Andrew Q Gordon

Nephy, you're very evil, ending the story like that. Not that I am surprised. Perfectly apt for the day and holiday. Hope you have a festive time and find as much happiness as you bring the rest of us.

Pipo, you act like I have any say in this - it's in the jury's hands now. But personally, IF I had a say, if he got off, I think we'd sign him and Peter up for Thunderdome - Two men enter, one man leaves

No way, our little Bee is 16 Happy Birthday Bee!!! You have a wonderful birthday and enjoy

Nephy, you touch on a very interesting debate - does punishment really work or is there a better way to deal with criminal acts? Given my position, I'm probably more on the side of 'maybe it doesn't work' than people believe. I often wonder if what we do is working or are we just locking up people with other like minded people and teaching them to be better at being a criminal when they get out. The Quakers founded the penitentiary system with a Penitentiary in Philadelphia. The idea was for those sent there to be penitent and to see forgiveness from within and from God and to find a way to be better people when they got out. Clearly that is not what we do now. But without an alternative, my feeling more and more is warehouse the criminal and let him get out when he's too old to do any more harm. BUT there are a certain class of people I feel no sympathy for. Not quite sure Jordan would fit into it, but white collar criminals who prey on others are not worthy or release. Bernie Madoff is perhaps the most glaring example, but really why would we want him out again? Jordan - being one of the rich and privileged had every reason not to get in trouble and no reason to do what he did. he is not a sympathetic defendant at sentencing; more so for his lack of remorse. Ekkk - youse a hard man Trev, better hope I never get in trouble when you're on the jury panel. I think you initial outrage is valid - but the other side is, what are we really doing? Straight up punishment? Rehabilitation? Protecting Society? I'm not sure the three are compatible. If we want to protect the public, locking up people where they learn to be brutal to survive is hardly a service to society when we release them. Again, I don't have the answers, just point out where I go back and forth on this.

Kyle, I'm in the middle of two that I'm post and a few others that I am not writing for GA. Sometimes it's a matter of just making myself do something. But I agree with you, that if I'm not feeling a story or more specifically a character, it is impossible to do it well. I don't know that I have any suggestions other than start on it and try to get back in the mood for the other story you're working on. Sometimes the muse hits me when I do that. Sometimes it doesn't Andy

Haha Dave, well you do, I tried to watch the game last night and alternately fell asleep or had angry baby to deal with. But go Cards, definitely rooting for Albert and Co.

Sorry couldn't resist one last review. First, you don't need to change the Bryce part at the end, that there is a bit of question is good, because it makes us think and frankly it was there, I just wanted to be sure. Okay so for the story as a whole, this is definitely one of my favorites on the site. I loved how you took us through the various stages to bit by bit introduce us to the characters and the world. We've 'discussed' my comments before, so I'm going to focus on why I loved this story. The way you wrote it, we got a real sense of Kynan and Alan and - at least for me - I really felt attached to them both. Bryce went from dismissible rogue to perhaps the most likeable of the supporting cast. And the way you distinguished, Azil and Karadur from Xeran gave us a sense that Demons, weren't evil by nature, just different. THAT, might be the best part of this, how you had us Hating the demons until we met Karadur and Azil, then you showed us that Xeran and his ilk were just evil not because they were demons, but well because they were evil. Last, the various twists and turns were imaginative and original so it was fun to read. Great job. So what's next ?

Wayne, Benji, Not gonna comment on what happens, but I can say I've finished chapter 7 already. I'm going to review it today and send it off to be looked over. Look for it, on schedule , next Sunday

Happy Birthday Tara, Hope you have a great day

Wow! great chapter - though I'm not sure what happened with Bryce. Am I right that in the end he did not join 'Waylon' because Alan didn't need saving? Beyond that- just a wonderful story and so well told. I hope in time you give us an epilogue, maybe tie it into a short story with Alan and Kynan. Kudos an thank you or sharing this.

Cute, after the return of angry baby today, I needed something light - thank you.

I think I need to take a poll - it might change the ending - to see how many think Jordan gets convicted and how many think he's found not guilty. Then based on the numbers, I decide if I flee the galaxy or not. Thanks Wayne,

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

How can I answer that without getting in major hot water with Study and Mike?

Okay so this is something I was going to save unless and until Jordan gets convicted. In 2008 Pennsylvania's hate crime law was overturned by the PA Supreme Court. Kinda fuzzy on the details, but I think it had to do with it being an enhancement and not a separate crime. - Don't quote me on that. So while the trial speaks of a hate crime, that is my own little fictitious little slice of my little fictitious world where Graydon University exists and the boys live their lives. I bring this up now, because I'm sure someone will write in about how PA doesn't have a hate crime law at this time. So yeah I know, but it makes for better fiction, or at least I thought so. Andy

Could it be you have a dirty mind, Mark?

DaddyD - thank you for those comments, the image of Martin addressing them was what I was hoping to show. B-man - more charges and a new trial?? there's no pleasing some folks.

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!!!

Chapter 6: Rebuttal, is posted. Read it here. As I mentioned earlier, this chapter doesn't get us to the verdict that is next. Hopefully this one was worth the wait. Andy

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