Missing Witness (46 page)

The screen to the left of the judge's bench lit up, and an enlarged image of handwritten notes from the 1718 Bath, North Carolina, grand jury proceeding appeared.

The final entry read,

Isaac Joppa, late of Bath, North Carolina, was indicted for piracy, the same being suspected of being a willing member of the crew of Captain Edward Teach, and having committed various piratical acts of robbery among vessels on the high seas.

“Now this,” Will said, pointing to the image on the screen, “is a frame with dots in it. The grand jury in Bath, North Carolina, was too close to the events of the day to be able to see the true picture of Isaac Joppa's innocence. After all, they had the testimony of only one witness, Henry Caulfeld. Caulfeld, you will recall, was aboard the ship
Marguerite
at the
time it was attacked and plundered by Teach's crew. The sole evidence upon which the grand jury indicted Isaac Joppa as a willing participant in an act of piracy was Caulfeld's observation.

“However, Henry Caulfeld's observations and testimony were ambiguous at best. What he thought were the gestures of Isaac giving orders to the pirate crew were, instead, meant to relieve the stiffness that had set in from long months of being manacled in the hold of Teach's ship with heavy irons. Further, Caulfeld observed weapons in the hands of all the men except Isaac. Thus, it is clear that Isaac was still under the control of the pirate crew and the captain, all of whom were armed and dangerous. And further yet, would it be reasonable to conclude that in just a few months, a novice, a frightened young sailor such as Isaac, would be elevated by Teach to a position of authority—indeed, to a position where he was giving orders to cutthroat pirates who had been committing murder and robbery on the high seas for years?”

Will argued to the jury that Isaac Joppa had been kidnapped by Teach merely because the pirate knew that Isaac's medical knowledge, learned while with the British Navy, though limited, might prove helpful to his syphilis-ravaged, battle-torn crew. Further, Isaac had neither the profile, nor the motivation, to pursue a life of crime.

While, admittedly, Joppa was guilty of deserting a Royal Navy ship while under the tyrannical rule of Captain Boughton, he had been faced with a dilemma—had he stayed on board, he would have to choose between joining a mutiny of the crew or supporting the savagery and brutality of the captain. Regrettably, Will submitted, Isaac chose the route most common among sailors of his day—to simply desert at the first available opportunity.

Will concluded his initial arguments by reminding the jury that the clerk in Bath, North Carolina, following the Old Bailey trial at Central Criminal Court in London, not only indicated the indictment dismissed, but also entered the words “res judicata”
—
which made sense
only
if Isaac Joppa had been acquitted, but could face a potential retrial in America unless it were known that the issues in his piracy trial had been “finally decided” in an English Court across the Atlantic.

Lastly, Will suggested to the jury that Isaac Joppa did not flee from the English navy during the battle of Ocracoke Inlet because he was conscious of his criminal guilt. Rather, in the melee of swords, bullets, and cannon fire, Isaac was simply running for his life.

“After all,” Will argued, “Samuel O'Dell—who was also in the hold of Teach's ship at the outbreak of the battle but was more or less an innocent bystander—himself received some seventy wounds in the battle, and was mistaken for a pirate until acquitted by the court in Williamsburg.

“In other words,” Will concluded, “the evidence we've presented, that I have summarized for you here, presents only one clear and unmistakable image. It is the picture of an innocent man whose life is tragically waylaid by a gang of seafaring thugs and murderers. The picture you see, I am confident, is one of Isaac Joppa's innocence. He was wrongfully accused once—let's not make that mistake twice.”

As Will sat down at counsel table, Virgil MacPherson strode up confidently, placing himself squarely in front of the jury box. His manner was folksy, entertaining, and energetic.

He reminded the jury of one indisputable fact—that the witnesses for Isaac Joppa's innocence were neither disinterested nor objective. Isaac Joppa himself had been on trial for his life, he reminded the jury, and of course he would invent a story to save himself from the hangman's noose. The only other witness for Isaac of any substance was the pirate Caesar, whose comments were not transcribed but merely noted by the clerk in the Williamsburg piracy trial, and indicated that Joppa had been a prisoner of Teach's. “Yet are we to believe,” MacPherson urged the jury, “the comments of a man guilty of piracy himself?

“On the other hand,” he continued, “who were the witnesses against Isaac Joppa? Henry Caulfeld, an established merchant and co-owner of the vessel
Marguerite
. He saw, with his own eyes, Isaac Joppa's freedom of movement and his position of authority among the pirates. Did Joppa look like a man imprisoned by Edward Teach? Further, there is the testimony of Samuel O'Dell at the Williamsburg piracy trial. O'Dell, according to the clerk's notes, clearly testified that, in the hold of Teach's ship—shortly before the outbreak of hostilities in the Battle of Ocracoke Inlet, Isaac Joppa was there…unmanacled, with full freedom of movement. Does that sound like a man imprisoned in the hold of a pirate's ship?

“And what of the iron manacles found at the salvage site of the sunken remains of the
Bold Venture
? What of the testimony of Dr. Steve Rosetti?” MacPherson asked—and then cleverly suggested to the jury that Isaac Joppa would have been fully familiar with all aspects of Teach's ship and would have noticed the manacles in the hold on one of the barrels. Thus, when he was ultimately captured and tried, he concocted the story that the manacles had been intended for him…and that he had been the pirates'
prisoner. How convenient, MacPherson sneered, that Joppa should remember there were irons aboard Teach's ship and use them in his plea for innocence. But was there, MacPherson submitted, any proof that Joppa's wrists were ever bound by those manacles? Was there any evidence ever presented to the jury in this trial that the person of Isaac Joppa was restrained by those irons?

“None whatsoever,” MacPherson concluded, his arms raised to the heavens.

Reminding the jury that Isaac Joppa was convicted of deserting the British navy, he pointed to Joppa's escape
from
—rather than his escape
to
—Lieutenant Maynard and the English sailors who attacked Teach's ship. This was proof that Joppa, better than anyone else, knew he was guilty of crimes on the high seas.

“You know, in this country we build monuments to great men and women,” MacPherson intoned. “We award medals to heroes. We do those things lest we forget the courage and deeds of those who are great among us. But not all deeds deserve to be remembered. Not all men deserve to be pinned with medals. There are those miserable men, cowards, and criminals who shame themselves, dishonor their families, and violate the laws of humanity. They deserve to be forgotten.

“Isaac Joppa was one of those men. Let's let the dead bury the dead. The evidence of this case tells us that Isaac Joppa should lie in a pauper's grave along with other criminals who were hanged in eighteenth-century England. He deserves to be forgotten. Don't be fooled by the legal tricks of my opponent. His case is smoke and mirrors. Isaac Joppa was a dastardly sinner—let's not be fooled into making him a saint.”

MacPherson gathered his papers from the podium, and then, with his hands clasped behind his back, looked each of the six jurors in the eye, one after another, making his last, and perhaps most potent argument of all. Will had expected it. In fact, he would have been surprised had his opponent not made the argument. But still, when it came, it was a devastating blow. Will felt it. He could sense Jonathan, sitting next to him, slumping in his seat. Perhaps part of it was the recognition that this case had never been winnable, that the truth had never been quite clear enough.

“As a final word,” MacPherson said, eyeing the jury and smiling. “I want to emphasize how the court is about to instruct you. Judge Gadwell will instruct you, once all the arguments have been concluded, that you are prohibited—let me say that again—you are
prohibited
from
speculating
about the evidence in this case. The court will instruct you that if the
evidence is not clear enough, on the question on Isaac Joppa's innocence of the charges of piracy—as the court will define them to you—then you
must
rule in favor of my client, Terrence Ludlow, and you
must
rule against Jonathan Joppa. It's as simple as that.”

As Virgil MacPherson took his seat, Will scanned the faces of each of the jury members, trying to discern whether MacPherson's argument had rung true with them. They were all, except one, blank-faced and expressionless. The sole exception was the elderly widow, who was still maintaining her unassuming smile.

Will rose slowly, and walked to the podium. And for a moment, he was swept away, wondering who he really represented. He felt an overpowering sensation that his real client was nowhere in the courtroom. Not really. His final comments in rebuttal would now have little to do with real estate entitlements, or the last will and testament of Randolph Willowby. Or even with vindicating Uncle Bull. Instead, he would address the secrets of a life long buried…and a reputation scuttled by human ignorance, malice, or even something worse.

66

W
ILL
'
S FINAL REBUTTAL ARGUMENT
would be simple. Almost simplistic.

“Ladies and gentlemen, I'm not going to take much of your time now. I only have one final thought. Mr. MacPherson says that the witnesses for Isaac Joppa, namely Isaac Joppa himself and the pirate Caesar, were biased and not trustworthy. He then argues that the witnesses against Isaac Joppa, Henry Caulfeld and Samuel O'Dell, were credible and are to be believed. He discounts the physical evidence in the case, such as the indisputable presence of manacles, discovered exactly where Isaac Joppa said they were.

“But there's something else. Something has been forgotten, and I'm here to remind us. There was a small plate introduced into evidence through the testimony of Oscar ‘Possum' Kooter. He irrefutably identified it as an heirloom given to Isaac Joppa by his beloved Abigail Merriwether on the occasion of their engagement. It shows, beyond question, not only that they were engaged to be married, but they had a date set in their hearts and minds at which time they were to be wed. But that date came and went. Where was Isaac Joppa when their intended date arrived? He was in the dank, stinking hold of a pirate ship, bound by irons and under the cruel tyranny of one of the most feared and hated men of the eighteenth century.

“Now I've told you that something has been forgotten. It is the testimony of Abigail Merriwether. We have it in the transcript from the Old Bailey trial. Mr. MacPherson may want you to forget about it…but I don't. So I'm going to read it to you. You'll have the opportunity to review it in your deliberations. But as you do…I'd like you to remember something very important.”

With that, Will retrieved the transcript copy from his table.

“We've heard it said that there is faith, and there is hope, and there is love. But the greatest of these is love. Here is why Isaac Joppa could never have willingly joined Teach's degenerate band of murderers, rapists, and
thieves. I believe that Isaac Joppa only had one intent behind his actions…to return to the arms of Abigail Merriwether. True enough, he had run from the grip of his father. And then he ran from the tyrannical brutality of Captain Zebulun Boughton. Finally he found himself fleeing from the bullets and cannon fire of the Battle of Ocracoke Inlet. But would he really ever have wanted to pursue a life of crime—and thereby run away from the steadfast love of Abigail Merriwether?”

Will then looked down at the Old Bailey trial transcript and began to read.

Sir Alexander Saxton, the prosecutor for the Crown, was building momentum in his cross-examination of Abigail Merriwether.

She had been standing in the dock for nearly an hour now, in her yellow satin dress with white ruffles. Yet, her expression was undisturbed by the mounting antagonism of her inquisitor.

“Miss Merriwether,” Mr. Saxton thundered, “you do concede, do you not, madam, that your engagement to the accused, Isaac Joppa, was against the express wishes of your father, Peter Merriwether…a prominent merchant and man of great respectability?”