Free Innocence by David Hosp

based? It is my understanding that the evidence at trial included positive identifications, both through the eyewitness testimony of the victim and through fingerprint comparisons. What is it that magically gives you this confidence?”
    “Well, Your Honor, the fact that the DA’s office is resisting this motion, for one thing. After all, if Mr. Salazar is actually guilty, the evidence in question should only prove his guilt. Why, then, should the DA’s office oppose this motion so vehemently? In addition, Mr. Salazar has an alibi. At the time of the attack, Mr. Salazar, who was a medical doctor in his own country, was providing medical attention to a woman up the street from his residence. The witness who can confirm that alibi is now willing to come forward and testify. As a result, it is impossible that Mr. Salazar was the individual who attacked Officer Steele. The district attorney’s office is in possession of evidence that could affirmatively establish the guilt or innocence of our client. In the interests of justice, it’s hard to find a reason for this evidence to be withheld.”
    Cavanaugh considered this. “Mr. Jackson?”
    Albert Jackson stood up. “Yes, Your Honor. What Mr. Finn fails to recognize is that Mr. Salazar has already been given a fair trial and a fair opportunity to demonstrate his innocence. Our refusal to open the door to additional evidence at this time is hardly reflective of any fear that the wrong man is in jail. Indeed, Mr. Salazar’s guilt has already been definitively established by a jury of twelve. A central and necessary principle of our criminal justice system is the finality of a jury’s decision. If we abandon our reliance on that principle, the system would become paralyzed and collapse.”
    Cavanaugh sat upright in his chair, his back pain evident. He looked down at Finn. “I have to say, Mr. Finn, that having read the papers, I’m inclined to agree with the prosecution. I see nothing out of the ordinary about this case, and if I were to allow your client a second bite at the apple, how could I deny that same opportunity to every defendant to come into my courtroom with a similar request?”
    “First, Your Honor, this case isn’t the same as every other case. There is a witness who is willing to come forward now and corroborate Mr. Salazar’s alibi.”
    “Where was this witness fifteen years ago, when Mr. Salazar was on trial? I assume that the defendant was aware of the identity of his own alibi witness at that time, correct?”
    “Yes, Your Honor, but at the time the witness was afraid to come forward. She was in the country illegally then, and she was afraid of being deported. Since the trial, she has earned her citizenship, and she is no longer afraid to testify.”
    “Mr. Finn,” Cavanaugh said, shaking his head. “The same claim could probably be manufactured by any defendant currently behind bars. It still seems to me that I would be setting a precedent that would allow an opportunity for every person in jail who claims that DNA evidence could exonerate them.”
    “And what would be so bad about that?” Finn asked abruptly. He hadn’t planned to join the confrontation on this level, but the words just came out of his mouth, and he could feel the judge’s look harden at the challenge to his authority. Finn was tempted to back off, but he figured he had nothing to lose. “If innocent people are in jail, don’t we have a responsibility to identify them? We’re not asking the state to pay one dime for these tests—tests that were not even admissible in courts in Massachusetts at the time of Mr. Salazar’s conviction. DNA testing has been used to identify hundreds of wrongly convicted—innocent— people in the past few years. I see no reason why the state would resist the opportunity to make sure that every person in its custody is actually guilty, particularly when it comes at no cost to itself.”
    “Mr. Jackson?” Cavanaugh invited.
    “No cost to