Thirty-nine

Though “reasonable doubt” is the legal requirement for acquittal in the criminal trial, Hadley believed that he needed to show the jury a convincing hypothesis of Zeigler's innocence.  Bob Eagan's closing statement would surely argue that the state's evidence foreclosed any possibility that Zeigler had not committed the crime.

On one level, Zeigler's own testimony about Christmas Eve would provide an alternative to the state's case: he drove to the store with Edward Williams, he was beaten and shot as he walked into the showroom. The footprint testimony of FBI expert Thomas Delaney, though contradicted by Herbert MacDonell's findings, nevertheless introduced the strong possibility of an unknown assailant.  The "dark car" testimony of Ed Reeves and Richard and Patricia Smith also suggested that someone else, unaccounted-for by the state, had been a part of the crime.

But that evidence implied a deeper question.  What was this crime? Why had it happened?  Eunice and her parents might have walked unexpectedly into an ambush, but Zeigler—guilty or innocent—was there by appointment.  If Zeigler was innocent, then he was the victim of a plot.  Who disliked him so greatly?

On Monday, June 28, Hadley called as a witness Andrew James, the black bar owner whom Zeigler had befriended in the fight to save his liquor license.  Hadley hoped that this testimony might help dispel the image of Zeigler as a man who contemptuously manipulated his black acquaintances.  But he also managed to put on the record the possibility that Zeigler had made enemies of powerful criminal elements in his hometown.

It was an extraordinary scene.  Andrew James began to testify about preparations for the trial in which Judge Paul had been a prosecution witness.  Surprisingly, Eagan did not object to the relevance of this exchange:

Q (HADLEY): Calling your attention to the summer months of 1975, who was your attorney at that time?

A (JAMES) You were sir.

Q: And you and I had a case together?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: Did Thomas Zeigler at that time render any assistance to you?

A: Yes, sir, he did.

Q: Did he aid and assist in your case on obtaining any information ?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: About whom was that information obtained?