Andrew Q Gordon

Either I did a lousy job with the defense or I made it too easy cause everyone is SO sure he's gonna be guilty. As I keep saying the defense is only looking for one person to have a reasonable doubt - not that they want to try this case over, as at a second trial, the government could read the defendant's testimony into the record and then impeach the hell out of it even before he takes the stand. Retrials are generally a terrible proposition when the defendant takes the stand and testifies. So It doesn't look good for Jordan no matter how you slice it. Glad it was detailed enough for you and others to visualize what I was trying to show. That was the hardest part of writing this for me. The arguments were easy - but the setting was a lot harder.

Thanks George, appreciate the review. Me personally, I've never had a trial go more than 4 weeks, but there are many that go much longer. I think direct is boring to watch, it's closing arguments, and cross examination that are fun to do and watch, so if you ever want to watch a real trial wait for the defense case and watch the cross of their witnesses and then stick around for closing arguments. One 'like' is enough - thank you for that. No need for me to get greedy

Motive is not an element of any crime, but it is something you can use to explain what happened. So for instance, if the video was crystal clear and you could see Jordan doing this and there had been no prior homophobic comments, the motive would be hard to image, but it wouldn't matter if the witnesses and the video showed him as the culprit. But when a defendant gets on the stand and says I didn't do it, the jury kind of wants to hear a motive unless there is rock solid evidence of his guilt. As for the time - remember the charge is attempted murder while armed and an enhancement for it being a hate crime. Generally enhancements for bias double the underlying crime. Just so you all know, PA does NOT have a hate crime bias enhancement anymore, the law was declared unconstitutional by the PA Supreme court, but I chose to 'pretend' it is still in existence for the sake of the story. So assume murder carries life and attempted carries half that - which you can't quantify, so the law provides a number, and in this I case it is 40 years, Then there is the conspiracy count, also half the crime you conspired to committed, so again 40 years. Assuming the doubling under my fictitious hate crime law and you're up to 160 years. That's just two crimes. There is the weapons offense - even though he didn't wield the bat, he'd be guilt as a co-conspirator - so you see there is a LOT of time out there. Now, in this case the prosecutor would have charged lesser assault counts in case the attempt murder didn't stick and the jury would of course have to rule on each, but the court could only sentence on one of the same 'type of crimes' but still, there is well over 100 year out there.

Thanks for the reading and commenting. Me personally, I'd agree that the defense doesn't have a chance, but the prosecutor has to convince all 12 jurors beyond a doubt - and while we talk about reasonable doubt, for the most part you have to convince them so they are sure the defendant did it. The defense on the other hand just has to make an argument that one juror will agree with. Now if the defense can't create a doubt in all 12, the trial has to go all over. So as you can, Martin's job is quite difficult and while it looks to most like a slam dunk, if even on says - hmm I think the defense has a point, well then no conviction and we pick 12 new jurors and go at it again. Stay 'tuned' for the last chapter.

Dan, Yeah this so didn't feel like part of the story, though at first I was going to make it part of it. It just felt easier and more engaging to write the trail from the perspective of a participant not an observer. And please, don't say it gets harder, right now sh barely goes sn hour plus before waking up during the day lol. This is hard enough.

Geez, Perc - doesn't having a new born count as torture enough? Glad you liked it, closings are both easy and hard. Half the time I have my 'closing' mapped out before the trial. Then I try to fit the evidence in that I know is out there to the desired argument. Then when the defense case mucks up things, I do my best work on rebuttal. Hopefully I . . . err. . . Martin did a good job here and the jury buys his side of things.

Writing out a closing loses some of it's impact. The movement, the inflection all of these show the jurors how you really feel about the case. It is - IMHO - the passion you bring that can sway an unsure jury. Of course if you have nothing, you can be as passionate as you like and not win, but I think had enough to try and plant a few seeds of doubt. Did it succeed? Mums the word right now. Thanks for the review and - GO RED BIRDS!!!

Martin added a couple of notes and stood up. Time to undo the spin Rankin put on things. "Ladies and Gentlemen, we're almost at the end. I know that must make some of you quite happy." He noted a couple nods from the jurors. "Because I have the burden of proving to you beyond a reasonable doubt that Jordan Colmar committed this terrible crime, I get the chance to address you last. "You heard a number of things from defense counsel, but, as you've already been told, nothing he nor I s

Finally? Two month is not unreasonable - I think I took 4 or 5 months You clean up well - nice. Andy

Welcome Russell T - there seems to be an influx of South African members - woo hoo!!! Not sure who gets the credit, but welcome and enjoy. Andy

Not sure if I'm late or not but happy birthday if I'm on time and happy belated birthday if I'm not.

Sidd, Hmm as someone who has a rather high rep and who has gotten mostly positive reviews I have this sneaking feeling you might have been referring to me among others. I for one have thick skin so if you feel the need to be critical, go for it. You'll probably be right in most cases, and I'll end up agreeing with you. Here's my thing on reviews - I don't leave negative reviews in the forum or as a review - almost never. I might leave a comment here or there about things that confused me, but if there is a real issue with something, I do it by PM. And here's why. Neither me, nor you, nor anyone else on here that I am aware of is a professional editor. Quite honestly, I've gotten comments from folks about this or that which are completely contrary to what writing professionals say - but the reviewer/commenter states their position with complete conviction. Unless you are a writing professional your opinion is just that, your opinion. You might be right, you might be wrong, but if you really want to help the author do it by PM and then you and the author can hash it out away from the public eye. Dann and I disagree on this point a bit -though I understand why he does what he does and I respect that - but if you don't like something, don't read it and don't 'like' it and don't praise it. If no one is reading something, maybe the author will get a clue and ask for help. If not, well they'll be posting but no one will be reading. At the end of the day, telling them in public their stuff stinks only serves to embarrass them and likely they'll leave and never learn from the community. Doing it in private will likely be more helpful. One last point and I'll shut up. Some times there are stories that 'break the rules' or are not polished or need work, but they are still entertaining to read. The plot is original, the characters have depth, despite the flaws, etc. In those cases, there will likely be a lot of positive reviews and maybe not a lot of negative ones. No one is saying this story should be published, but they are telling the author they like what they posted. Andy

Thanks again, and I've responded to your PM

Well thank you for the review and who knew you could leave reviews in different colors?? I'm a hold over from the 'old' new system where you couldn't. As for Peter, the hope was that you were mad at him, but didn't hate him, not sure if that is even possible but that was how I tried to write him. It was also from Jason's POV so his feelings shaped the story as well. Too short? I've been told this is too long by a factor of three if I want to get published. But I hear what you're saying. I posted something on the writer's forum about doing a serial story - which would almost be an on going soap opera type story, but I'm not sure that's me. I can this, I don't see me ever doing their senior year as a story. I don't know there is enough conflict/tension/plot for that. I've thought about a spin off with either Blake or Ethan that would cover J & P's senior year, and I sequel that would be 5 years or so out from Peter's perspective but both are just thoughts at the moment, I've too much else to get done. If I could quit my job and write full time, I say yeah, it'll be done soon, but alas that is not in the cards. Thanks for the review and the kind words. Andy

A good defense lawyer will try not to tip his hand while still getting the answers he needs to make his closing. And while it's obviously crazy to us - we know Jordan did it, consider if you knew nothing about the case and didn't come to the trial predisposed to dislike Jordan. Would it seem so crazy then? I had the defense theory in mind the whole trial so that part was easy to write. Believe it or not the Prosecutor's closing is harder for, because of all that he needs to get across. tay tuned, the end is coming.

The surprise isn't so much a surprise it's who's delivering it. Their theory is - Jordan didn't do it, and they've somehow convinced a co-defendant to testify against the government. We'll see how that works for them won't we?

Haha, glad I got Dan's character across. In some ways this story is harder to follow because I am not giving you ALL the testimony and ALL the arguments and ALL the stages. But I think I'm getting the major points across so I'm glad you think it is easy to read.

Peter has always been a strong person, flawed perhaps, but certainly has a strength to his character. I think all his friends were proud of him for not letting the 'hired' gun of the person who tried to kill him get under his skin

Haha, I suppose that idea would be rather fun to try to write, but uff, the implications and complications would be tough to get right - stick with me and I'll get this done soon - promise.

For Halloween, I'm gonna be giving out candy. There will be pictures of this, right? I mean how else will we be sure you actually did it.

Well then, since you love comments let me be sure to make one; You're so evil! First you're going to torture poor Lucca - he's going from no one to everyone wanting him, Sam likes him, now Jeremy is having him 'sleep' over, and then of course there is Matt who has to secretly like his as much as Lucca likes him. [but of course Matt has no idea Lucca is gay either so that's a problem for Matt and his feelings.] Once all of this gets out, poor Lucca is going to have a HUGE mess on his hands, compliments of . . . YOU! As I said, you're evil. AND if that wasn't bad enough, you left us hanging - again. Sigh, guess that's the mark of a good story and a good chapter, you left us anxious for more.

Funny how a transitional chapter for you, means a return of 'old' - dare I say butt pirate - friends for George. Nice to see they left port safely this time and George made it safely back to Gaitling. Still waiting to see what happens when Roberts get back.

I'm probably a terrible person to give advice on this because this is what I wished I'd done but didn't. As most know I'm a lawyer - prosecutor actually - and while I love my work and job - it's a good office with great, generous, friendly people - I hate my work. I know. What I mean is I wanted to ditch law and do something else, I don't know what, but anything NOT in an office. I hate that I bring work - even if it's not 'work' I bring my work home with me - Even at home I'll stew about cases, idiot defense counsel, stupid judges you get the idea. So for me, I wish I'd followed my heart and left the law 20 years ago and set out to find what made me happy - The reason I didn't was I met Mike - my partner. He wasn't the type to ditch the job and go in search of what makes him happy. He's always wanted to own a nursery or a landscape architect business, but he worried about paying the rent etc. Although I had money saved for my 'search', I stashed it and we moved in, etc. Fast forward, we dreamed, we had fun, we bought a house, we got dogs, bought a new house, talked about kids, bought this house, had a kid, and viola, in a position from which I can't easily get out. My point isn't my life sucks, far from it, but IF you want to do something different, the time to do it is BEFORE you take on obligations. Mortgage, partner, kid etc. Each new addition makes it harder to follow your dream because each new addition adds a layer of responsibility. Now at the risk of my immortal soul, I'm going to disagree with Nephy. Yeah you are young and have time, but don't think there were be a better time in the future. Chase your dreams while you're young. IF it doesn't work out, you have time to recover and rebuilt. If you try it when you're my age - and things don't work out, you have so much less time to recover and rebuild. As I said at the start, I'm probably a bad person to give advice because I wish I had followed my heart and not chased a paycheck and a house etc. I might be better off if i had done it, but maybe not. So, unless you're the type to worry about money and what will happen to you if you fail etc, I'd do what will make you happy, but not without a bit of planning and extra thought. Following one's dream doesn't mean doing it foolishly or haphazardly. Not sure I helped, but that is my opinion. Andy

Meh, I don't see what all the fuss is about finding a way to work in the the title to the story somewhere in 80k words. Hehe, sorry couldn't resist. So are you going to be change from Dr. Evil to Dr. Nice or is another shoe gonna fall next chapter??

This is why you don't date a newbie - they have no experience to draw on. Charlie would have no doubts about why Scott would want him if he was well immersed in gay culture - he's a chicken and Scott's a chicken hawk - nuff said