Page 44 of The Right to Remain

Finally, the prosecutor moved beyond the background questions. She placed an exhibit on the table before the witness.

“Mr. Stafford, I’m showing you exhibit twenty-seven, which has been previously identified by witnesses in this proceeding. It is a handwritten list that Miami-Dade homicide detectives found in the kitchen on the night police recovered Owen Pollard’s body.”

The junior prosecutor provided a courtesy copy to Jack, which was the first time he’d seen or heard of the “list.” A surprise like that couldn’t happen at trial, but it was permitted under the secrecy rules of grand jury proceedings.

“Have you ever seen this document before, Mr. Stafford?”

“No.”

Jack cringed—not because the response was hurtful, but because he’d repeatedly warned Elliott how important it was to take the Fifth if the prosecutor used exhibits that Elliott had never seen before.

“I’m sorry to interrupt,” said Jack, rising. “May I have a word with my client?”

The prosecutor paused. “Mr. Swyteck, let me remind you that you are not allowed to interrupt these proceedings for any reason. You can advise your client if and when the witness requests it.”

She was right, and Jack knew he was risking ejection if he didn’t mind the rules. He hoped that his interruption had reminded his client of the need to take the Fifth. The prosecutor turned her attention back to the witness.

“To be fair, let me ask the witness: Mr. Stafford, do you wish to consult with your lawyer at this point in time?”

Jack did everything short of standing up and screamingYes!

“No,” said Elliott.

It was a watershed moment. Elliott’s decision to ignore his lawyer’sannounced desire to speak with his client pushed Jack beyond the jitters of simple potted-plant syndrome.

“And just so the record is clear, Mr. Stafford, your answer to my question was ‘no,’ you’ve never seen this document before. Correct?”

“That’s correct,” said Elliott.

A flood of follow-up questions came to Jack’s mind, but to his surprise, the prosecutor chose not to ask any of them.

“All right,” said Weller. “Please put that exhibit aside.”

This is one strange strategy,thought Jack.

“Mr. Stafford, how long did you say you worked for VanPoll Enterprises?”

“A little over a year.”

“In the course of your employment, you had occasion to see Mr. Pollard’s handwriting, did you not?”

“I did.”

“It’s my understanding that it was Mr. Pollard’s practice to use a stylus on his tablet to edit and mark up documents, correct?”

“Yes, he liked to work that way.”

“So, you had occasion to see documents marked up in his handwriting, correct?”

“Yes.”

“Hundreds of documents, no?”

“Yes. Probably hundreds.”

It wasn’t hard for Jack to see where the prosecutor was going with a line of questioning about Elliott’s familiarity with the decedent’s handwriting.Look at me, Elliott.

“Mr. Pollard also used a whiteboard at team meetings, correct?”