Monster: Tuesday, July 14th Summary & Analysis

In his notes, Steve recounts that O’Brien is worried about their defense; she says that Bobo’s testimony looks bad for Steve, and Briggs is going to try to attach King to Steve because Steve looks like a decent guy. When Steve asks O’Brien if they’re going to lose his case, she says no, but he doesn’t believe her. It all seems overwhelming to Steve, like the problem continually grows and swells. Steve realizes he’s just like all the other prisoners, lying to themselves that everything will turn out alright. He wonders if lying to themselves landed them in jail in the first place. Steve thinks about the life he is losing, about Jerry, and understands why the guards take the inmates’ shoelaces and belts. O’Brien advises Steve to make a list of everyone he loves and admires and who loves him back. He writes down Mr. Sawicki two times.

The screenplay resumes inside the courtroom. King’s cousin is on the stand. Briggs questions her, and she testifies that King was at her house on the afternoon of the murder, giving her a lamp he’d bought for her. However, when Petrocelli cross-examines her, King’s cousin admits that she no longer has the lamp, does not know how much it cost, and does not know where King would have gotten the money to pay for it, since he didn’t have a job.

Briggs brings another witness to testify that King is left-handed and Mr. Nesbitt was shot from an angle that suggests a right-handed shooter, but the questioning is brief and O’Brien tells Steve that it’s a weak argument. Steve recalls Mr. Sawicki telling his film students that if a director is using too many flourishes or extraneous details, it means he’s afraid of the story’s weakness.

In a separate meeting room, O’Brien counsels Steve that he needs to testify to present himself to the jury as a good, innocent kid. He also needs to break his association with King as much as possible, since that is Petrocelli’s strongest argument for Steve’s supposed guilt. O’Brien is confident that Briggs won’t let King testify, because King blatantly lied in his statement to the police when he was arrested, and he’s trying to look tough and surly, which already moves the jury against him. King’s cousin’s testimony won’t hold water either way.

O’Brien sits at the table across from Steve with a paper cup and explains that she is going to coach him by playing a game. She’ll ask questions like a prosecutor. If Steve gives a good answer, she’ll turn the cup facing up. If he gives a bad answer, she’ll turn the cup upside down until Steve figures out what was wrong with his answer. As she asks Steve practice questions about his association with King and when he last spoke to him, angling for vague answers, the scene fades away.

In his cell at night, Steve overhears two inmates talking about how they can’t tell the truth while they testify or they’ll be locked up longer. One of them says that truth doesn’t exist anymore, that “the prosecutor talks about looking for the truth when they really mean a way to stick you under the jail.”

The scene cuts back to the courtroom. Steve is on the witness stand while O’Brien questions him. O’Brien asks several questions about whether Steve has any connection at all to the crime, the drugstore, or if he was there on the day of the robbery. Steve states that he was not present or involved in any way, nor did he ever agree to be. O’Brien sits and Petrocelli takes her place. She begins questioning Steve about his relationship with King, and Steve responds that he only knows him because King hangs around the playground where the neighborhood kids play ball. He didn’t see him at any point in December. Steve admits that he knows Osvaldo, but denies that he knows Bobo.

Petrocelli tries to insinuate that Steve was at the drugstore on the day of the robbery, recalling Bobo and Cruz’s testimonies, but Steve continually denies it, stating that he was scouting locations for a film about his neighborhood every day of Christmas break. Multiple times, Petrocelli asks illegitimate leading questions, prompting rebuke from Briggs, O’Brien, and the judge who warns her to stop. Petrocelli ends her questioning, “satisfied.” Steve returns nervously to his seat. His parents nod encouragingly. O’Brien writes a note for him to “take deep breaths.”

O’Brien calls Mr. Sawicki to testify to Steve’s character. Mr. Sawicki describes Steve as an honest, upstanding young man whom he admires very much. Petrocelli cross-examines Mr. Sawicki and argues that since the teacher only sees Steve at school, he could not know how Steve acts at home in his own neighborhood. Mr. Sawicki disagrees, however, and states that Steve makes very honest films that show a deep sense of humanity and that look for the most positive elements of his neighborhood. The screenplay briefly cuts to a shot of Steve, lying in his cell bed, “soaked with sweat” and breathing hard.

Back in the courtroom, Briggs makes his closing argument for the defense of James King. Briggs argues that Petrocelli’s prosecution does not have a single witness to the actual murder and relies entirely on testimony from admitted criminals Bobo and Osvaldo, both of whom are obviously trying to minimize their own roles in the murder. Ms. Henry did see two men enter the store, it’s true, but did not immediately recognize King.

Briggs thus argues that King did not enter the store with Bobo; Osvaldo did. One of them shot Mr. Nesbitt. When he was arrested, Bobo needed someone to rat on to earn a lenient sentence for himself, so he picked King at random from his known associates. All evidence that Petrocelli produced is subject to reasonable doubt, and thus the jury cannot justifiably convict King of the murder. While Briggs speaks, the people in the courtroom look bored.

O’Brien then summarizes her defense of Steve Harmon. She argues that even the prosecution was only able to establish a minimal connection between Steve and the robbery, based entirely on unreliable testimonies and the fact that Steve had once seen Bobo Evans. If Steve did exit the drugstore on that day, he apparently gave no signal, and the most reliable witness testimony (Ms. Henry’s) confirms Steve’s own account that he was not in the drugstore at all, since she did not see him.

O’Brien argues that even Bobo’s testimony suggests that only he and King had any contact with each other after the murder, again removing Steve from the plot. Both Osvaldo and Bobo’s plea deals are dependent on other people being prosecuted, meaning they have a vested interest in framing Steve, and their testimonies are thus unreliable. Bobo is using and discarding Steve’s life just like he murdered Mr. Nesbitt and left him on the floor. Thus far, Steve is the only witness charged with a crime whose character seems legitimately defensible and admirable. In light of all these things, O’Brien believes that Steve’s guilt has not been credibly proven and the jury must judge him not guilty.

Petrocelli takes her turn for closing remarks, arguing that the defense is trying to focus the jury on the admittedly poor character of criminal witnesses rather than the fact that Mr. Nesbitt was murdered and deserves justice. Ms. Henry and José Delgado have no ulterior motives in testifying, and although Bobo and Osvaldo obviously do, their testimonies corroborate each other. Three witnesses testify that King entered the drugstore at the time of the robbery. Bobo testifies that Steve was the lookout.

Petrocelli argues that the only possible version of events that fits all available evidence is the state’s accusation, and King and Steve Harmon are thus both fully culpable for Mr. Nesbitt’s death. They each played their part and made their contribution. King is obviously closely associated with Bobo Evans, so there is little doubt as to his guilt. Steve Harmon can try to distance himself from the murder or rationalize it, but he made the “moral decision” to participate in a robbery with the hope of a payoff. Nobody can bring Mr. Nesbitt back, but the jury can bring his murderers to justice.

The jurors convene and speak with the judge, who states that if they believe either King or Steve were involved in the robbery that led to Mr. Nesbitt’s death, regardless of whether they themselves fired the gun, the jury must give a guilty verdict of felony murder. As the judge speaks, the camera cuts to various American symbols throughout the courtroom: the flag, a mural of George Washington, and so on.

Steve sits in a holding cell with King. Steve admits that he’s scared, but King seems unbothered, and states that “if the man wants you, he got you. Ain’t nothing to it.” A smirking guard tells Steve and King that they’ve started a betting pool on how much prison time they’ll get. The other guys are betting they get 25 years to life. The guard asks if Steve or King want to bet. Steve puts his head in his hands, but the guard asks again. The camera cuts to Steve in the jail’s cafeteria, trying to avoid looking at King. A fight breaks out near him. The camera cuts to Steve in his cell, and then to a group of inmates playing a friendly game of dominoes as if they weren’t in jail.