A Fine Line Read Online Free PDF Page B

yourself facing a myriad of grave lights. “In case you’d forgotten,” they appear to say, although almost everyone – lawyers, police officers, clerksof the court and judges – has got used to it. The lights, the cypresses and the niches have become part of the landscape.
    We passed a small group of carabinieri. Annapaola stopped to hug a couple of them with a warmth reserved for former comrades in arms. As so often before, I noticed the masculine way she moved and related to the outside world.
    We went back into court. A few minutes later, the judges emerged from their chambers and the hearing resumed.
    â€œFirst of all, I ask defence counsel if they wish to examine the defendant.”
    â€œNo, Your Honour. The statements made by the defendant under questioning and already admitted in evidence appear more than sufficient following the outcome of the cross-examination of the injured party.”
    â€œThen if there are no further observations or motions, we declare that the testimony contained in the case file is admissible, including that made before the previous judges. Therefore at this point—”
    â€œYour Honour, I’m sorry, I have a motion,” Castroni said.
    Basile looked at him for several seconds without saying anything. Not only had he not appreciated the interruption, he could also imagine the reason and didn’t like it.
    â€œHe’s asking for a postponement,” I whispered to Consuelo. “If there’s an acquittal he wants the other bastard to get it in the neck.”
    â€œGo on, prosecutor,” the judge at last conceded, although his tone was far from cordial.
    â€œI ask for a postponement in order to have a chance to examine the results of today’s hearing, which has… well, which has contained a few surprises. Considering today’s developments, it may be appropriate that the conclusions should be drawn by the prosecutor whose case this originally was because—”
    â€œProsecutor, in the first place don’t force me to remind you that your office is impersonal. In the second place, I don’t see any reason to grant a postponement. The trial has been going on for too long; the defendant was actually arrested at the time of the events and is entitled to a verdict within a reasonable length of time. You have been present at a crucial stage in the proceedings and are best qualified to draw the right conclusions from them. If you need half an hour to reread the documents, to think about them and then make your decision, I would have no objection to that.”
    Castroni was about to reply. Then it must have struck him that it wasn’t a good idea. Mechanically, he leafed through the file he had in front of him, but without looking at the papers. Equally mechanically, he adjusted his robe over his shoulders and made his closing speech. It didn’t take long.
    â€œYour Honour, the evidence against the defendant, which at the time of his arrest, and to tell the truth up until today, has appeared solid, seems less so now. On cross-examination, the injured party has highlighted contradictions and hesitations. It does not seem to the prosecution that it is possible to reach a guilty verdict in the light of these contradictions. The evidence is ambiguous and, in a way, tainted, and therefore we have no option but to ask for an acquittal in accordance with article 530, paragraph 2 of the code of criminal procedure on the grounds of insufficient evidence to support the prosecution case.”
    The judge nodded and turned to Consuelo and me. “I don’t want in any way to limit the prerogatives of the defence, but” – he clearly articulated the words that followed – “I ask you to take the prosecutor’s motion into account. The court will appreciate a brief summing up, entrusted if possible to only one of the defenders.”
    The translation of that phrase was as follows: We will acquit him,