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 57

    by Stuart, Woods,

    In Chap­ter 57, Stone reunites with jour­nal­ists Hilary Kramer and Jim For­rester after a court ses­sion, where they express con­fi­dence in his defense team’s per­for­mance and ques­tion the legit­i­ma­cy of the tri­al. Kramer crit­i­cizes the lack of evi­dence, com­par­ing it unfa­vor­ably to Amer­i­can courts, while Stone acknowl­edges the unique chal­lenges of St. Marks’ legal sys­tem. The dis­cus­sion turns to the jury’s poten­tial bias­es, as Stone reveals that jurors’ per­son­al con­nec­tions to Sir Win­ston, a pow­er­ful fig­ure, could influ­ence the ver­dict. Despite the opti­mism, Stone remains cau­tious, aware that the trial’s out­come hinges on unpre­dictable fac­tors.

    The group spec­u­lates about the tim­ing of the ver­dict, with Stone not­ing that St. Marks juries typ­i­cal­ly deliv­er quick deci­sions. How­ev­er, the pro­longed delib­er­a­tion sug­gests a con­tentious debate among jurors. Hewitt, the defense attor­ney, remains hope­ful, inter­pret­ing the delay as a sign of thor­ough con­sid­er­a­tion. Mean­while, Alli­son, the defen­dant, express­es opti­mism, but Stone pri­vate­ly wor­ries about the pos­si­bil­i­ty of a guilty ver­dict. The ten­sion builds as the court­room grows qui­eter, with only a few reporters remain­ing to wit­ness the out­come.

    The jury final­ly returns with a shock­ing ver­dict: Alli­son is found guilty of mur­der, caus­ing an uproar in the court­room. Stone attempts to reas­sure Alli­son, who is vis­i­bly stunned and pale. Hewitt imme­di­ate­ly sub­mits an appeal to the prime min­is­ter, hop­ing to delay sen­tenc­ing, but the judge insists on pro­ceed­ing. The court­room atmos­phere grows increas­ing­ly grim as the judge pre­pares to deliv­er the sen­tence, with Alli­son strug­gling to main­tain com­po­sure. The abrupt ver­dict leaves Stone and the defense team reel­ing, as their hopes for an acquit­tal are dashed.

    The chap­ter con­cludes with the judge sen­tenc­ing Alli­son to death by hang­ing at sun­set the fol­low­ing day. Alli­son col­laps­es in shock, and the court­room erupts into chaos as Stone and the bailiff rush to her aid. The abrupt and harsh sen­tence under­scores the bru­tal­i­ty of St. Marks’ legal sys­tem, leav­ing lit­tle room for hope. Despite Hewitt’s assur­ances about the appeal process, the chap­ter ends on a bleak note, empha­siz­ing the pre­car­i­ous­ness of Allison’s sit­u­a­tion and the emo­tion­al toll on every­one involved.

    Down­load PDF Sum­ma­ry

    FAQs

    • Answer:
      Stone highlights two key factors influencing the St. Marks jury: the island’s small size and jurors’ personal relationships with Sir Winston. He implies jurors might vote against the defense if they fear repercussions from him, stating, “If one of them has something to fear from Sir Winston, he’s unlikely to vote our way.” This contrasts sharply with the American system, where such bias would be grounds for appeal, as Jim Forrester notes. The chapter underscores how St. Marks’ informal power dynamics override legal objectivity, whereas U.S. courts prioritize procedural fairness.

      2. Analyze the significance of the defense team’s optimism before the verdict and how it contrasts with the outcome. What literary effect does this create?

      Answer:
      Before the verdict, Hewitt, Stone, and Allison express cautious optimism—Hewitt praises their “brilliant job,” while Allison feels “very optimistic.” This creates dramatic irony, as readers later witness the shocking guilty verdict. The disconnect between their confidence and the outcome heightens tension and underscores the unpredictability of St. Marks’ justice system. The optimism also humanizes the characters, making Allison’s collapse upon sentencing more poignant. The contrast serves to critique the arbitrary nature of the island’s legal proceedings, where preparation and logic are overruled by hidden influences.

      Answer:
      The chapter reveals St. Marks’ legal system as deeply intertwined with political and personal power. Key examples include: (1) Jurors potentially fearing Sir Winston, showing how intimidation trumps impartiality; (2) The prime minister’s “whim” deciding appeals, highlighting centralized authority; and (3) The judge’s swift sentencing despite Hewitt’s appeal, emphasizing procedural rigidity. Even the bailiff’s theatrical delivery of the black cloth (symbolizing death) underscores the performative, authoritarian nature of justice. These details paint a system where power—not evidence or law—dictates outcomes.

      4. Why does the defense team emphasize the possibility of an appeal, and what does this reveal about their strategy?

      Answer:
      Hewitt reassures Allison that “even if the verdict goes against us, it’s not over,” stressing their appeal plan. This reveals a two-pronged strategy: first, to win at trial, but second, to leverage political pressure (“pressure brought to bear on the government”) for clemency. The appeal’s reliance on the 89-year-old prime minister’s “good nature” shows their awareness of St. Marks’ unique system—where legal arguments matter less than connections. Their preparedness (sealed envelope with appeal) demonstrates adaptability to both formal and informal power structures.

      5. Evaluate the judge’s sentencing ritual (e.g., the black cloth, immediate verdict). How does this contribute to the chapter’s tone?

      Answer:
      The judge’s ritual—donning a black cloth, demanding Allison rise, and coldly declaring her hanging—creates a chilling, almost medieval tone. The ceremonial details (fringed cushion, brass key) contrast grotesquely with the brutality of the sentence, amplifying the horror. Immediate sentencing without deliberation underscores the system’s ruthlessness, while Allison’s collapse heightens the visceral impact. This theatrical yet clinical approach mirrors the chapter’s broader critique: justice in St. Marks is performative, arbitrary, and devoid of compassion, leaving readers unsettled by its institutionalized cruelty.

    Quotes

    • 1. “This could never have come to trial in an American court.”

      (Hilary Kramer expressing disbelief at the trial’s legitimacy)
      This quote highlights the cultural and legal disparities between St. Marks and the U.S., emphasizing the questionable basis for Allison’s trial and foreshadowing potential injustice.

      2. “Leslie says that the relationship between individual jurors and Sir Winston is going to be the deciding factor.”

      (Stone explaining the jury’s potential bias)
      This reveals the informal, personal dynamics influencing the trial’s outcome, underscoring the lack of impartiality in St. Marks’ judicial system.

      3. “The appeal here is to the good nature, or perhaps the whim, of the prime minister, who’s eighty-nine.”

      (Stone on the flawed appeals process)
      This starkly illustrates the arbitrary nature of justice in St. Marks, where legal outcomes hinge on caprice rather than due process.

      4. “We, a jury of freemen of St. Marks, have considered our verdict… After due deliberation, we unanimously find the prisoner guilty of murder.”

      (The jury’s verdict)
      A pivotal moment in the chapter, this quote delivers the shocking verdict, sealing Allison’s fate and heightening the tension.

      5. “May God have mercy on your soul.”

      (The judge’s chilling sentencing of Allison)
      This concluding line underscores the brutality and finality of the judgment, leaving a lasting impact on both the characters and readers.

    Quotes

    1. “This could never have come to trial in an American court.”

    (Hilary Kramer expressing disbelief at the trial’s legitimacy)
    This quote highlights the cultural and legal disparities between St. Marks and the U.S., emphasizing the questionable basis for Allison’s trial and foreshadowing potential injustice.

    2. “Leslie says that the relationship between individual jurors and Sir Winston is going to be the deciding factor.”

    (Stone explaining the jury’s potential bias)
    This reveals the informal, personal dynamics influencing the trial’s outcome, underscoring the lack of impartiality in St. Marks’ judicial system.

    3. “The appeal here is to the good nature, or perhaps the whim, of the prime minister, who’s eighty-nine.”

    (Stone on the flawed appeals process)
    This starkly illustrates the arbitrary nature of justice in St. Marks, where legal outcomes hinge on caprice rather than due process.

    4. “We, a jury of freemen of St. Marks, have considered our verdict… After due deliberation, we unanimously find the prisoner guilty of murder.”

    (The jury’s verdict)
    A pivotal moment in the chapter, this quote delivers the shocking verdict, sealing Allison’s fate and heightening the tension.

    5. “May God have mercy on your soul.”

    (The judge’s chilling sentencing of Allison)
    This concluding line underscores the brutality and finality of the judgment, leaving a lasting impact on both the characters and readers.

    FAQs

    Answer:
    Stone highlights two key factors influencing the St. Marks jury: the island’s small size and jurors’ personal relationships with Sir Winston. He implies jurors might vote against the defense if they fear repercussions from him, stating, “If one of them has something to fear from Sir Winston, he’s unlikely to vote our way.” This contrasts sharply with the American system, where such bias would be grounds for appeal, as Jim Forrester notes. The chapter underscores how St. Marks’ informal power dynamics override legal objectivity, whereas U.S. courts prioritize procedural fairness.

    2. Analyze the significance of the defense team’s optimism before the verdict and how it contrasts with the outcome. What literary effect does this create?

    Answer:
    Before the verdict, Hewitt, Stone, and Allison express cautious optimism—Hewitt praises their “brilliant job,” while Allison feels “very optimistic.” This creates dramatic irony, as readers later witness the shocking guilty verdict. The disconnect between their confidence and the outcome heightens tension and underscores the unpredictability of St. Marks’ justice system. The optimism also humanizes the characters, making Allison’s collapse upon sentencing more poignant. The contrast serves to critique the arbitrary nature of the island’s legal proceedings, where preparation and logic are overruled by hidden influences.

    Answer:
    The chapter reveals St. Marks’ legal system as deeply intertwined with political and personal power. Key examples include: (1) Jurors potentially fearing Sir Winston, showing how intimidation trumps impartiality; (2) The prime minister’s “whim” deciding appeals, highlighting centralized authority; and (3) The judge’s swift sentencing despite Hewitt’s appeal, emphasizing procedural rigidity. Even the bailiff’s theatrical delivery of the black cloth (symbolizing death) underscores the performative, authoritarian nature of justice. These details paint a system where power—not evidence or law—dictates outcomes.

    4. Why does the defense team emphasize the possibility of an appeal, and what does this reveal about their strategy?

    Answer:
    Hewitt reassures Allison that “even if the verdict goes against us, it’s not over,” stressing their appeal plan. This reveals a two-pronged strategy: first, to win at trial, but second, to leverage political pressure (“pressure brought to bear on the government”) for clemency. The appeal’s reliance on the 89-year-old prime minister’s “good nature” shows their awareness of St. Marks’ unique system—where legal arguments matter less than connections. Their preparedness (sealed envelope with appeal) demonstrates adaptability to both formal and informal power structures.

    5. Evaluate the judge’s sentencing ritual (e.g., the black cloth, immediate verdict). How does this contribute to the chapter’s tone?

    Answer:
    The judge’s ritual—donning a black cloth, demanding Allison rise, and coldly declaring her hanging—creates a chilling, almost medieval tone. The ceremonial details (fringed cushion, brass key) contrast grotesquely with the brutality of the sentence, amplifying the horror. Immediate sentencing without deliberation underscores the system’s ruthlessness, while Allison’s collapse heightens the visceral impact. This theatrical yet clinical approach mirrors the chapter’s broader critique: justice in St. Marks is performative, arbitrary, and devoid of compassion, leaving readers unsettled by its institutionalized cruelty.

    Note