[Stone Barrington 03] • Dead in the Water

by Stuart, Woods,

In “Dead in the Water,” part of Stuart Woods’ Stone Barrington series, the suave attorney and former NYPD detective finds himself embroiled in a high-stakes legal thriller. While vacationing in the Caribbean, Barrington is drawn into a case involving a wealthy woman accused of murdering her husband at sea. As he investigates, he uncovers layers of deception, maritime law complexities, and dangerous adversaries. The novel blends legal intrigue with action, showcasing Barrington’s wit and resourcefulness. Themes of justice, trust, and survival underpin this fast-paced entry in the popular series, appealing to fans of courtroom dramas and adventure alike.

Previous Next

Chapter 53

by Stuart, Woods,

Stone and Leslie Hewitt leave the courthouse after Allison’s bail is revoked, heading to a nearby restaurant frequented by government officials. Stone, still wearing his barrister’s robe and wig, is reminded by Hewitt to keep the wig on as a matter of protocol. They discuss whether to call Allison as a witness, with Stone arguing against it due to the prosecution’s weak case. Hewitt insists she must testify, explaining that in St. Marks, refusing to take the stand could imply guilt to the jury, and the prosecution would likely call her if the defense didn’t.

Hewitt elaborates on the legal system in St. Marks, contrasting it with American jurisprudence. He explains that the presumption of innocence is nominal, and jurors often convict based on a mere probability of guilt rather than requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt. The system, shaped by figures like Sir Winston and the prime minister, favors convictions. Stone expresses frustration, longing for the American system, while Hewitt acknowledges the flaws but accepts them as part of the local legal culture.

The conversation shifts to the political landscape of St. Marks, with Hewitt revealing that the 89-year-old prime minister has held power since 1966. Sir Winston, the prosecutor, is a potential successor, and a conviction in Allison’s case could bolster his political ambitions. Hewitt hints at the corrupt nature of the government, where officials like Sir Winston benefit from their positions. Stone questions whether Sir Winston would go so far as to execute Allison for political gain, to which Hewitt responds grimly, emphasizing the dangers of unchecked ambition in a small, power-centric society.

Hewitt concludes by expressing hope that defeating Sir Winston in court could derail his political aspirations. He describes a better alternative candidate for prime minister, one without Sir Winston’s flaws, and admits his personal stake in the case. A loss for Sir Winston would diminish his influence, relegating him to private practice and his wife’s wealth. Hewitt’s motivation becomes clear: he sees the trial as a chance to strike a blow against corruption and vanity, offering a glimmer of optimism for St. Marks’ future.

Download PDF Summary

FAQs

1. How does the legal system in St. Marks differ from the American legal system regarding the presumption of innocence and the defendant’s right to testify?

Answer:
In St. Marks, while the presumption of innocence is given lip service, the legal system operates differently from the American tradition. Unlike in the U.S., where a defendant’s refusal to testify cannot be held against them, in St. Marks, the jury may interpret a defendant’s silence as an indication of guilt. Additionally, the concept of “reasonable doubt” is more lenient—jurors may convict if they believe the defendant is “probably guilty,” whereas in the U.S., guilt must be proven “beyond a reasonable doubt.” This reflects a system skewed toward conviction, as explained by Leslie Hewitt (e.g., Sir Winston’s influence and the lack of constitutional oversight).

2. Why does Leslie Hewitt insist on calling Allison to testify, despite Stone’s argument that the prosecution’s case is weak?

Answer:
Hewitt argues that Allison must testify for two key reasons. First, if the defense doesn’t call her, the prosecution (Sir Winston) could reopen their case and call her themselves, putting her at greater disadvantage. Second, in St. Marks’ legal culture, the jury expects the defendant to answer accusations directly, and refusing to testify could be seen as an admission of guilt. Hewitt also believes Allison is her own best witness, capable of countering the prosecution’s insinuations. This strategy reflects the local legal norms, where passive defense tactics (like resting without testimony) are riskier.

3. What political stakes are tied to the outcome of Allison’s trial, and how does this influence Sir Winston’s motivations?

Answer:
The trial is politically significant because Sir Winston is a candidate to succeed the aging prime minister. A conviction would bolster his reputation as a tough, effective leader, especially against a wealthy American defendant, and could secure his path to power. As Hewitt explains, the prime minister’s role is highly coveted—a “lifetime job” with near-kingly status on the island. Sir Winston’s ambition and vanity drive him to pursue a conviction aggressively, even if it means sacrificing Allison. A loss in court, however, could cripple his political aspirations, which is why Hewitt sees the case as a chance to undermine him.

4. How does Hewitt characterize the societal and governmental dynamics of St. Marks, and what role does climate play in its stability?

Answer:
Hewitt describes St. Marks as a functional but flawed society where corruption is tolerated (e.g., officials underpaid but supplementing incomes discreetly) and power is concentrated among a small elite. The warm climate contributes to stability by reducing hardship—people are less discontent when basic needs like warmth and food are easily met. The island’s informal economy (fishing, tourism) and minimal clothing requirements lessen societal pressures. However, Hewitt critiques the lack of political turnover and systemic biases, hinting at his own reformist past and the entrenched power of figures like Sir Winston.

5. What ethical dilemma does Stone face in this chapter, and how does it reflect his cultural background?

Answer:
Stone grapples with whether to expose Allison to cross-examination by calling her to testify, as his American legal instincts favor avoiding risk when the prosecution’s case seems weak. He struggles to reconcile his belief in “innocent until proven guilty” with St. Marks’ expectation that defendants actively disprove guilt. His discomfort highlights the clash between U.S. procedural protections (e.g., no adverse inference from silence) and St. Marks’ more accusatorial system. This dilemma forces him to confront the limitations of his own legal training in a foreign context, where justice is intertwined with politics and local traditions.

Quotes

1. “You must understand that in our legal tradition, although the presumption of innocence is given lip service, in fact even the insinuation of guilt must be answered in order to convince a jury that the accused is innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.”

This quote reveals the stark contrast between St. Marks’ legal system and American justice, highlighting how the burden of proof effectively falls on the defendant. Hewitt’s explanation underscores the chapter’s central theme of systemic bias in the island’s courts.

2. “The system is very much more comfortable if it is easier to find the accused guilty instead of innocent. And, of course, they have no written constitution or Supreme Court looking over their shoulders.”

Hewitt’s blunt assessment exposes the authoritarian underpinnings of St. Marks’ legal framework. This serves as both a critique of post-colonial governance and foreshadows the political stakes of Allison’s trial.

3. “If he wins a conviction in our case, that will probably give him a distinct advantage… Because he will be seen to have prevailed over a wealthy white American with a white American lawyer.”

This quote crystallizes the political motivations behind the prosecution, revealing how Sir Winston views the trial as a stepping stone to power. It transforms Allison’s case from a legal matter to a symbolic colonial struggle.

4. “Remember, if Sir Winston becomes our next prime minister, he will have, for all practical purposes, a lifetime job at the very pinnacle of our governmental and social heap, such as it is on this small island.”

Hewitt’s observation about the allure of power in microstates provides profound insight into the psychology of post-colonial leaders. The quote explains why Sir Winston would risk judicial overreach for political gain.

5. “It is his vanity as much as his ambition that makes him dangerous. If we can defeat him in court today, we will have struck a blow, perhaps a fatal one, to his political dreams.”

This concluding statement frames the legal battle as a moral crusade against tyranny. Hewitt positions the trial as a rare opportunity to check authoritarianism through the very system it has corrupted.

Quotes

1. “You must understand that in our legal tradition, although the presumption of innocence is given lip service, in fact even the insinuation of guilt must be answered in order to convince a jury that the accused is innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.”

This quote reveals the stark contrast between St. Marks’ legal system and American justice, highlighting how the burden of proof effectively falls on the defendant. Hewitt’s explanation underscores the chapter’s central theme of systemic bias in the island’s courts.

2. “The system is very much more comfortable if it is easier to find the accused guilty instead of innocent. And, of course, they have no written constitution or Supreme Court looking over their shoulders.”

Hewitt’s blunt assessment exposes the authoritarian underpinnings of St. Marks’ legal framework. This serves as both a critique of post-colonial governance and foreshadows the political stakes of Allison’s trial.

3. “If he wins a conviction in our case, that will probably give him a distinct advantage… Because he will be seen to have prevailed over a wealthy white American with a white American lawyer.”

This quote crystallizes the political motivations behind the prosecution, revealing how Sir Winston views the trial as a stepping stone to power. It transforms Allison’s case from a legal matter to a symbolic colonial struggle.

4. “Remember, if Sir Winston becomes our next prime minister, he will have, for all practical purposes, a lifetime job at the very pinnacle of our governmental and social heap, such as it is on this small island.”

Hewitt’s observation about the allure of power in microstates provides profound insight into the psychology of post-colonial leaders. The quote explains why Sir Winston would risk judicial overreach for political gain.

5. “It is his vanity as much as his ambition that makes him dangerous. If we can defeat him in court today, we will have struck a blow, perhaps a fatal one, to his political dreams.”

This concluding statement frames the legal battle as a moral crusade against tyranny. Hewitt positions the trial as a rare opportunity to check authoritarianism through the very system it has corrupted.

FAQs

1. How does the legal system in St. Marks differ from the American legal system regarding the presumption of innocence and the defendant’s right to testify?

Answer:
In St. Marks, while the presumption of innocence is given lip service, the legal system operates differently from the American tradition. Unlike in the U.S., where a defendant’s refusal to testify cannot be held against them, in St. Marks, the jury may interpret a defendant’s silence as an indication of guilt. Additionally, the concept of “reasonable doubt” is more lenient—jurors may convict if they believe the defendant is “probably guilty,” whereas in the U.S., guilt must be proven “beyond a reasonable doubt.” This reflects a system skewed toward conviction, as explained by Leslie Hewitt (e.g., Sir Winston’s influence and the lack of constitutional oversight).

2. Why does Leslie Hewitt insist on calling Allison to testify, despite Stone’s argument that the prosecution’s case is weak?

Answer:
Hewitt argues that Allison must testify for two key reasons. First, if the defense doesn’t call her, the prosecution (Sir Winston) could reopen their case and call her themselves, putting her at greater disadvantage. Second, in St. Marks’ legal culture, the jury expects the defendant to answer accusations directly, and refusing to testify could be seen as an admission of guilt. Hewitt also believes Allison is her own best witness, capable of countering the prosecution’s insinuations. This strategy reflects the local legal norms, where passive defense tactics (like resting without testimony) are riskier.

3. What political stakes are tied to the outcome of Allison’s trial, and how does this influence Sir Winston’s motivations?

Answer:
The trial is politically significant because Sir Winston is a candidate to succeed the aging prime minister. A conviction would bolster his reputation as a tough, effective leader, especially against a wealthy American defendant, and could secure his path to power. As Hewitt explains, the prime minister’s role is highly coveted—a “lifetime job” with near-kingly status on the island. Sir Winston’s ambition and vanity drive him to pursue a conviction aggressively, even if it means sacrificing Allison. A loss in court, however, could cripple his political aspirations, which is why Hewitt sees the case as a chance to undermine him.

4. How does Hewitt characterize the societal and governmental dynamics of St. Marks, and what role does climate play in its stability?

Answer:
Hewitt describes St. Marks as a functional but flawed society where corruption is tolerated (e.g., officials underpaid but supplementing incomes discreetly) and power is concentrated among a small elite. The warm climate contributes to stability by reducing hardship—people are less discontent when basic needs like warmth and food are easily met. The island’s informal economy (fishing, tourism) and minimal clothing requirements lessen societal pressures. However, Hewitt critiques the lack of political turnover and systemic biases, hinting at his own reformist past and the entrenched power of figures like Sir Winston.

5. What ethical dilemma does Stone face in this chapter, and how does it reflect his cultural background?

Answer:
Stone grapples with whether to expose Allison to cross-examination by calling her to testify, as his American legal instincts favor avoiding risk when the prosecution’s case seems weak. He struggles to reconcile his belief in “innocent until proven guilty” with St. Marks’ expectation that defendants actively disprove guilt. His discomfort highlights the clash between U.S. procedural protections (e.g., no adverse inference from silence) and St. Marks’ more accusatorial system. This dilemma forces him to confront the limitations of his own legal training in a foreign context, where justice is intertwined with politics and local traditions.