Chapter 17 - Grant Should Never Have Testified
Grant testified in his own defense.
His attorney looked unhappy.
He insisted.
He wanted to explain.
Men like Grant often believe the problem is not evidence.
It is that nobody has heard their version loudly enough.
He said:
“I never meant to kill her.”
Prosecutor:
“What did you mean to do?”
“Scare her.”
“By throwing a sixty seven year old stroke survivor out of moving vehicle?”
“I pushed her away.”
“At thirty seven miles per hour?”
“I didn’t know speed.”
“Did you kick her walker farther away?”
“I knocked it.”
“Why?”
“I was angry.”
“Did you call 911?”
“No.”
“Did you return?”
“We tried.”
“To rescue her?”
Silence.
“To get recorder?”
“I don’t remember.”
Owen had already testified.
The prosecutor played motel audio recovered from Owen’s phone.
GRANT:
If that recorder uploaded, we’re screwed.
CELIA:
Should’ve found it.
OWEN:
We should’ve called ambulance.
GRANT:
Shut up.
Grant’s face hardened.
Then prosecutor asked:
“What did you mean when you said she doesn’t leave kitchen—” Wait wrong story. Here van. Need use phrase from van maybe:
“What did you mean when you told Owen before trip, ‘She doesn’t come home until she signs’?”
Grant:
“That she’d stay at motel.”
“No motel reservation existed for Eleanor.”
“I would have made one.”
Then:
“What did you mean after impact when you said, ‘She’s done’?”
“I meant done fighting us.”
“In freezing ditch?”
Grant looked at jury.
That was the moment he lost them.
May you like
Not because he lacked a clever explanation.
Because every explanation required them to ignore common sense.
