|
San Francisco attorney Kali O’Brien is asked to represent a rich and famous couple in an adoption proceeding. She normally doesn’t do this kind of work, but she agrees because the brother of the wife involved in the case is her former lover, Steven Cross. Steven’s wife and daughter had been killed in a hit and run crash while she and Steven were enjoying each other’s company, so she wants to atone for her sins.
At first blush, the circumstances of the adoption look straightforward. Ted and Terri Harper have been childless for many years and have recently suffered the loss of almost adopting a little boy when his birth mother had second thoughts. This time they are planning to adopt Melissa Burke’s baby as soon as the child is born. Melissa, only nineteen, has no interest in either the father of her child or rearing it as a single parent.
The Harpers have welcomed her into their home for the duration of the pregnancy and showered her with attention. She wishes no contact with the child other than pictures as she grows. The Harpers, however, want to make certain she won’t change her mind once the child is born so they are asking Kali to research all the possibilities that would prevent them from claiming the child. Kali’s first thought is the birth father’s permission. At first Melissa is reluctant to name the father, but finally produces a sleazy looking fellow who claims responsibility and quickly signs the necessary forms.
All is well until the infant is born. The Harpers no sooner go home with Hannah than Bram Weaver, a radio talk show host, comes forward announcing he is the father of the child. Melissa, confronted, admits that he is. Kali is furious at Melissa’s deception because, of course, the true birth father can claim custody of the child. Weaver, who is known for his stance on the rights of women (they should be home taking care of the kids), initiates court proceedings toward obtaining custody of Hannah. Kali feels there is little she can do to help the Harpers as “blood wins out” in cases of this nature. Their only hope is that either Weaver will relinquish his parental rights, or is found through DNA testing to not be the father of the child, neither of which scenarios seems at all likely.
Suddenly in mid trial Weaver is found shot to death in his home. This should be wonderful news for the Harpers since the one obstacle preventing the adoption has been eliminated. Unfortunately, all the evidence, albeit circumstantial, points toward Terri Harper as the murderer. Kali’s services to represent Terri in the murder trial are enlisted. Kali has gotten to know and like Terri during the adoption travails. Presumably, her guilt or innocence shouldn’t be an issue for Kali. She is just bound to try and get her client acquitted. Kali doesn’t think Terri actually killed Weaver though she had made threats. Kali does think, however, that Terri is withholding evidence which, if Kali doesn’t know about it, may play havoc with her defense of her client.
Jonnie Jacobs has provided a fast paced thriller in Witness for the Defense for those last lazy summer afternoons on the beach. The characters, while not particularly deep and complex are believable and, with the exception of Weaver, likable. One can easily empathize with Terri and Ted as they fear the loss of yet another child through the quirks of the adoption system, and then the horrible realization that Terri could spend many years in prison for a crime they know she didn’t commit.
Kali has personal issues in this case because of her prior relationship with her client’s brother. She sees him chasing demons and feels responsible for his mental state. These character dilemmas provide more food for thought beyond trying to guess the identity of the murderer.
What makes the book more than a pleasant way to spend some leisure time unraveling a mystery are a few questions Ms. Jacobs has raised concerning the United States laws regarding adoption. According to the law, the biological parents’ rights to the guardianship of a child supersede all else, except obvious cases of abuse. As this story indicates, there are situations where it appears that that decision is not always in the best interest of the child, but what seems morally correct is not legally so. Also the system of jury trial seems to be quite frightening if the accused is, indeed, innocent. Twelve people, with their own set of opinions and prejudices may be guided by the more persuasive lawyer. This commentary on the legal system elevates Witness for the Defense above the ordinary courtroom thriller.
--Andy Plonka
|