John-Mark and I have been taking Trial Advocacy this semester-the course culminates in a short version of a full scale trial that the students put on themselves. John-Mark and I were defending a man on trial for both armed robbery and first degree murder. Gabe was able to come up to Morgantown to be our defendant, John Burns. He was fantastic. Although he was declared guilty after our jury of ungrads seeking extra credit deliberated for about 15 minutes (I think they were hungry and ready to leave) our professor mentioned several times to Gabe that "A real jury would never have convicted you."
John-Mark did a great job-so much so that during cross examination, he got the witness to change his story and to agree with John-Mark's line of questioning. This eventually raised an objection from the prosecution..."Your honor, the witness is clearly confused!"
I've been thinking about how to trust myself more, after we finished the process. I think some of the members of the jury noticed pauses before questions I asked, and took this to mean that I lacked confidence. I'm very deliberate. In court, I need to let up. Our professor was speaking to me after trial and compared it to playing chess versus boxing. Communication is a contact sport, he says, and my deliberate movements almost cost me the human aspect of trial.
I made split pea soup last weekend and John-Mark ate it.
