Search Jump: Comments
    Chapter Index
    Back to Story
    Cover of [Stone Barrington 03] • Dead in the Water
    Adventure FictionFictionThriller

    [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.
    PreviousNext
    [Stone Barrington 03] • Dead in the Water

    Chapter 54

    by Stuart, Woods,

    The chap­ter opens with the defense opt­ing not to request a dis­missal of charges against Alli­son Man­ning, despite deem­ing the pros­e­cu­tion’s evi­dence weak. Sir Leslie Hewitt empha­sizes their inten­tion to have Man­ning tes­ti­fy to prove her inno­cence. The judge then allows the defense to pro­ceed, and Stone Bar­ring­ton calls James For­rester as their first wit­ness. For­rester, a jour­nal­ist and acquain­tance of the deceased Paul Man­ning, pro­vides back­ground on their long-stand­ing but inter­mit­tent rela­tion­ship, describ­ing Man­ning as pleas­ant and friend­ly dur­ing their encoun­ters over the years.

    For­rester recounts his most recent meet­ing with Paul and Alli­son Man­ning in the Canary Islands, where he dined with them aboard their yacht. He tes­ti­fies that the cou­ple appeared deeply affec­tion­ate and har­mo­nious, shar­ing tasks like meal prepa­ra­tion. Notably, For­rester reveals that Paul men­tioned work­ing on a new nov­el titled *Dead in the Water* and showed him a leather-bound note­book, lat­er iden­ti­fied as Pros­e­cu­tion Exhib­it One. For­rester con­firms the note­book con­tained writ­ing notes, not a diary, and asserts it aligned with his impres­sion of Paul’s cre­ative process.

    The defense uses For­rester’s tes­ti­mo­ny to chal­lenge the pros­e­cu­tion’s nar­ra­tive, par­tic­u­lar­ly regard­ing the state of the Man­nings’ mar­riage. For­rester describes see­ing the cou­ple again in Puer­to Rico, where they seemed equal­ly hap­py before sail­ing away. He con­firms he was the last per­son, aside from Alli­son, to see Paul alive. Under cross-exam­i­na­tion, how­ev­er, For­rester’s cred­i­bil­i­ty is ques­tioned when he admits he is not an expert on mar­riage and is cur­rent­ly divorc­ing. The pros­e­cu­tion high­lights his lim­it­ed inter­ac­tions with the cou­ple, under­min­ing his abil­i­ty to defin­i­tive­ly assess their rela­tion­ship.

    The chap­ter con­cludes with the pros­e­cu­tion press­ing For­rester on his lack of first­hand knowl­edge of events aboard the yacht after it depart­ed Puer­to Rico. For­rester con­cedes he relies sole­ly on Alli­son Man­ning’s account, leav­ing room for doubt about the accu­ra­cy of his tes­ti­mo­ny. The exchange under­scores the ten­sion between the defense’s por­tray­al of a hap­py mar­riage and the pros­e­cu­tion’s skep­ti­cism, set­ting the stage for Alli­son Man­ning’s antic­i­pat­ed tes­ti­mo­ny.

    Down­load PDF Sum­ma­ry

    FAQs

    • 1. What strategic decision does the defense make regarding the dismissal of charges, and why is this significant?

      Answer:
      The defense, led by Sir Leslie Hewitt, deliberately chooses not to move for a dismissal of charges despite acknowledging the prosecution’s weak evidence. This is significant because they want the jury to hear Allison Manning testify directly, believing her firsthand account will convincingly demonstrate her innocence. By forgoing a procedural dismissal, the defense signals confidence in their client’s testimony and aims to create a more compelling narrative of her innocence for the jury (Chapter 54, opening dialogue).

      2. How does James Forrester’s testimony challenge the prosecution’s case, and what inconsistencies arise in his account?

      Answer:
      Forrester’s testimony undermines the prosecution by portraying Paul and Allison Manning as a happily married couple, contradicting any suggestion of marital strife that might motivate foul play. However, inconsistencies emerge when Forrester reveals new details (e.g., Paul’s novel Dead in the Water and their meeting in Puerto Rico) that he hadn’t previously disclosed. These omissions raise questions about his reliability and suggest he may be selectively shaping his narrative to support Allison (Chapter 54, Forrester’s cross-examination and Stone’s reactions).

      3. Analyze the effectiveness of Sir Winston’s cross-examination of Forrester. What weaknesses does he expose?

      Answer:
      Sir Winston effectively dismantles Forrester’s credibility by highlighting his lack of expertise in evaluating marriages and his personal divorce, which undermines his rosy portrayal of the Mannings’ relationship. By forcing Forrester to admit he isn’t qualified to judge their marriage and emphasizing his limited interactions with the couple, Sir Winston casts doubt on the defense’s characterization of Allison as a blameless widow. This line of questioning exposes Forrester’s testimony as subjective and incomplete (Chapter 54, “Are you qualified to judge the state of their marriage?” exchange).

      4. Why is the leather-bound book (Prosecution Exhibit One) a pivotal piece of evidence, and how does Forrester interpret it?

      Answer:
      The book is pivotal because it allegedly contains Paul Manning’s notes for his novel Dead in the Water, which Forrester identifies as creative writing material rather than a diary. This interpretation supports the defense’s argument that the book doesn’t reflect marital discord, as the prosecution might suggest. However, its late introduction and Forrester’s inconsistent disclosures about it leave room for skepticism about its authenticity and relevance (Chapter 54, Forrester’s examination of the exhibit).

      5. How does the chapter build suspense about Allison Manning’s upcoming testimony?

      Answer:
      The chapter heightens anticipation by delaying Allison’s testimony while laying groundwork through Forrester’s account. His portrayal of her innocence and the couple’s happiness creates a “set-up” for her eventual appearance, making the jury (and reader) eager to hear her version of events. Simultaneously, the cracks in Forrester’s testimony—exposed under cross-examination—hint at potential contradictions, leaving uncertainty about whether Allison’s story will hold up under scrutiny (Chapter 54, defense’s emphasis on her testimony and Forrester’s mixed credibility).

    Quotes

    • 1. “But the defense will not request a dismissal of charges, because we want the jury to hear our client, Mrs. Allison Manning, tell her own story, so that they will know from her lips that she is an innocent woman.”

      This bold declaration by Sir Leslie Hewitt sets the stage for the defense’s strategy, emphasizing their confidence in Allison Manning’s testimony and their desire for the jury to hear her firsthand account of events.

      2. “They seemed very happy together; it was obviously a very successful marriage, by almost any measure.”

      James Forrester’s testimony about the Mannings’ relationship is crucial to the defense’s case, painting a picture of a harmonious marriage that contradicts the prosecution’s narrative of marital strife leading to foul play.

      3. “This seems very much to me to be a set of notes, though an incomplete one… Certainly not. It does not describe the relationship between man and wife that I saw in Las Palmas.”

      Forrester’s analysis of Paul Manning’s notebook is pivotal, as it challenges the prosecution’s characterization of the book as a diary documenting marital problems, instead supporting the defense’s position that it was merely notes for a novel.

      4. “Everything she told me had the absolute ring of truth.”

      Forrester’s strong endorsement of Allison Manning’s credibility under direct examination provides powerful support for her defense, suggesting her account of events is consistent and believable.

      5. “Well, I’m certainly no marriage counselor… No,” Forrester admitted.”

      This exchange during cross-examination reveals the vulnerability in Forrester’s testimony, as he’s forced to concede his limited qualifications to assess the true state of the Mannings’ marriage, potentially undermining his earlier positive characterization.

    Quotes

    1. “But the defense will not request a dismissal of charges, because we want the jury to hear our client, Mrs. Allison Manning, tell her own story, so that they will know from her lips that she is an innocent woman.”

    This bold declaration by Sir Leslie Hewitt sets the stage for the defense’s strategy, emphasizing their confidence in Allison Manning’s testimony and their desire for the jury to hear her firsthand account of events.

    2. “They seemed very happy together; it was obviously a very successful marriage, by almost any measure.”

    James Forrester’s testimony about the Mannings’ relationship is crucial to the defense’s case, painting a picture of a harmonious marriage that contradicts the prosecution’s narrative of marital strife leading to foul play.

    3. “This seems very much to me to be a set of notes, though an incomplete one… Certainly not. It does not describe the relationship between man and wife that I saw in Las Palmas.”

    Forrester’s analysis of Paul Manning’s notebook is pivotal, as it challenges the prosecution’s characterization of the book as a diary documenting marital problems, instead supporting the defense’s position that it was merely notes for a novel.

    4. “Everything she told me had the absolute ring of truth.”

    Forrester’s strong endorsement of Allison Manning’s credibility under direct examination provides powerful support for her defense, suggesting her account of events is consistent and believable.

    5. “Well, I’m certainly no marriage counselor… No,” Forrester admitted.”

    This exchange during cross-examination reveals the vulnerability in Forrester’s testimony, as he’s forced to concede his limited qualifications to assess the true state of the Mannings’ marriage, potentially undermining his earlier positive characterization.

    FAQs

    1. What strategic decision does the defense make regarding the dismissal of charges, and why is this significant?

    Answer:
    The defense, led by Sir Leslie Hewitt, deliberately chooses not to move for a dismissal of charges despite acknowledging the prosecution’s weak evidence. This is significant because they want the jury to hear Allison Manning testify directly, believing her firsthand account will convincingly demonstrate her innocence. By forgoing a procedural dismissal, the defense signals confidence in their client’s testimony and aims to create a more compelling narrative of her innocence for the jury (Chapter 54, opening dialogue).

    2. How does James Forrester’s testimony challenge the prosecution’s case, and what inconsistencies arise in his account?

    Answer:
    Forrester’s testimony undermines the prosecution by portraying Paul and Allison Manning as a happily married couple, contradicting any suggestion of marital strife that might motivate foul play. However, inconsistencies emerge when Forrester reveals new details (e.g., Paul’s novel Dead in the Water and their meeting in Puerto Rico) that he hadn’t previously disclosed. These omissions raise questions about his reliability and suggest he may be selectively shaping his narrative to support Allison (Chapter 54, Forrester’s cross-examination and Stone’s reactions).

    3. Analyze the effectiveness of Sir Winston’s cross-examination of Forrester. What weaknesses does he expose?

    Answer:
    Sir Winston effectively dismantles Forrester’s credibility by highlighting his lack of expertise in evaluating marriages and his personal divorce, which undermines his rosy portrayal of the Mannings’ relationship. By forcing Forrester to admit he isn’t qualified to judge their marriage and emphasizing his limited interactions with the couple, Sir Winston casts doubt on the defense’s characterization of Allison as a blameless widow. This line of questioning exposes Forrester’s testimony as subjective and incomplete (Chapter 54, “Are you qualified to judge the state of their marriage?” exchange).

    4. Why is the leather-bound book (Prosecution Exhibit One) a pivotal piece of evidence, and how does Forrester interpret it?

    Answer:
    The book is pivotal because it allegedly contains Paul Manning’s notes for his novel Dead in the Water, which Forrester identifies as creative writing material rather than a diary. This interpretation supports the defense’s argument that the book doesn’t reflect marital discord, as the prosecution might suggest. However, its late introduction and Forrester’s inconsistent disclosures about it leave room for skepticism about its authenticity and relevance (Chapter 54, Forrester’s examination of the exhibit).

    5. How does the chapter build suspense about Allison Manning’s upcoming testimony?

    Answer:
    The chapter heightens anticipation by delaying Allison’s testimony while laying groundwork through Forrester’s account. His portrayal of her innocence and the couple’s happiness creates a “set-up” for her eventual appearance, making the jury (and reader) eager to hear her version of events. Simultaneously, the cracks in Forrester’s testimony—exposed under cross-examination—hint at potential contradictions, leaving uncertainty about whether Allison’s story will hold up under scrutiny (Chapter 54, defense’s emphasis on her testimony and Forrester’s mixed credibility).

    Note