Hannah was listening intently. So much of this she already knew, had gleaned from microscopic examination of every newspaper article written about the case, but it was different hearing it spoken about here, in this manner. Jim was to the point, straightforward, but he was also respectful, unlike many of the newspaper articles, which lingered over titil ating details and ignored others.
“The prosecution’s case was that Samuel Fitzhugh, then age seven, woken by his sister’s crying, came to the door of his bedroom and watched, unseen, as the attacker left the house. Samuel later identified our client from a photographic lineup, but we al know how unreliable eyewitness testimony is at the best of times. And we’re talking about a traumatized seven-year-old here. Not exactly the gold standard. Anyway, Samuel ran to his mother and found her unresponsive. He was very distressed, but somehow he managed to get his sister out of her crib and he carried her next door to the Stamford apartment. At two A.M. Thomas Stamford cal ed the police, who showed up twelve minutes later.”
Jim looked around at everyone, making sure that he stil had their attention. He had nothing to worry about. The room was completely stil . No one fidgeted or looked at their phones. They were al completely focused. “That’s it, real y, in terms of the facts of the attack. We know that police effectively had no leads. The kil er was extraordinarily careful. He used a condom and presumably gloves.
As we now know, a single hair was found but no match to that hair has been found in the system to date. Police canvassed the neighborhood and interviewed neighbors, family, and friends. Three weeks after the murder they had no meaningful leads, and no arrests. That was when they went looking for our client.”
“Why?” Hannah asked.
Everyone turned and looked at her and she felt her face reddening.
“Sorry, I’m just wondering what brought the police to question Dandridge in the first place.” She already knew the answer, but she wanted to make some smal counterpoint to the innocent victim narrative they were so eager to run with.
“An anonymous cal ,” Rob Parekh said. He held up one finger.
“That was the first link. Police claim that an anonymous cal er told them that Michael had murdered Sarah Fitzhugh. For that reason they brought him in for questioning. Forty-eight hours later they had their confession.” Parekh held up a second finger, then a third. “Then they had seven-year-old Samuel Fitzhugh pul Michael out of a photo lineup.” Rob Parekh turned his hand around to face them, al fingers extended like he was offering them a high five. “That’s it. An anonymous cal , a forced confession, and a lineup with a traumatized, highly suggestible seven-year-old. That’s what it took to convict our client of murder.” Parekh exchanged glances with Jim Lehane.
Jim leaned forward. “The case goes to a preliminary hearing on Monday. A preliminary hearing is usual y a nonevent.” His eyes swept over Hannah, Camila, and Sean. “The point of a preliminary hearing is for the prosecution to lay out enough information to convince the judge that there is probable cause to hold the defendant for indictment and prosecution. General y speaking, the judge wil not even consider defense evidence. A preliminary hearing is not a trial. After the preliminary hearing the case goes to a grand jury and then, eventual y, to a ful trial.”
“That’s how it usual y works,” Parekh interrupted. His eyes were bright; his expression said he was ful y switched on. “But not this time, if we can help it. I want to kil this thing before it gets off the ground at the preliminary hearing. I want to knock down everything they put up, convince the judge that there’s no evidence to support the case moving forward. We have one week. Jim and I wil be hard at work on the motions needed to exclude Michael’s coerced confession and Samuel Fitzhugh’s evidence. If we win those motions we might win the case there and then. I’m confident we’l exclude the confession, less confident about the lineup.” Parekh nodded at Sean, Camila, and Hannah. “I want you guys working every angle you can think of. We need new facts, anything that wasn’t explored or presented at the first trial. Anything we can use to disprove core evidence the prosecution is likely to present at the hearing.
Dandridge’s alibi. This so-cal ed anonymous cal er. Look for any police who might have retired or moved out of the county. Is anyone wil ing to break ranks about what happened in the original case? I don’t want to go into court with a dry case based solely on technical argument. I want a narrative, a story to tel . Understood?”