausibly accounted for all injuries dealt at the scene, then, and all relevant details in the Autopsy Report?"
(Tingling) "Oh, I do have one last question. Just a small one, really. Could the prosecution inform us of where they believe the lorazepam came from? Sure, you could just say my client slipped it into her drink earlier, but I would like to think you'd have evidence to support that."
(Continues into page 9)

pg.9

(Continuing from page 8)
(Crowe) "...We were hoping that it wouldn't come to this. The defendant is on trial, not the victim. But since the sedative was taken hours earlier, it's probably not connected to the murder. Which means she took it herself. And since she didn't have a prescription..." A slight pause. "Well, we can't say for sure how she got it, but it may have been an illegal way of coping with a stressful job. Or she might've been given a pill by a friend to cope with a tough day. We may never know." And Crowe raises himself up to full height. And he says, solemnly: "But this does explain one thing. If Ms. Kranz had taken a sedative earlier, it might have made her struggles weaker. Strong enough to raise her hands, but not too strong to be restrained one-handed. Strong enough to fight weakly, but not strong enough to scratch through gloves." And now the point of all of Crowe's fussing about gloves and wounds was clear. Here Crowe addresses the detective. "Were there any marks on the defendant's hands? I assumed you'd have mentioned them if there were, but let's just check. And does the lorazepam help explain this?"
(Fulbright) "Uh, right. The lorazepam would also explain that. It would subdue the victim. Chloroform isn't an instant knockout by any means..."
(Judge) "I had been wondering about the lorazepam for quite a while now. While I would appreciate more definitive proof of what happened to it, I suppose speculation is the best we can do..." "Prosecution theorizes that the lorazepam was entirely unplanned. Does the defense care to respond?"
(Crowe) "If you'd like more proof, we could try searching the victim's home for any remaining doses. But that assumes she kept it there. And that she didn't use the last dose on the day she was murdered. But even if someone else gave her the drug earlier, the defendant's still the only one at the scene when she was strangled."
(Tingling) "We have no desire to pursue the lorazepam at this time, but I do find it somewhat interesting. Call it a hunch, but I feel like I'll see this again some time. For now, though, I believe we can move on."
(Crowe) "Then the defense has no further questions...?"
(Judge) "I see..." Judge Ayala sounds hesitant again, but she recovers. "Detective Fulbright, please have the police on the lorazepam. We may need to revisit this issue when we find your results." She then returns to the subject at hand. "In this case, once Mr. Quintero and Mr. Ledger are satisfied, we may call the next witness. I remind the court that if no new issues come up during that cross-examination, I will render a Guilty verdict immediately."
(Ledger) "Iiiii," he doesn't sount too confident as he draws out the vowel, before looking up straight ahead, "have no further questions to... ask of the witness, Your Honor." He clears his throat after another pause. "I, uh, as part of the prosecution, agree that... as of the Detective's testimony," he raises a hand, "the defendant is the only one with the means, he counts on his hand, the opportunity, and... by extension, the motive from... what Mr. Crowe put forth, and that this next witness is... well, just going to reinforce that."
(Quintero) "Your Honor, the defense's ready to cross-examine the next witness."
(Fulbright dismissed, he's off to run the checks for more evidence)

(Judge) "Thank you, Detective," says the judge. "You may step down from the stand."
(Fulbright) "A pleasure!" says Bobby, complete with a salute. "I'm off to run those final checks you ordered! We should have more information about the victim's movements and the results of the lorazepam search by the time this next cross-examination is called. In justice we trust!"

## Contradictions

The issue of the lorazepam in the victim's system was raised. A drug available by prescription only, traces were found in the victim, but yet neither the victim nor defendant have been prescribed for it. It is speculated that it may have been illegally obtained by the defendant, but the issue at the time was not pushed much harder than that. It is believed it contributed to her eventual death by her attacker by making her less alert and incapable of fully fighting back... but where did it come from, and where was it (and the related evidence) disposed? The detective was dispatched to go search for it in the victim's home.