“PICTURES FROM A PASSING TRAIN”
Can a killer be caught when the only evidence that links him to a murder is pictures from a passing train?
A murder has been committed just outside the small city of Lockney, TN., the county seat. It seems a pretty open and shut case, the circumstantial evidence is piled up and the prosecutor, who is convinced that this will play out as he wants has really not put much of a case out there but for that circumstantial evidence. His justification is that the facts speak for themselves, even if circumstantial.
The defense attorney is perplexed why her job has been so easy. Entering into the case, she was certain that the defendant would be convicted, but now she thinks he is being framed … but why and by who? The jury itself is not real comfortable with the trial either and three or four jurors in particular feel this was just too easy and something is amiss.
Juror Henry Lawson “Hank” newly moved to the city of Lockney, where jury duty he finds out, is a “test,” for all those who want to be citizens; if you live here you’ll be expected to give something back … or so the city motto is. However, Hank is unlike the other jurors. Weeks back when he had interviewed for his new job, he was headed into town on the afternoon the murder took place town. While on the train, unable to resist his hobby of photography, he began shooting pictures of the town and capturing in the photographs, the murder in progress and exactly who the murderer is.
Juror Mabel Blanskey, a retired school cafeteria worker whose avocation is reading detective novels is sure that there is more to the case, “in the detective books something this swift always means that they got the wrong man.”
Juror Jack Donaldson, a laid off road paver isn’t happy with any civic system so he is certain that the local government somehow screwed this up too, like they did for his company and the roadwork contract they forgot to renew … causing the layoffs for over twenty workers.
Mitchell Gray, the prosecutor is a powerbroker wannabe. The mayor, a lack luster sort of fellow who never had much drive or ambition takes his cues from Gray, who seems to have a hand in the business development of Lackney, but he gives a very good imitation of someone who is good and honest. It’s a ruse … as soon his unique watch and monogrammed cufflinks will give him way.
Pete Courier, the murder victim was owner of Courier Road Paving and was a former rival of Mitchell Gray. Gray and Courier were rivals throughout school. For Gray it was a power play, but for Pete it was to the point of distraction causing him to drop out of law school. Gray wanted Courier to pay up … extortion, if you will … for the benefit of being given city contracts, but Courier knew that Gray was dirty … a dirty politician.
Larry Graves, the alleged murderer, is portrayed as being repeatedly turned down for employment by Courier. In his angst and desperate anger he killed Courier, or so it seems. Larry Graves history is one of a mercenary of sorts … a hired gun whose forte is that he just doesn’t look the part but rather looks like a ne’er do well panhandler on the street.
Alex Gearson Todd, the owner of Gearson Machinery who has just employed Henry Lawson. Mitchell Gray has a financial interest in Gearson, they make parts that are used in road paving equipment.
Juror Judith “Judy” Banks, a medical worker/juror who seems to go from job to job. She is a wannabe … she wants to be somebody important simply because she feels she is entitled. She has been using anyone and everyone in an effort to attain that … without any success.
Juror Tina Jones, a file clerk for the city. She “sees” many things but is in a difficult situation. Does she open up about the goings on that she witnesses and about how the defendant is dirty but she feels is being set up for this crime or does she conform in an effort to keep her job? She keeps trying to inch others toward the former so that she does not have to put her neck out.
Hank Lawson knows there is more to this case than meets the eye. In the last week of the trial he notices the arms of the prosecutor as he gives the closing argument. Flashing back, he remembers that in a couple of those pictures of the town, the ones he only casually glanced at … he has pictures of the murder scene; before, during, and after and in those pictures the murderer wasn’t a panhandler or bum, or appear to be so, but a rather stylishly dressed man. However, the pictures provide only limited clues, a view of the back of a head for an instant and a partial view of the mystery person’s arm; the one that was holding the gun that was pointed at the victim. The unsettling part is that based on the photographs he took, the pictures from the passing train, both the mystery person at the murder scene and the prosecutor … are ‘wearing’ the same cufflinks. The jury hasn’t been sequestered but when the Hank brings one of the pictures back to the jury room and tries to point out that the cufflinks on the prosecutor’s arm and the ones in the murder picture are remarkably similar and not something a “bum” would have, his comments are falling on deaf ears .. but for those who also think something is amiss. Adding to the issue, is that one of the jurors and one of the baliff’s, is a mole for the prosecutor and suddenly the jury is not only sequestered, but remanded to not even talk amongst themselves away from the courtroom.
This is a tale about discovery and intrigue featuring the attempts at getting word to the right person that the defendant is innocent.
--------------------------------------------------
Can a killer be caught when the only evidence that links him is pictures from a passing train?
