All language subtitles for the_practice_s05e06_show_and_tell

Previously, on The Practice.

My client was in shock at the time of
this interrogation. He had just found

wife dead less than an hour before this.

She said that if she turned up missing,
that I should call the police, because

Scott probably did something to her.

Objection! We find the defendant, Scott
Wallace, guilty.

Yeah, you gotta get me out. Scott. Get
me out!

You got a problem. The man is on the
verge of a psychotic breakdown. He needs

be transferred to a mental facility
right now.

I'm convinced that Kyle Barrett lied on
the stand after being coached by the

prosecution. Mr. Barrett, you had a
meeting with Richard Bay and Helen

did you not? On the advice of counsel,
I'm exercising my Fifth Amendment right

not to answer your question. I have been
ordered to conduct a full hearing into

this perjury business.

That hearing has been thwarted by the
primary witness exercising his Fifth

Amendment right. The conviction of Scott
Wallace is hereby set aside. It is the

order of this court that he be granted a
new trial.

This is the part that kills us.

That's the bomb. This time, you will
have to testify. I can handle all the

witnesses. We're in good shape there.
But that videotape and your response to

on the stand, that's what will decide
this case.

I'm ready.

Do you feel pressure because he's your
friend or because you failed him?

Both.

I want to get him out because I care
about him, and yeah, because I tried a

lousy case.

Of course I feel pressure. How could I
not?

This guy committed murder, and the only
thing standing between him and the

street is me.

It's a bit unusual for the lead
prosecutor to suddenly flip and think

innocent.

Helen Gamble started feeling guilty over
tactics, and she became clouded by her

conscience. That's all.

She claims you coached a witness to lie.

She's wrong.

Richard Bay will do anything.

DAs like him make it easier for defense
attorneys like me to stay passionate

about what we do, because to me, he
basically represents a police state.

Oh, I don't expect it to be at all,
Sybil.

Bobby Donald fights for clients like it
was his life on the line, and Richard

Bay prosecutes like the victim was his
mother.

Isn't that good?

Zealous advocates? Isn't that what it
should be about?

One would think.

But when fights get this ugly, it's
rarely in the interest of truth.

It's messy.

It gets personal.

You think you'll win?

I know I will.

How can you be so sure?

Because this time I have the video,
which means Scott Wallace will have to

the stand and explain it. And when he
does, I'll get him.

He'll lose it up there.

You watch.

Witnesses are never objective.

Of course, I want you to appear neutral,
but you need to be every bit the

advocate I am.

Never forget, your goal is to help the
prosecution secure a conviction, to put

murderer in prison.

That means you're going to have to stand
up to Bobby Donald.

He can't be feared, and he will
absolutely try to do just that. His

defense is reasonable doubt. Every
question he asks you, it's to build

reasonable doubt.

At the first trial, he got you all to
admit things were possible, and you all

did so, too submissively.

This is why I brought Cindy Keller in
tonight.

She's our behavioral psychologist.

When the defense lawyer forces you to
say the words that he wants you to say,

you can nevertheless use body language
to convey your opinion.

It's all a presentation, and you have to
train your witnesses to be showmen a

little. The key is...

They can't come off too much like
advocates.

If they do, they have less credibility.

We used to have an advantage. People
trusted the police.

That advantage is gone now.

Because they cheat. And Richard Bay will
cheat. He absolutely will.

That seems to be a refrain with you. One
that I have to be mindful of the entire

trial.

What will be different about this trial?

I'm going to win.

I mean, tactics, evidence, witnesses.

What will be different there?

That tape.

That damn videotape.

It played every chance he gets.

We think you had an argument.

You hit her.

Maybe by accident.

She was unconscious.

You were afraid of how it might look.

You put her in the car to make it look
like a suicide.

That's what happened, isn't it?

Detective Larson, does that videotape
fairly and accurately depict what

in that room?

Yes, it does.

What did happen in that room?

From my experience, Scott Wallace
admitted to killing his wife.

Objection. Overruled.

Did he ever say he killed his wife?

No, but... In fact, he maintained his
innocence and he still does, doesn't he,

Detective? But when confronted... When
you say admitted, you mean the behavior

we just witnessed on this tape.

Right, Detective?

Correct. With words, he's always
maintained his innocence, hasn't he,

With words, yes.

Are you a psychologist, Detective?

No, I'm not.

And if a psychologist was of the opinion
that Mr. Wallace's behavior on that

tape... Objection. He's trying to
introduce psychiatric... I'm posing a

hypothetical to the witness.

I'll allow it.

If a psychologist looked at that tape
and concluded that it did not constitute

an admission to the crime, do you have
any medical training which would enable

you to overrule him?

Do I have any medical training? No.
Thank you, detective. That's all.

How many suspects have you interrogated
in the course of your career?

Hundreds. Hundreds.

Do you think you would recognize a
silent admission if you saw one?

Absolutely.

Based on your experience as a police
officer who has conducted hundreds of

interrogations, what did Scott Wallace's
silence convey to you?

An admission that he committed murder.

Thank you.

Do you have any formal training in
behavioral psychology?

No, I don't. Thank you.

When we first started, just Bobby and me
and...

He was so wide -eyed.

Every case, his eyes.

Oh, and if it was a murder case, God.

The light coming out from his eyes.

And it didn't bother him a bit if the
guy was probably guilty.

You know, he'd say, Beck, we defend the
guilty because ultimately it protects

the innocent.

Or he'd say that was the high.

You know, you got a guy that was
actually innocent.

And now, he hates it when they're
innocent. Like this one.

It's too much pressure.

I mean, that's why none of us laugh on
this job.

You can only bear defending the guilty.

And how long can anyone last doing that?

He was screaming at her, calling her a
liar, and she was pleading with him to

stop screaming.

Are you sure this was around 9 .30 p
.m.? Yes, that's when I walked my dog.

You recognized my client's voice
screaming because you'd heard him scream

before? Many times. So there wasn't
anything hugely unusual about them

that night?

No, they fought a lot.

And in fact, you didn't call the police
or try to intervene, did you, sir?

No.

I wasn't crazy about calling that
witness in the first trial. I wasn't

about it here.

But I have to establish a timeline.

As a rule...

When you come across anemic little wimps
like Mr. Berenson, who haven't got the

guts to get involved at the time, you
can be sure they'll be pretty impotent

witnesses, too.

But I needed to get in the timeline.

Why are you so sure he's innocent?

Because I am.

I know him.

Plus, he passed the polygraph. That's
what really gets me.

I mean, they may not be admissible, but
lie detectors are pretty damn reliable.

And the prosecution and the police, they
believe in them more than I do.

Here we got a guy who passes over and
over and over, and they still prosecute.

Why do you think?

Because the media declared this a
murder, and there was an ensuing public

to get a conviction.

There seems to be such a huge distrust
here.

You have no idea.

When I first started, the DAs and
defense attorneys, we all go out at the

the day. There were watering holes where
we congregate, swap stories.

You fought hard in court, but after, it
was a brotherhood.

Today, we go our separate ways. They
don't trust us, we don't trust them.

What happened?

It became too much about winning and
losing.

We analyzed a skin fragment found under
the defendant's fingernail.

It was a genetic match to Mrs. Wallace.

Did you do any other DNA testing, Dr.
Wang? Oh, yes.

We found shed skin cells all over the
victim's head and neck.

They belonged to the defendant, Scott
Wallace.

If Scott Wallace were trying to save his
wife, resuscitate her, it's possible

his skin cells could have gotten out of
that way. Am I right? In my experience,

that would be unlikely.

I asked if it were possible.

I suppose it's possible.

And it's possible, isn't it, Doctor,
that Mrs. Wallace had decided she wanted

compete in the Olympics, and while
practicing a backflip, she accidentally

her head on a blunt instrument being
held by the defendant.

Objection! As long as we're going for
far -fetched possibility.

Mr.

Bay, that is quite enough.

Dr. Wang, based on your years of
experience as a forensic pathologist,

form an opinion as to the likelihood of
what happened?

Yes, I did.

Could you state that for the court,
please?

She was killed by the defendant.

The defense has suggested Mr.

Wallace discovered his wife in the car.
She wasn't breathing.

He pulled her out, and her head struck
the concrete floor, causing the

Yes, I think this is a bit of a fairy
tale.

The fracture, she was hit very hard.

Is it possible that she could have
gotten this after she died by her head

hitting the floor?

Anything's possible.

My medical opinion is somebody hit her.

Doctor, in the first trial, you
testified that this fracture was severe

to be fatal.

Didn't you say that? I did.

Was it the cause of death?

No, the cause of death was monoxide
poisoning.

So it's possible that the head fracture
came after she died of the car exhaust,

right? That's not what I think happened.
I can't declare it to be impossible.

Doctor, you're employed by the
Commonwealth, aren't you? Yes. Do you

afraid of losing your job if you don't
secure convictions?

Objection sustained. It goes to bias,
Your Honor. The objection is sustained.

That's it.

Now let's move on.

It's what he does when he's losing.

It's an excellent sign for the
prosecution when Bobby Donald starts to

crap like that.

It means he thinks he's losing.

In the first trial, he was getting as
possible than resting.

He was more desperate just then.

Did you see it?

He's going down again.

This time with nothing to appeal.

You know, I keep thinking it'll all get
corrected.

They've made this terrible mistake.

This is the land of truth and justice.

It'll all get cleared up.

But here I am.

The thinking is for you to get
acquitted.

It'll come down to your testimony.

Yeah, I know this.

I know this.

Are you scared?

It's way beyond that now.

I think that's enough.

That's enough. The arrangement is
complete, Axis. Well, that's all. You

leave.

Bobby, Kyle Barrett isn't testifying.

Why? They just notified the court
they're arresting. We're up.

Well, call Dr. Murphy.

He's going to... I did. He's on his way.
Why doesn't her brother testify?

I don't need him.

Plus, he'd get peeled like an onion up
there. He's a liability.

I thought you said he was telling the
truth. I never said that.

I only said I don't know if he's lying.

That sounds a little questionable.

Hey, question away.

I only put on the witnesses I think will
help me win. Kyle Barrett doesn't

qualify. But this is the witness who got
you the conviction in the first trial.

In the first trial, I didn't have the
video.

Scott Wallace was suffering from
clinical depression.

Were you able to determine the cause,
Doctor?

Twin positional traumas.

The first was his wife's death. The
second, his being accused of that death.

Doctor, you recommended that Scott
Wallace be hospitalized, did you not? I

Can you tell us why?

I found him to be very close to a
complete mental breakdown.

Doctor, you've seen this tape before. I
want to play you a small portion again.

It looked like a suicide.

It's what happened, isn't it?

You've heard the prosecution
characterize that moment as an admission

by Scott Wallace.

Well, I think that conclusion is as
dangerous as it is absurd.

He'd only just discovered within the
last two hours that his wife was dead.

Then he's taken down to the police
station. He's hit with the accusation

murdered her.

Now, to a guilty man, that wouldn't be
as much of a shock. But to an innocent

one, that could cause the very trauma
I'm talking about.

And when he dropped his head?

It was in shock.

That was likely the beginning of his
breakdown.

You can state that for a medical
certainty?

No, but... And you were not in the room
at the time, were you, Doctor?

No, I was not.

You spoke of twin positional traumas,
one of those traumas being the loss of

wife. Yes. For this to be so, he would
have to have loved his wife very deeply,

I assume.

And he did, from my observations.

Well, if this wife, who he loved deeply,
told him she was leaving him, couldn't

that be traumatic?

Certainly. Is it possible that's when
this mental breakdown started, when she

said she was leaving him? I suppose it's
possible, but I don't think likely.

Doctor, according to your diagnosis, you
said Scott Wallace was in danger of

becoming psychotic, didn't you?

He never became psychotic, Mr. Bay.

Sometimes, when you get a tough witness,
you take what you can get and sit the

hell down.

I thought I handled him well.

And now you have the victim,
psychiatrist.

I'm not afraid of him. How can you not
be?

He's going to testify that she was
depressed.

He'll say depressed.

Then on cross, I'll get him to say she
wasn't suicidal.

Then on redirect, Bobby will claim he
has motive to say she wasn't suicidal,

he doesn't have her blood on his hands.
It's vintage Bobby Donald.

He gets a witness to help him, then he
hangs him out. You watch.

You seem a little more agitated now.

I'm not agitated. This is adrenaline.
It's a fight.

I'm not agitated.

My little informal pole in the gallery?

They think you're losing.

I'm not losing. Why would people think
you are?

Because with galleries, it's about
popularity.

Bobby Donald is good -looking. With
juries, it's about weighing evidence,

they'll do that.

I'm not losing.

What were you treating Karen Wallace
for?

Anxiety. Depression.

Depression? Yes.

What was she depressed over?

Mainly her marriage.

She felt it was rather loveless.

Also her life.

Did you regard her as suicidal?

No, I did not. But doctor, now that
she's turned up dead, do you now think

perhaps she was suicidal?

No, I do not.

Many people experience depression and
hopelessness. That doesn't mean they

their lives.

And the very reason that Mrs. Wallace
had come to me was to improve things.

She was looking forward.

I don't believe at all that she had the
mental state to take her own life.

How did it make you feel to learn that a
patient you had been treating for

depression killed herself?

Obviously, it was distressing to hear
it.

Certainly, a person experiencing
hopelessness, suffering depression,

from monoxide poisoning with a hose
connected to the exhaust pipe of the

you had to wonder if maybe she did kill
herself.

Didn't you at least wonder, Doctor?

I wondered, but I still don't believe
she took her life.

Well, if it were foreseeable that she
might.

take her life and you did nothing you
might be held liable isn't that right

doctor what are you saying mr donald i'm
saying you have motive to deny she was

suicidal objection leading after she's
found dead you don't even notify the

police that you were treating her No.
What were you trying to hide?

Objection. Permission to treat the
witness as hostile?

Objection. Overruled. Why not come
forward to anybody and say, hey, I was

treating her? There's a privilege. Which
does not survive the patient's death.

You were trying to hide the fact that
you were treating her because you knew

was potentially suicidal.

Objection. You are afraid of being hit
with a judgment. Just like you are now.

You let this man go down because you are
afraid of being hit with a judgment.

All right.

Mr. Donald, dial it back.

Did you tell that witness you would be
going after him like that?

No.

Because? Because I needed him.

And he never would have cooperated
knowing what he was in for.

Why didn't you just call him as a
hostile witness to begin with? Because I

I'd get more out of him this way. First
as an ally and then blindsiding him. I

don't think I blindsided him, but...
Yes.

Don't you think that perpetuates the
very distrust you spoke of before

DAs and defense attorneys?

My goal here isn't to repair trust.

It's to get an acquittal.

And you're comfortable with yourself?

Yes.

The truth is, he isn't comfortable.

And when he and Lindsay have this baby,
it's going to be the beginning of the

end of his criminal defense days.

Why?

Because with Bobby, this job is who he
is.

And when he starts to see himself
through his son's eyes or his daughter's

forget it. It's over.

It's gone as well as we could have
expected.

That videotape is still the biggest
piece of evidence, and you'll have to

account for it. I understand.

Just tell the truth, Scott.

Truth is on our side here.

Yeah.

Uh, you want... Go over my testimony
again?

Actually, I prefer not to. I don't want
it coming off rehearsed.

Now, Richard Bay, he's going to come at
you all rabid.

That's his style. I can protect you, but
I prefer not to.

I can handle him.

Lastly, your anger towards your wife for
what she did to you.

Let's play that down tomorrow.

We don't want them seeing anger.

Okay.

You all right, Scott?

I'm nervous.

Other than that...

You

look scared.

It's been a long haul.

Have you seen any good peel issues so
far?

That's the thing about Judge Hiller.

Her trials don't get overturned.

So basically, if you don't win here,
Scott Wallace is never coming out.

Were you surprised Bobby said yes to the
cameras?

Not really. If he loses, he hopes you
catch some prosecutorial misconduct on

tape. Give him grounds for appeal.

What if he wins and Richard Bay spots
misconduct on Bobby's part?

Doesn't matter.

Double jeopardy. Not guilty is not
guilty.

Bay's got the monitor set up. It looks
like he plans to show the tape again.

What a shot. Can you tell Scott?

He's ready.

She just announced that she planned to
leave me.

Did you see this coming?

Not at all.

We'd had our problems, and I knew she
was unhappy, but I never expected her to

walk out.

Did you want to stay married?

Yes, I asked if we could get therapy.

She said it was too late. She'd already
made up her mind, and she said that she

wanted to live life without me.

She said it had been years since she
felt the slightest twinge of happiness

me. And that was how she put it, the
slightest twinge. And she said she

out.

And then what happened?

We argued.

We engaged in some name -calling.

Did you call her a liar?

Among other things, yeah.

Then I went upstairs to the bedroom, got
ready for bed, and watched TV.

Your wife tells you she's leaving you
and you watch television?

Well, I had hoped that when she came up,
after things calmed down a little bit,

that I could, you know, maybe talk her
out of it.

So what happened?

Well, I waited.

After about an hour and a half, she
still hadn't come up, so I figured she

probably had a drink and decided to
sleep on the couch.

So I went down, and she wasn't there.

I thought, well, maybe she left.

but I thought I would have heard the car
pull out.

So I went to check, and when

I opened the door to the garage, I

just smelled the exhaust, and it was all
smoky in there.

And then what?

I went in, and I had to open it.

garage door because I couldn't breathe
the exhaust and I saw the hose.

Mr. Wallace.

It was a garden hose. It was taped to
the exhaust pipe of the

car. The car was running and the hose
went into the front

window.

What did you do then?

I ran to the car. I opened the door and
there she was.

Her head was back and her eyes were
closed and she wasn't breathing.

She looked like she was sleeping.

I screamed, Karen, and I shook her.

She wouldn't wake up and I pulled her
out.

She fell.

And I tried giving her...

Mouth to mouth and chest compressions,
but she wasn't breathing.

She didn't have a pulse.

I kept holding her nose closed and

trying to blow air in her lungs, but she
wouldn't come back.

She wouldn't come back.

And when the police arrived, did you
tell them all this?

Yeah, yeah.

They asked me to come to the station.

Scott, on that videotape, when they
accused you of killing Karen,

why didn't you deny it?

I don't think I could believe what I was
even hearing.

I mean, I still couldn't believe she was
dead, and then some district attorney

was saying that I killed her.

I remember feeling nauseous and like I
was going to black out.

I'm going to give you another chance to
answer that question.

Did you kill your wife?

No.

I'm sorry.

It's just for a...

For six months you have been asking me
not to speak to anyone, and I never

and I've waited for this day to come
before everyone and finally

say I didn't kill her.

I did not commit any crime.

You're an investment banker, is that
correct, Mr. Wallace?

Yes, that's right.

In the month or so prior to your wife's
sudden death, how are things going for

you at work?

Well, it had been rough.

The market was off.

Had you been told you might be let go?

Well, my firm was scaling back, yes. I
was told that my position was tenuous.

How about your own personal assets?

You'd suffered some losses, hadn't you?
A few, yes.

At the time of your wife's sudden death,
you were nearly broke, weren't you,

sir? Well, I would hardly say I was
broke, Mr. Bay. I did live in a million

-dollar house.

Fully paid for? No. We had a mortgage of
about $400 ,000.

And the other assets?

My savings, some stocks.

Totaling more or less than $50 ,000 at
the time of your wife's sudden death.

At the exact time left.

But stocks have... Thank you, sir. So at
the time of your wife's sudden death,

your assets totaled about $650 ,000. A
divorce would have cut that in half.

Add to that attorney fees plus alimony,
plus you were looking at unemployment.

Did you have a life insurance policy on
your wife at the time of her sudden

death? Objection.

Overruled. Did you, sir? There were life
insurance policies for both of us.

The policy was to pay you over a million
dollars in the event of her death.

Isn't that correct?

Yes.

When did you renew that policy, sir?

We both renewed the policy. When did you
both renew that policy?

I think it was around May.

Approximately a month before her sudden
death.

Did you kill your wife for money, sir?

No, I did not.

Gee, you seem capable of denying it now.

Objection. Sustained. You've got a
suicidal woman on your hands. You get

big fight, and you go upstairs and watch
television?

Well, I didn't know she was on the verge
of taking her life. And hey, look, I

was angry that night, too. Angry enough
to kill her?

No. Angry enough to have a mental
breakdown?

Angry enough to have a mental breakdown,
sir?

Objection calls for a medical opinion.

I'll put it in layman's terms.

Angry enough to snap?

No. You're about to lose your job.

You've already lost your money. Now
you're hit with losing your wife, your

house. You weren't going to let that
happen, were you, Mr. Wallace? That's

the way it happened. You snapped. I did
not. You hit her from behind. I never

hit my wife. You cracked when you knew
you were caught. I did no such thing. We

saw the tape. I explained. You killed
your wife. I did not!

Are you about to get violent, Mr.
Wallace?

Objection! Withdrawn.

Nothing further.

Chambers, Your Honor.

It's bad faith. Bad faith? Never, ever
in the first trial today suggest

financial gain as motive. None of the
police ever said it. Now something. So

what? You decide on a new motive between
the first and the second trial. Why

can't I? Without any new evidence, that
amounts to unfair surprise. Oh, you've

got to be kidding me. You've got to
fabricate a new motive. All right.

Bobby, there is nothing to prevent the
prosecution from changing strategies.

At a minimum, it's bad faith. If he
truly believed that money was a motive,

would have argued it in the first trial.
I didn't try the first one. Helen

Gamble did. Oh, come on, Richard.

What are you asking for?

The Commonwealth does not have a good
faith belief in its motive theory, and

spring it at a second trial constitutes
unfair surprise, and I'm asking that it

be stricken.

Forget it. Your Honor. Don't even waste
my time, Bobby. You don't know what Mr.

Bay does or does not believe. They are
not bound by the strategy of the first

trial.

Do you believe it?

That he killed her for money?

I certainly don't know that he didn't.
That wasn't my question. You're not

asking a question. You're making an
accusation, and I'm getting sick of it.

The idea of giving you access was to let
you observe. It wasn't for you to

charge in here with opinions.

Was I doing that? Yes.

You've been doing that, and I'm getting
fed up. You want to point your damn

cameras? Fine.

But enough with the judgments.

What are you thinking right now?

I'm thinking this is why you shouldn't
represent people you feel emotionally.

Family members, friends. The best legal
advice you can give them is to hire

somebody else.

You think you've tried a bad case again?

I was caught off guard with motive.

I let the jury see me angry with the
witness.

I... Yeah.

I made some mistakes.

I don't agree.

What do you think, Lindsay?

I think it's pretty even.

And ties go to the defendants in this
business.

Bobby Close is a lot better than Richard
Bay.

This isn't over.

The question I have... You have a client
charged with a violent, angry crime.

You told him not to flesh anger.

What happened?

When I first became a lawyer, I used to
call my mother and tell her about my

cases. I'd explain all the intricacies
and she'd get bored and snap at me, just

nutshell the damn thing.

And I discovered when I did nutshell,
most of those cases, which I thought

so complicated, were actually quite
simple.

The nutshell on this one.

Man in financial trouble.

renews insurance policy on wife.

She announces she's leaving him.

She's found dead with a whack on the
back of the head.

That pretty much says it all.

In the way of proof, there's certainly a
lot more.

All the DNA evidence points to him. Not
most of it.

All.

Her skin found under his fingernails.
His skin cells and prints found on her

head and neck.

His admission caught right on videotape.
His anger displayed right here on the

stand. His own treating psychiatrist
diagnosed him borderline psychotic.

She didn't commit suicide.

The psychiatrist who was treating Karen
Wallace, he told you she wasn't

suicidal.

This woman was murdered.

All the evidence tells you so.

And Scott Wallace... You put her in the
car to make it look like a suicide.

That's what happened.

He told you so, too.

Didn't he?

The only reason Scott Wallace was ever
arrested was that perceived admission.

The DNA evidence, the head fracture, all
that came from him trying to save her.

The prosecution's entire case is his
reaction to being accused of the murder.

It wasn't a normal reaction, they say.

That's not how people normally respond.

Have you ever been in this situation?

Your wife died recently?

Your husband?

Any of you accused of murdering a
spouse?

In the immediate wake of discovering the
death, we're really going to sit here

and discuss normal reactions?

Seems to me a mental breakdown of some
sort is the most normal.

That's what Dr. Murphy told you Scott
was experiencing.

Scott himself told you that.

He was feeling nauseous in that
interrogation, about to black out.

As Dr. Murphy said, he was suffering
from twin positional trauma.

How dare they charge him with murder?

Because they didn't like the way he
responded to being accused?

They better have more than that, and
they don't.

And now, now the DA wants you to find
guilt because Scott Wallace got angry in

the witness chair.

Oh, you saw his rage, didn't you? Let's
convict on that.

First they arrest him because he didn't
get angry, and now they want you to

convict because he did.

You know, people ask me how I can spend
my days being a criminal defense lawyer.

Defending guilty people. Well, I am in
this to defend the

innocent ones.

And there's an innocent one sitting
right over there.

For six months now, they've kept him
locked up.

He couldn't even go to a funeral.

He's never been to her grave.

They've taken away his life.

Karen Wallace took her own.

The police have taken his.

Enough is enough.

Give freedom back to

an innocent man.

Nutshell.

Borderline psychotic man in financial
trouble renews insurance policy on wife

month before her death.

She threatens to leave him.

He's heard screaming at her.

She's found dead with a fractured skull.

When accused of the crime, he doesn't
even deny it.

like Bobby Donald, personally?

He's a pretty good guy.

It's one thing for two men looking at
the same evidence to have different

opinions, but you two seem so convinced
in opposite directions.

DAs come to prosecute those they believe
to be guilty.

Defense attorneys come to believe those
they choose to defend.

That certainly makes the DAs sound more
noble.

We are.

Does he usually hibernate when he waits
for a verdict?

Yeah.

Waiting can be a killer.

A lot of lawyers just go about other
business.

Bobby, he can't.

Aren't there other clients?

Plenty. And he could be out right now
bringing in new ones.

Bobby Donald.

If you're looking to build a law
practice, he's not the guy to hire.

But if you ever get charged with
murder...

Hotline. Hello?

Okay, thank you.

Jury's back.

Mr. Wallace, would you please rise?

The jury has reached its verdict.

We have, Your Honor.

What say you?

Commonwealth v. Scott Wallace on count
one, murder in the first degree. We find

the defendant, Scott Wallace, not
guilty.

Count two, murder in the second degree.
We find the defendant, Scott Wallace,

not guilty.

Members of the jury, this concludes your
service on behalf of the Commonwealth.

I thank you.

Mr. Wallace, you are free to go. We are
adjourned.

It wasn't as ugly as you predicted.

No. I thought they all behaved very
well. It was nice to see for a change.

Do you think it was the right result?

Probably.

I suppose there was reasonable doubt.

But do you think it was the right
result?

I haven't the slightest idea.