Comfort and Affliction
Page 14
“Yes, a common practice.”
“Do your records show the first Ralph Whitfield acquired more land?”
“He did. Over the course of several years, he bought three parcels adjacent to 17655-24.”
“How much property did Captain Whitfield ultimately own?”
“Almost two thousand acres.”
“Let’s go back to Parcel 17655-24. How long did this specific parcel remain in the Whitfield family?” Allison asked.
“Until 1933, when the defendant’s grandfather sold the parcel during the Great Depression.”
“Who bought Parcel 17655-24 in 1933?”
“A Lucas Marlow.”
“How long did the parcel remain in the Marlow family’s possession?”
“Until November 1st, last year.”
“Do your records show the sale price?”
“Yes. Your client, Raymond Taliaferro, paid eight hundred thousand dollars for the parcel.”
“Thank you for your patience,” Allison continued. “We’re almost at the end of my questions. Did the parcel change hands again?”
“Our records show Mr. Taliaferro sold the property on December 14th, last year to Mr. Ralph Whitfield,” the tax assessor pointed to his cousin, “for six hundred and fifty thousand dollars.”
“Doesn’t the most recent sale price strike you as odd?” Allison asked.
“What do you mean?”
“According to your records, my client lost at least one hundred and fifty thousand dollars on this deal in a very short time.”
“People often sell properties at losses, especially during depressed economic times like the present,” the tax assessor said. “Perhaps your client ran into financial difficulties and needed some quick cash.”
Allison looked at her notes. “How do you obtain information about these types of transactions?”
“The county records clerk sends us copies of the deeds and other documents related to the sales. We use this information to update the property record cards.”
“Are you referring to Ms. Dorothy Adams?”
“Yes. I am.”
“Are you related to Ms. Adams?”
Counselor Scott jumped to his feet again. “Your Honor, can you please terminate these insinuations of aberrant relationships?”
“Still showing a pattern, Your Honor,” Allison said.
“You may answer the question, Mr. Whitfield,” the judge directed.
“We are related by marriage.”
“Doesn’t Ms. Adams use her maiden name professionally?”
“She does.”
“What is her married name?”
“Whitfield.”
“Were you provided a copy of the bill of sale Mr. Ralph Whitfield gave my client in order to document the sale?”
“Yes.”
Allison spoke to the judge. “Your Honor, I call your attention to our Exhibit B.” The image of the bill of sale replaced the property record card on the screen. “Mr. Whitfield, does the document shown on the screen correctly reproduce the bill of sale in your files?”
“Yes.”
“What is the date on this bill of sale, our Exhibit B?”
“The exact same date as on the property record card, December 14th of last year.”
“I have no further questions for the tax assessor at this time; however, I reserve the right to recall him at a later time.”
“So noted,” Judge Prentice said. “Do you have questions on cross, Counselor Scott?”
“I do.” Scott stood in front of the defense table to question the tax assessor. “Mr. Whitfield, have you carried out any illegal procedures with respect to the sale and documentation of Parcel 17655-24?”
“I have not, and I resent any insinuation I have done so.”
“Have you violated your oath of office?”
“No!”
“In summary, therefore, the sale of Parcel 17655-24 from the plaintiff, Mr. Raymond Taliaferro, to the defendant, Mr. Ralph Whitfield, met all legal standards as a willing and arms-length transaction?”
“Absolutely.”
“Do you also affirm under oath that your familial relationships did not influence you in the performance of your legal duties?”
“Also correct.”
“Thank you.” Scott spoke to the judge. “I have no more questions for this witness.”
Prentice asked Allison, “Questions on re-direct, Counselor Stevens?”
“Not at this time, Your Honor.”
“Please step down, Mr. Whitfield,” Prentice directed. “Counselor Stevens, you may call your next witness.”
“We call Dr. Stephen Kushner,” Allison said.
Kushner came forward to the witness chair. The bailiff administered the oath. Kushner settled into the witness chair and adjusted the microphone for his tall, lanky body. In response to Allison’s question, Kushner stated his full name and Athens address before giving his profession. “I have an academic appointment at the University of Georgia, and I often consult for the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, or GBI, as well as the FBI and private citizens.”
“You have an earned doctorate?”
“I have a doctorate in anthropology from the University of Georgia.”
“In what capacity do you consult for the GBI, FBI, and private citizens?”
“I am a handwriting expert.”
“Please explain for the court what being a handwriting expert involves.”
“I typically compare specimens of handwriting to determine their authenticity, to ascertain if the samples derive from specific persons.”
“As an example, have you ever been asked to give your expert opinion about the validity of a signature on a will—that is, if the signature came from a person who supposedly made the will?”
“I’m often asked to determine if signatures on documents are genuine, not forged.”
“You render your expert opinions on criminal and civil cases?”
“I do.”
“Have you testified on behalf of defendants, as well as prosecutors and plaintiffs?”
“About equally.”
“How long have you been involved in this work, your profession as a handwriting expert?”
“Almost thirty years.”
“Are you here today on behalf of the GBI or FBI?”
“Not directly. I’m in court today as an expert witness for the plaintiff.”
“You might say you’re here as a professional witness?”
“If you mean you’re paying me for my services, yes.”
“How much are we paying you?”
“So far I’ve billed you for”—Kushner looked at his notes—“four thousand dollars.”
“You’ll bill us for your appearance today?”
“At my standard rate of one thousand dollars per eight-hour day or partial-day plus expenses.”
“Dr. Kushner, a few minutes ago, you replied, not directly, when I asked if you were in court today on behalf of the GBI or FBI. What did you mean?”
“If my work on behalf of your witness reveals any indication of fraud, I would be compelled to report it to the GBI.”
Scott jumped to his feet. “I object, I object!”
Judge Prentice asked, “On what basis?”
“We’re conducting a civil, not a criminal trial,” Scott huffed. “No one has mentioned fraud.”
“Objection overruled,” the judge banged his gavel. “Dr. Kushner merely stated a fact, his legal obligation.”
Scott sat, shaking his head in frustration. Ralph Whitfield glared at his lawyer. Allison grinned and continued. “We direct the court’s attention to our Exhibit B, the alleged bill of sale for Parcel 17655-24 from my client to Mr. Ralph Whitfield.”
Scott once more bolted upright. He slammed both hands onto the top of the defense table. “Outrageous! Outrageous! It’s a true bill of sale, not an alleged document. She’s impugning the honesty of my client.”
Judge Prentice banged his gavel three times loudly and sternly asked
, “Counselor Scott, did you forget something?”
“I didn’t forget anything. You’re allowing a travesty of justice to take place.”
The judge held up his hand to prevent Allison from speaking. “Counselor Scott, what is the correct form of address for a lawyer when speaking to a judge, something you seem to have forgotten in your last few statements?”
Red-faced, Scott replied, “Your Honor or Judge.”
“Use one of those honorifics in the future, for the dignity of this court. I have been unusually patient to this point. I will not tolerate any further discourtesy to this court or to the position I hold.”
“Yes, sir.”
The judge raised his eyebrows.
“Yes, Your Honor. The fact remains, Ms. Stevens has laid no groundwork for the use of the word alleged. We call for a mistrial.”
Judge Prentice turned to Allison. “Counselor Stevens?”
“Your Honor,” she answered, “in a few minutes, Dr. Kushner will give the court adequate justification for my use of alleged bill of sale.”
Judge Prentice said, “Nevertheless, you haven’t laid the requisite foundation at this point.” He spoke to the court recorder, “Please delete the word alleged from Counselor Stevens’ first statement about the bill of sale.”
“She’s poisoned the well, Your Honor,” Scott almost shouted. “You heard the word. A mistrial should be declared.”
“Counselor Scott, I’m sorry you have such a poor opinion of my intellectual capabilities. Yes, I heard the word, and I’ve erased it from my memory banks. Motion denied. Please take your seat again. Counselor Stevens, the ball resides with you.”
“Thank you, Your Honor,” Allison said. “Dr. Kushner, we provided you with a certified copy of this document?”
“You did.”
“Please tell the court what this document is.”
“The document purports to be a bill of sale for Parcel 17655-24.”
Scott once more bounded to his feet. “Your Honor, I object to the term purported. Plaintiff’s Exhibit B is a bona fide bill of sale.”
Prentice looked at the witness. “Dr. Kushner, perhaps you should restate your answer for the record.”
Kushner replied, “Your Honor, you are quite correct. My proper response to Ms. Stevens, based upon evidence presented through this time, should have been a bill of sale for Parcel 17655-24.”
“So noted,” Prentis said. “Thank you Dr. Kushner. Counselor Stevens, you may carry on.”
Allison asked Kushner, “The document contains two signatures, correct?”
“Yes, one signature from the plaintiff, Mr. Raymond Taliaferro.” Kushner took a laser pointer from the breast pocket of his suit coat and used the device to indicate the appropriate signature. “The other signature from the defendant, Mr. Ralph Whitfield.” Kushner again used the pointer.
“Did we provide you with certified specimen samples of handwriting, including signatures, from both men?”
“You did. My understanding is that you obtained copies of Mr. Whitfield’s signatures from official county documents he signed in conjunction with his duties as Chair of the Board of Commissioners.”
“You compared these handwriting samples with the signatures on…” Allison paused, “the bill of sale?”
“I did.”
“From your years of professional experience and expertise, what can you tell us about the comparisons?”
Kushner played the laser pointer over Whitfield’s signature on the bill of sale. “With a high degree of probability, I attest this signature came from Mr. Ralph Whitfield.”
“And the other signature?”
The laser pointer danced around the signature for Taliaferro. “With an equally high degree of probability, I attest that this signature did not come from the plaintiff.”
As Scott rose to his feet, Judge Prentice said, “Counselor, you’ll have your chance on cross.” Scott sat, shaking his head at Whitfield.
Allison continued. “Dr. Kushner, can you give the court a simplified explanation for your finding?”
“Gladly. Will you please bring up the comparison images?”
“I will,” Allison said. “Judge, I call your attention to our Exhibit C.” She pressed a key on her laptop and two images appeared, one labeled the authentic signature sample for Taliaferro, the other the signature on the bill of sale. Kushner spent the next ten minutes pointing out the subtle differences in the two signatures. He concluded, “In summary, Mr. Taliaferro is highly unlikely to have signed this document.”
“In other words, the signature on the document for Mr. Taliaferro is a forgery?”
“Yes; a clever forgery, yet a forgery nevertheless.”
The judge again glared at Scott before he could make an attempt to object. Scott and Whitfield exchanged looks bordering on hostility.
“Dr. Kushner, did we give you other documents to examine?” Allison asked.
“You did.”
“Your Honor, we call your attention to our Exhibit D in toto.” Another image appeared on the screen. “Mr. Kushner, please tell the court what this image depicts.”
“A credit card receipt, dated December 14th of last year, from the Fog City Diner restaurant in San Francisco.”
“Can you give us your expert opinion about the signature on the receipt?”
“I can state with a high degree of probability that Mr. Taliaferro signed the receipt.”
“Is the date on the credit card, December 14th, the same date as our Exhibit B, the bill of sale for Parcel 17655-24?”
“It is.”
“In your expert opinion, did Mr. Taliaferro also sign several other documents during the time period, December 12th through December 28th of last year, all of which documents originate from restaurants and a hotel in San Francisco?”
“He did.”
“Finally, to be clear, the dates on the receipts from San Francisco encompass the date of the alleged bill of sale for Parcel 17655-24?”
“They do.”
“Thank you, Dr. Kushner. Your Honor, I have no further questions for Dr. Kushner on direct.”
Judge Prentice spoke to Scott, “Your turn, Counselor.”
Scott conferred briefly with his client before standing to question the witness. “Dr. Kushner, you have represented yourself as a certified handwriting expert, correct?”
“I am a certified handwriting expert.”
“Is handwriting comparison an exact science, say, like physics?”
“In common with physics, we have defined principles and methodology, which have withstood the test of time and a plethora of court cases such as this one.”
“But, you can’t, for instance, write a mathematical equation to support your opinions?”
“No.”
“Aren’t your comparisons based upon a lot of subjectivity, not hard data like in physics?”
“No.”
“Your answers confuse me, and perhaps this honorable court, as well.”
“Why are you confused?” Kushner asked.
“Because, Dr. Kushner, you just said you can’t write an equation to support your claims, a circumstance unlikely to sway the opinion of this honorable court.”
“I applied well-recognized procedures and principles for my comparisons.”
“But doesn’t subjectivity, rather than hard data, necessarily characterize your findings, which must be opinions, not demonstrable facts?”
“I have thirty years of experience in this field. Furthermore, the GBI and FBI periodically test me and other handwriting experts to ensure our objectivity.”
“Test you? How?”
“These agencies give us samples to compare. The agencies know the origin of the samples, we do not.”
“And you’ve never made a mistake?”
“I have not and, if you wish, I can provide you with the documentation.”
“Dr. Kushner,” Scott asked, “why did you used the term, a high degree of probability, when you described your
claims about the signatures on the documents you examined? Are you uncertain about what you have presented to this honorable court?”
“Contrary to what most people believe, science operates on probability rather than certainty.”
“On probability, not certainty?”
“Correct. We base all of our scientific laws upon events of high probabilities, not certainties.”
“Well, then, how can you be absolutely certain about suggesting Mr. Taliaferro didn’t sign the bill of sale?”
“Suggesting, within the context of your use of the word, does not apply here.”
“Well, then, what would be a better word, in the absence of true scientific data?”
“Based upon the methodology I have described and my professional reputation built over thirty years, I will repeat my previous expert opinion: Mr. Taliaferro is highly unlikely to have signed the bill of sale; hence, someone forged his signature.”
“You are an expert witness?”
“I am, as I previously stated.”
“Isn’t the defense paying you for your testimony?”
“No.”
“But you have received payment for your testimony. Just to be perfectly clear on this point, we can have the court recorder read back the relevant sections of your statements before this honorable court.”
Kushner looked at Allison, who turned her hands palm up. “By all means,” Kushner said, “let’s have the court recorder read aloud my previous response to Ms. Stevens on this subject.”
“Which one?” the judge asked.
“About the defense paying me for my services.”
The court recorder read from her transcript, “If you mean you’re paying me for my services, yes.”
“Yes, that’s what I asked you,” Scott said.
Kushner sat up ramrod straight. “No. In fact, Ms. Stevens pays me for the application of my expertise and my expert opinion. Let me perfectly clear, Mr. Scott: Sufficient money in the world does not exist to pay me to testify in opposition to the facts as I have determined them, and I resent your implication.”
Scott hesitated. Judge Prentice asked him, “Any more questions for this witness?”
“Not at this time, Your Honor.”
“We’ll take a short recess for lunch,” Judge Prentice said. “I want to finish this trial today, even if we have to stay late. Court will reconvene in exactly one hour.” He gave a sharp punctuation with his gavel.