The People v. Mary Anne and Wanda - Opening Statement

TRIAL TRANSCRIPT

The People versus Mary Anne and Wanda, 2020

DEFENSE'S OPENING STATEMENT

Your honor, members of the jury. I am Ezekiel Kincaid, and I represent the defendants in this case, Mary Anne and Wanda.

An unrecovered body. A baseless allegation. Folks, we are here today not because of any actual evidence. We are here because, after twenty years long gone, someone in the district attorney's office has decided to pin the death of a man known for violence on one of his victims and a woman who wasn't even living in the state at the time.

The evidence you will hear today will show beyond a reasonable doubt that my clients are not guilty. These two are upstanding small business owners and lifelong residents of this community. Both of these women grew up here, participated in junior civic organizations like the 4H Club and the FFA, and have contributed to their hometown. Yes, one of my clients left to pursue other options in the big city, but it was that absence that reminded her of the sweet feeling of her hometown's soil beneath her feet and what drew her back to start a business here.

I am asking you all to brace yourselves because the evidence presented today will also show that my client, Wanda, was subjected to repeated physical and emotional abuse from her now-missing husband. I will introduce testimony that the abuse started just weeks after the wedding and continued up and until the victim's disappearance.

EXHIBIT A - Photo from defendant Wanda’s hospital room

Members of the jury, you may ask yourself, if she was subjected to physical torment, why would she not avail herself of the law and its many protections? I ask you first to examine your own thinking that blames this woman for the torture she suffered, but I also submit to you that she did just that. She first filed for divorce from her ruthless and sadistic spouse. Along with that filing, she applied for and was granted a restraining order which required this violent man to maintain a distance from her and prohibited him from contacting her.

I will present evidence to you today that the simple act of obtaining the restraining order so enraged the victim in this case that he sent my client to the intensive care unit. This fact is not meant to disparage the victim, only to show my clients' state of mind at the time of his disappearance.

The state will try and argue that at some point, the victim ended up back at my client's house on the last evening he was seen alive. However, the evidence will show that the two discarded bowls of black-eyed peas in the sink belonged to both of my clients. No testing was done on the contents of either bowl because I submit to you there was no need. This was an evening shared by two women, two best friends, enjoying a home-cooked meal together and celebrating that one of them had been released from the hospital. Why on earth would my client invite the very man responsible for her injuries over to her home? She would not, she did not, and the state is unable to produce any evidence that could convince you otherwise.

Yes, the victim's disappearance offered my client a welcome reprieve from the years of violence that the state failed to shield her from. But I challenge you that you will not hear any evidence today that would implicate my clients or show that his disappearance was caused by either of them.

You will hear from the sharp and masterful police officers who investigated the crime. They will testify how they conducted a thorough search of my client's house with her full permission. After their exhaustive search, they concluded that the victim had not been in or around the home for some time and directed their investigative efforts elsewhere. The officers will also testify that when they asked both of my clients to reach out should the victim make contact, my clients agreed and were never anything but cooperative.

The failure of the police department to turn up any leads or recover the victim's body is a reflection on them, not my clients. Further, the sudden interest to bring charges is not in line with any community outrage as there have been no requests to pursue the case nor any calls for justice against my clients.

At the end of this trial the State will ask you to find my clients guilty. What I am asking you to do today is acquit my clients of the heinous crime they've been accused of.

I want you to consider for a moment all the actions that would have been required to accomplish what the state is alleging has happened. Then I want you to ask yourself, "Would a woman who had just been released from the intensive care unit have been able to accomplish this against the very man who had put her there?" I am asking you to consider all the evidence presented then ask yourself whether even one shred points to my clients as the perpetrators beyond a reasonable doubt. I submit to you that it does not.

Members of the jury, if you've never stopped off at my clients' roadside stand, which they have been running for many years, and gotten yourself a treat, you're missing out. What you would have tasted from a slice of that Tennessee ham or just a spoonful of their homemade strawberry jam is the simple taste of freedom. Freedom that my clients have enjoyed for the past several decades as an happenstance by-product of the victim's disappearance which neither Mary Anne nor Wanda caused.

Thank you.