I Will Fear No Evil by Robert A. Heinlein
“Your Honor, I pray your help in bringing this witness to order.”
“I think he’s making a responsive answer to your question. Go on, Mr. Branca. They offered you money. For what?”
“Oh. Eunice got a boss, see? Mr. Smith. Johann Smith. So rich he karks in gold pot. But poor old muck is dying, see? Only the medicares don’ let him die. Pitiful. But he’s got this same funny blood, see? Like me, like Eunice. I tell ’em, sure, he can have Eunice’ body, she don’ need it no more—but not for money. So we rig a swindle—me and his fixer over there, Mr. Jake Salomon. He knows how I feel, he helps. ‘Eunice Evans Branca Memorial Fund for Free Rare Blood’—all paid to t’ Rare Blood Club. Ask Mr. Jake Salomon, he knows. I…don’…touch…one… God damn’ frimpin’ dime!” (“Jake—he won’t even look at me.” “Put your veil up, dear, and cry under it.”)
“Does Counsel for Petitioners have any more questions to ask this witness?”
“No, Your Honor. Counsel may inquire.”
“No cross-examination, Your Honor.”
“Does either counsel wish to question this witness at a later time? This is not a trial, and the Court intends to allow the widest latitude for inquiry even at the cost of permitting irrelevancies to creep into the record. Counsel?”
“Petitioners have no further use for this witness.”
“No questions now or later, Your Honor.”
“Very well. Court will reconvene at ten tomorrow morning. Bailiff is directed to provide this witness with transportation home or wherever he wishes to go, and to protect him from annoyance in so doing. Off the top, Evelyn, he’s been harried enough.”
“Judge? Can I say sump’n?”
“If you wish, Mr. Branca.”
“That karky fixer—not Mr. Salomon, other one. Gets dark every night. Some night he winds up in Bird’s Nest turf.”
“Order. Mr. Branca, you must not make threats in court.”
“Wasn’t no threat, Judge. Was prophesying. I wouldn’t hurt anybody. But Eunice had lots and lots and lots of friends.”
“Very well. You’re excused, Mr. Branca; you won’t have to come back. Clerk will take charge of exhibits. Bailiff will provide heel-and-toe guards. Recessed.”
“All rise!” “—greatest possible respect for the scholarly qualifications of my distinguished colleague, nevertheless the opinions he has expressed are the most arrant nonsense, as proved by that great scientist in his paper of 1976 from which I know quote: ‘The very concept of “personality” is but a shadow of a figment of a fantasy of a pre-scientific speculation. All life phenomena are fully explained by the laws of biochemistry as exemplified—’” “—even an existential phenomenology requires a teleological foundation and I so concede, but a close study of dialectical materialism proves to any but the hopelessly biased that—” “Who’s in charge here?” “An unborn child is not person; it is merely an inchoate protoplasmic structure with a potentiality to become from its environment—” “—mathematical laws of genetic inheritance account for every possible event misnamed—” “—in words familiar to the Court and to everyone: ‘Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.’”
“—shocked to discover that the learned judge presiding over this trial is in fact a fraternity brother of Johann S. B. Smith. This clandestine relationship may be verified in records open to the public and I ask that this Court today, and any later courts seeing this record, take judicial notice, and I demand that opposing Counsel stipulate the fact.”
“Stipulated.” (“Jake, how did they find out?” “We leaked it. Through Alec, last night. Time to get it into the record, rather than in an appeal.”)
“Aha! This damning fact having been stipulated, Petitioners are now forced to demand that the Judge presiding disqualify himself and declare this a mistrial.” (“Jake, seems to me they’ve got us on the hip. Much as I like Mac and Alec, I have to admit that this has the flavor of finding a strawberry mark on a missing heir.” “No, my dear. In the course of a long life a prominent man acquires direct linkage to every other prominent man. If it hadn’t turned out that you and Mac were in the same fraternity, it would have been some other link as close or closer. How many members of the Supreme Court do you know?” “Uh… I think it’s five.” “There’s your answer. At the top of the pyramid everybody knows everybody else.”) (And sleeps with them.) (Shut up, Eunice!)
“Counsel, I find this interesting. First let me set you straight on a point of law. Twice you have used the word ‘trial’ and now you speak of a ‘mistrial.’ This is, as you know, not a trial, it is not even an adversary situation: it is merely an inquiry for the purpose of determining the identity of the young woman there who calls herself ‘Miss Smith.’ She is charged with no crime, no civil suit against her is before this court; it is simply that her claimed identity has been challenged by petitioners who assert an interest. So this court is assisting in a friendly investigation—helping like a good neighbor in attempting to straighten out a mixup. Not a trial.”
“I stand corrected, Your Honor.”
“Please be careful in your use of technical language. If there is no trial, there can be no mistrial. Do you agree?”
“Perhaps I should use other language, Your Honor. Petitioners feel that, under these disclosed circumstances, you are not the judge who should preside over this, uh, friendly investigation.”
“That is possible. But the matter has reached me in the course of due process and it will continue to remain before me unless compelling reasons are shown why I should step aside. Again on the matter of language, you used the word ‘clandestine.’ The Court will not at this moment consider whether or not Counsel’s choice of this word implies contempt—”
“Your Honor, I assure you—”
“Order. I am speaking. Nor will you discuss that aspect at this time. We will now consider only the meaning of this word. ‘Clandestine’ means ‘hidden, secret, concealed’ with a flavor or connotation of surreptitious, or underhanded, or illicit. Tell me—this alleged relationship: Could it be verified in ‘Who’s Who’?”
“Oh, certainly, Your Honor! That’s where I found it.”
“I know that my own fraternity is noted there; I assume that if appropriate it would be listed in the case of Johann Sebastian Bach Smith. Since you tell me that you have checked it, the Court takes judicial notice for whatever it is worth and requires no further substantiation…other than to comment that we could hardly have been members of the same chapter at the same time since we differ by almost half a century in age. Did your investigations show that Johann Smith and I were jointly members of other organizations? For example Johann Smith was a founding member of the Gibraltar Club—and I am a member, and Miss Smith’s counsel, Mr. Salomon, is a member…and you are a member. In what other organizations do I share membership with Johann Smith? Now or in the past.”
“Uh… Petitioners have not investigated.”
“Oh, come now, I feel sure that you could turn up others. The Red Cross, for example. Probably the Chamber of Commerce at some time. I seem to recall that when I was a Scout Commissioner Johann Smith was one also. Possibly we’re both in other fraternal bodies. Almost certainly we have served as trustees, or such, for the same charitable or service groups, either simultaneously or successively. I note that you are a Shriner, so am I. Care to comment on the fact?”
“No comment, Your Honor.”
“But you and I almost certainly share several fraternal bonds. The Court takes notice of the wry fact that, since lawyers are not permitted to advertise, as a class they tend to join more organizations—fraternal, social, service, and religious—then do laymen as a class. Since you choose not to comment on the ones that you and I share in common, the Court will on its own motion investigate and place the results in the record. Now as to my alleged obligation to disqualify myself, do you wish to clarify your reasoning? Think it over while we take a recess, as your answer will go into the record. Ten minutes.”
“Order. Counsel for the
Petitioners? You have had time to think.”
“Petitioners move that all remarks concerning fraternal associations and like matters be struck from the record.”
“Motion denied. Nothing will be struck from this record. Come now, Counselor, you must have had some theory. State it.”
“Your Honor, at the time I raised the point it seemed important. I now no longer think so.”
“But you must have had a theory or you would not have raised it. Please speak freely, I want to know.”
“Well…if Your Honor will indulge me, the disclosed fact seemed to admit of the possibility of prejudice on the part of the Court. No contempt is intended.”
“And the Court will assume that none exists. But your answer is less than complete. Prejudice in favor of whom? The Petitioners? Because of my fraternal relationship with their grandparent?”
“What? Oh, no, Your Honor—prejudice in favor of, uh, of Miss—the challenged party.”
“You are stipulating that she is indeed Johann Sebastian Bach Smith?” (“My God, Jake, Mac’s got him biting his own tail.” “Yes. Who has got whom on whose hip?”)
“No, no Your Honor, we are not stipulating that. That is the very matter we are challenging.”
“But Counsel cannot have it both ways. If this young woman is not Johann Sebastian Bach Smith—as Petitioners allege—then she is not of my college fraternity. Conversely, under your own theory, she is Johann Sebastian Bach Smith. Which way will you have it?”
“I’m afraid I have been guilty of faulty reasoning. I pray the Court’s indulgence.”
“We all reason faultily at times. Are you quite finished? Shall we go on with examination of witnesses?”
“Quite finished, Your Honor.”
“But, Dr. Boyle, do you know that you removed the brain from this body—this cadaver, and transplanted it into the body of that woman?”
“Don’t be an ass, old chap. You heard my answer.”
“Your Honor, Petitioners feel that this is proper cross-examination and ask for the Court’s assistance.”
“The Court orders the witness to answer the questions as stated.”
“Judge, you don’t scare me, y’ know. I am here as a voluntary witness—and I am not and never was a citizen of your quaint country. I am now a citizen of China. Your State Department promised our Foreign Affairs Minister that I would have full immunity during my entire stay if only I would appear. So don’t bother to throw your weight around; it won’t go. Care to see my passport? Diplomatic immunity.”
“Dr. Boyle, this court is aware of your immunity. However, you have been induced to come here—at considerable expense I would assume and clearly at some inconvenience to you—to give evidence that only you can give. The Court requests you to answer all questions put to you, as fully, explicitly, and clearly as possible, in terms a layman can comprehend, even if it means repeating yourself. We want to find out exactly what you did and what you know of your own knowledge, which might directly or indirectly assist this court in determining the identity of this woman.”
“Oh, certainly, my dear fellow—put that way. Well, let’s go back and run it through again, from A to Zed. A year ago, more or less, I was approached by that old bugger over there—sorry, I mean ‘barrister’—Mr. Jacob Salomon—to do what the Sunday sheets call a ‘brain transplant.’ I accepted the commission. After this and that—you can get the trivia from him—I did it. Moved a brain and some ancillary parts from one human skull to another. That brain was alive in its new digs when I left.
“Now as to whom. The brain donor was a very elderly male, the body donor was a young mature female. And that is about the size of it—they are covered, y’ know, sterile sheeting and such, before the surgeon in charge comes in. Prepped. I can add only these hints: The male was in bad shape, kept alive by major supportive means. The female was in worse shape, she was dead—massive trauma to skull and cortex about here—head bashed in, I mean to say, and the yolk spattered. Dead as Queen Anne save that her body had been kept alive by extreme support measures.
“Now that unsightly hunk of pickled meat over there has had its brain et cetera removed in a fashion consistent with my own—unique—surgical techniques; I doubt if there is another surgeon alive who can do it my way. I have examined that cadaver carefully; I conclude that it is my work—and, by elimination, I conclude that it must be the body Salomon hired me to carve on; there is no conflicting evidence and the cadaver is not from any other case of mine.
“Identifying the young female is another matter. If her head were shaved I might look for scar tissue. If her skull were X-rayed I might look for prosthesis; teflon vitae does not throw the same shadow on a plate as does natural bone. But such tests would be only indicative; scar tissue is easily come by, and other trephining could produce similar X-ray shadow without disturbing the central nervous system.”
“Dr. Boyle, let us stipulate momentarily that you removed a living brain from exhibit JJ, the cadaver—”
“‘Stipulate?’ I did do so, you heard me say so.”
“I am not contradicting you, I am simply using appropriate language. Very well, you have so testified and you have also testified that you transplanted that brain into a young female body. Look about and see if you can identify that female body.”
“Oh, you’re being an ass again. I am neither a witch doctor nor a beauty contest judge; I am a surgeon. No, thank you. If that young woman—that composite human, female body, male brain—survived and is alive today—a point on which I have no opinion of my own knowledge and I assure you that I have had strong reason to acquaint myself both with relevant forensic medicine and medical jurisprudence; you are not about to trip me into being the ass you are—I would not today be able to single her out with certainty from ten thousand other young women of approximately the same size, weight, build, skin shade, and such. Counsel, have you ever seen a human body hooked up for extreme life support and prepared for such surgery? I’m sure you have not or you would not ask such silly questions. But I assure you that you would not recognize your own wife under such circumstances. If you want me to perjure myself, you’ve come to the wrong shop.”
“Your Honor, Petitioners seem unable to get a responsive answer on this key point.”
“The Court finds it responsive. Witness states that he can and does identify the male body but is unable to identify the female body. Doctor, I confess that I am puzzled on one point—perhaps through not being a medical man myself; nevertheless I am puzzled. Are we to understand that you would perform such an operation without being certain of the identity of the bodies?”
“Judge, I’ve never been one to fret about trivia. Mr. Salomon assured me, in legalistic language, that ‘the fix was on’ if I have your American idiom correct. His assurances meant to me that the paper work was done, the legal requirements met, et cetera, and that I was free to operate. I believed him and did so. Was I mistaken? Should I expect an attempt to extradite me after I return home? I think it would be difficult; I have at last found a country where my work is respected.”
“I am not aware that anyone has any intention of trying to extradite you. I was curious, that’s all. What Counsel was getting at is this: There is present in this room a woman who claims to be that composite from your surgery. You can’t point her out?”
“Oh, certainly I can. Though not as a sworn witness. It’s that young lady seated by Jake Salomon. How are you, my dear? Felling chipper?”
“Very much so, Doctor.”
“Sorry if I’ve disappointed you. Oh, I could make positive identification…by sawing off the top of your skull, then digging out your brain and looking for certain indications. But—heh heh!—you would not be much use to yourself afterwards. I prefer seeing you alive, a monument to my skill.”
“I prefer it, too, Doctor—and truly, I’m not disappointed. I’m eternally grateful to you.”
“Your Honor, this is hardly proper!”
“Counsel, I will be the j
udge of that. Under these most unusual circumstances I will permit a few human amenities in court.”
“Miss Smith, I’d like to examine you before I go home. For my journal, you know.”
“Certainly, Doctor! Anything—short of sawing off my skull.”
“Oh, just chest-thumping and such. The usual rituals. Shall we say tomorrow morning, ten o’clockish?”
“My car will be waiting for you at nine thirty, Doctor. Or earlier, if you will do me the honor of having breakfast with me.”
“The Court finds it necessary to interrupt. I’m sorry to say that both of you will be here at ten o’clock. The hour of recessing is almost on us and—”
“No, Judge.”
“What, Dr. Boyle?”
“I said, ‘No.’ I will not be here tomorrow morning. I speak this evening at twenty o’clock at a dinner of one of your chop-’em-up societies. The American College of Surgeons. Until shortly before that time I am at your disposal. I suppose you can require the presence of Miss Smith tomorrow morning, but not mine. I’m off to merry old China as quickly as possible. No shortage of opportunities for research there—you would be amazed what condemned prisoners will agree to. So I shan’t waste another day on silly-ass questions. But I am willing to tolerate them now.”
“Mmm—I’m afraid that the Court must concede that this is a case of Mahomet and the Mountain. Very well, we will not recess at the usual hour.”
“Witness will stand down. Do Petitioners offer more witnesses?”
“No, Your Honor.”
“Counsel?”
“Miss Johann Smith offers no further evidence.”
“Mr. Salomon, is it your intention to present an argument or summary?”
“No, Your Honor. The facts speak for themselves.”
“Petitioners?”
“Your Honor, is it your intention to bring this to a terminus today?”
“That’s what I am trying to find out. We’ve been at this for many weary days and I find myself in sympathy with Dr. Boyle’s attitude: Let’s sweep up the mess and go home. Both sides agree that there are no more witnesses, no more questions, no more exhibits. Counsel for Miss Smith states that he will not offer an argument. If Petitioners’ counsel wishes to argue, he may do so—in which case Miss Smith, in person or through counsel or both, is privileged to rebut. What I had in mind, Counsel, was a recess…then, if you have your thoughts in order, you can say what you wish. If you can’t, we can let it go over till tomorrow morning. You may at that time argue for a postponement—but I warn you that a lengthy postponement will not be tolerated; the Court has become impatient with delaying tactics and red herrings, not to mention language and attitudes flavored with contempt. What is your wish?”
“I think he’s making a responsive answer to your question. Go on, Mr. Branca. They offered you money. For what?”
“Oh. Eunice got a boss, see? Mr. Smith. Johann Smith. So rich he karks in gold pot. But poor old muck is dying, see? Only the medicares don’ let him die. Pitiful. But he’s got this same funny blood, see? Like me, like Eunice. I tell ’em, sure, he can have Eunice’ body, she don’ need it no more—but not for money. So we rig a swindle—me and his fixer over there, Mr. Jake Salomon. He knows how I feel, he helps. ‘Eunice Evans Branca Memorial Fund for Free Rare Blood’—all paid to t’ Rare Blood Club. Ask Mr. Jake Salomon, he knows. I…don’…touch…one… God damn’ frimpin’ dime!” (“Jake—he won’t even look at me.” “Put your veil up, dear, and cry under it.”)
“Does Counsel for Petitioners have any more questions to ask this witness?”
“No, Your Honor. Counsel may inquire.”
“No cross-examination, Your Honor.”
“Does either counsel wish to question this witness at a later time? This is not a trial, and the Court intends to allow the widest latitude for inquiry even at the cost of permitting irrelevancies to creep into the record. Counsel?”
“Petitioners have no further use for this witness.”
“No questions now or later, Your Honor.”
“Very well. Court will reconvene at ten tomorrow morning. Bailiff is directed to provide this witness with transportation home or wherever he wishes to go, and to protect him from annoyance in so doing. Off the top, Evelyn, he’s been harried enough.”
“Judge? Can I say sump’n?”
“If you wish, Mr. Branca.”
“That karky fixer—not Mr. Salomon, other one. Gets dark every night. Some night he winds up in Bird’s Nest turf.”
“Order. Mr. Branca, you must not make threats in court.”
“Wasn’t no threat, Judge. Was prophesying. I wouldn’t hurt anybody. But Eunice had lots and lots and lots of friends.”
“Very well. You’re excused, Mr. Branca; you won’t have to come back. Clerk will take charge of exhibits. Bailiff will provide heel-and-toe guards. Recessed.”
“All rise!” “—greatest possible respect for the scholarly qualifications of my distinguished colleague, nevertheless the opinions he has expressed are the most arrant nonsense, as proved by that great scientist in his paper of 1976 from which I know quote: ‘The very concept of “personality” is but a shadow of a figment of a fantasy of a pre-scientific speculation. All life phenomena are fully explained by the laws of biochemistry as exemplified—’” “—even an existential phenomenology requires a teleological foundation and I so concede, but a close study of dialectical materialism proves to any but the hopelessly biased that—” “Who’s in charge here?” “An unborn child is not person; it is merely an inchoate protoplasmic structure with a potentiality to become from its environment—” “—mathematical laws of genetic inheritance account for every possible event misnamed—” “—in words familiar to the Court and to everyone: ‘Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.’”
“—shocked to discover that the learned judge presiding over this trial is in fact a fraternity brother of Johann S. B. Smith. This clandestine relationship may be verified in records open to the public and I ask that this Court today, and any later courts seeing this record, take judicial notice, and I demand that opposing Counsel stipulate the fact.”
“Stipulated.” (“Jake, how did they find out?” “We leaked it. Through Alec, last night. Time to get it into the record, rather than in an appeal.”)
“Aha! This damning fact having been stipulated, Petitioners are now forced to demand that the Judge presiding disqualify himself and declare this a mistrial.” (“Jake, seems to me they’ve got us on the hip. Much as I like Mac and Alec, I have to admit that this has the flavor of finding a strawberry mark on a missing heir.” “No, my dear. In the course of a long life a prominent man acquires direct linkage to every other prominent man. If it hadn’t turned out that you and Mac were in the same fraternity, it would have been some other link as close or closer. How many members of the Supreme Court do you know?” “Uh… I think it’s five.” “There’s your answer. At the top of the pyramid everybody knows everybody else.”) (And sleeps with them.) (Shut up, Eunice!)
“Counsel, I find this interesting. First let me set you straight on a point of law. Twice you have used the word ‘trial’ and now you speak of a ‘mistrial.’ This is, as you know, not a trial, it is not even an adversary situation: it is merely an inquiry for the purpose of determining the identity of the young woman there who calls herself ‘Miss Smith.’ She is charged with no crime, no civil suit against her is before this court; it is simply that her claimed identity has been challenged by petitioners who assert an interest. So this court is assisting in a friendly investigation—helping like a good neighbor in attempting to straighten out a mixup. Not a trial.”
“I stand corrected, Your Honor.”
“Please be careful in your use of technical language. If there is no trial, there can be no mistrial. Do you agree?”
“Perhaps I should use other language, Your Honor. Petitioners feel that, under these disclosed circumstances, you are not the judge who should preside over this, uh, friendly investigation.”
“That is possible. But the matter has reached me in the course of due process and it will continue to remain before me unless compelling reasons are shown why I should step aside. Again on the matter of language, you used the word ‘clandestine.’ The Court will not at this moment consider whether or not Counsel’s choice of this word implies contempt—”
“Your Honor, I assure you—”
“Order. I am speaking. Nor will you discuss that aspect at this time. We will now consider only the meaning of this word. ‘Clandestine’ means ‘hidden, secret, concealed’ with a flavor or connotation of surreptitious, or underhanded, or illicit. Tell me—this alleged relationship: Could it be verified in ‘Who’s Who’?”
“Oh, certainly, Your Honor! That’s where I found it.”
“I know that my own fraternity is noted there; I assume that if appropriate it would be listed in the case of Johann Sebastian Bach Smith. Since you tell me that you have checked it, the Court takes judicial notice for whatever it is worth and requires no further substantiation…other than to comment that we could hardly have been members of the same chapter at the same time since we differ by almost half a century in age. Did your investigations show that Johann Smith and I were jointly members of other organizations? For example Johann Smith was a founding member of the Gibraltar Club—and I am a member, and Miss Smith’s counsel, Mr. Salomon, is a member…and you are a member. In what other organizations do I share membership with Johann Smith? Now or in the past.”
“Uh… Petitioners have not investigated.”
“Oh, come now, I feel sure that you could turn up others. The Red Cross, for example. Probably the Chamber of Commerce at some time. I seem to recall that when I was a Scout Commissioner Johann Smith was one also. Possibly we’re both in other fraternal bodies. Almost certainly we have served as trustees, or such, for the same charitable or service groups, either simultaneously or successively. I note that you are a Shriner, so am I. Care to comment on the fact?”
“No comment, Your Honor.”
“But you and I almost certainly share several fraternal bonds. The Court takes notice of the wry fact that, since lawyers are not permitted to advertise, as a class they tend to join more organizations—fraternal, social, service, and religious—then do laymen as a class. Since you choose not to comment on the ones that you and I share in common, the Court will on its own motion investigate and place the results in the record. Now as to my alleged obligation to disqualify myself, do you wish to clarify your reasoning? Think it over while we take a recess, as your answer will go into the record. Ten minutes.”
“Order. Counsel for the
“Petitioners move that all remarks concerning fraternal associations and like matters be struck from the record.”
“Motion denied. Nothing will be struck from this record. Come now, Counselor, you must have had some theory. State it.”
“Your Honor, at the time I raised the point it seemed important. I now no longer think so.”
“But you must have had a theory or you would not have raised it. Please speak freely, I want to know.”
“Well…if Your Honor will indulge me, the disclosed fact seemed to admit of the possibility of prejudice on the part of the Court. No contempt is intended.”
“And the Court will assume that none exists. But your answer is less than complete. Prejudice in favor of whom? The Petitioners? Because of my fraternal relationship with their grandparent?”
“What? Oh, no, Your Honor—prejudice in favor of, uh, of Miss—the challenged party.”
“You are stipulating that she is indeed Johann Sebastian Bach Smith?” (“My God, Jake, Mac’s got him biting his own tail.” “Yes. Who has got whom on whose hip?”)
“No, no Your Honor, we are not stipulating that. That is the very matter we are challenging.”
“But Counsel cannot have it both ways. If this young woman is not Johann Sebastian Bach Smith—as Petitioners allege—then she is not of my college fraternity. Conversely, under your own theory, she is Johann Sebastian Bach Smith. Which way will you have it?”
“I’m afraid I have been guilty of faulty reasoning. I pray the Court’s indulgence.”
“We all reason faultily at times. Are you quite finished? Shall we go on with examination of witnesses?”
“Quite finished, Your Honor.”
“But, Dr. Boyle, do you know that you removed the brain from this body—this cadaver, and transplanted it into the body of that woman?”
“Don’t be an ass, old chap. You heard my answer.”
“Your Honor, Petitioners feel that this is proper cross-examination and ask for the Court’s assistance.”
“The Court orders the witness to answer the questions as stated.”
“Judge, you don’t scare me, y’ know. I am here as a voluntary witness—and I am not and never was a citizen of your quaint country. I am now a citizen of China. Your State Department promised our Foreign Affairs Minister that I would have full immunity during my entire stay if only I would appear. So don’t bother to throw your weight around; it won’t go. Care to see my passport? Diplomatic immunity.”
“Dr. Boyle, this court is aware of your immunity. However, you have been induced to come here—at considerable expense I would assume and clearly at some inconvenience to you—to give evidence that only you can give. The Court requests you to answer all questions put to you, as fully, explicitly, and clearly as possible, in terms a layman can comprehend, even if it means repeating yourself. We want to find out exactly what you did and what you know of your own knowledge, which might directly or indirectly assist this court in determining the identity of this woman.”
“Oh, certainly, my dear fellow—put that way. Well, let’s go back and run it through again, from A to Zed. A year ago, more or less, I was approached by that old bugger over there—sorry, I mean ‘barrister’—Mr. Jacob Salomon—to do what the Sunday sheets call a ‘brain transplant.’ I accepted the commission. After this and that—you can get the trivia from him—I did it. Moved a brain and some ancillary parts from one human skull to another. That brain was alive in its new digs when I left.
“Now as to whom. The brain donor was a very elderly male, the body donor was a young mature female. And that is about the size of it—they are covered, y’ know, sterile sheeting and such, before the surgeon in charge comes in. Prepped. I can add only these hints: The male was in bad shape, kept alive by major supportive means. The female was in worse shape, she was dead—massive trauma to skull and cortex about here—head bashed in, I mean to say, and the yolk spattered. Dead as Queen Anne save that her body had been kept alive by extreme support measures.
“Now that unsightly hunk of pickled meat over there has had its brain et cetera removed in a fashion consistent with my own—unique—surgical techniques; I doubt if there is another surgeon alive who can do it my way. I have examined that cadaver carefully; I conclude that it is my work—and, by elimination, I conclude that it must be the body Salomon hired me to carve on; there is no conflicting evidence and the cadaver is not from any other case of mine.
“Identifying the young female is another matter. If her head were shaved I might look for scar tissue. If her skull were X-rayed I might look for prosthesis; teflon vitae does not throw the same shadow on a plate as does natural bone. But such tests would be only indicative; scar tissue is easily come by, and other trephining could produce similar X-ray shadow without disturbing the central nervous system.”
“Dr. Boyle, let us stipulate momentarily that you removed a living brain from exhibit JJ, the cadaver—”
“‘Stipulate?’ I did do so, you heard me say so.”
“I am not contradicting you, I am simply using appropriate language. Very well, you have so testified and you have also testified that you transplanted that brain into a young female body. Look about and see if you can identify that female body.”
“Oh, you’re being an ass again. I am neither a witch doctor nor a beauty contest judge; I am a surgeon. No, thank you. If that young woman—that composite human, female body, male brain—survived and is alive today—a point on which I have no opinion of my own knowledge and I assure you that I have had strong reason to acquaint myself both with relevant forensic medicine and medical jurisprudence; you are not about to trip me into being the ass you are—I would not today be able to single her out with certainty from ten thousand other young women of approximately the same size, weight, build, skin shade, and such. Counsel, have you ever seen a human body hooked up for extreme life support and prepared for such surgery? I’m sure you have not or you would not ask such silly questions. But I assure you that you would not recognize your own wife under such circumstances. If you want me to perjure myself, you’ve come to the wrong shop.”
“Your Honor, Petitioners seem unable to get a responsive answer on this key point.”
“The Court finds it responsive. Witness states that he can and does identify the male body but is unable to identify the female body. Doctor, I confess that I am puzzled on one point—perhaps through not being a medical man myself; nevertheless I am puzzled. Are we to understand that you would perform such an operation without being certain of the identity of the bodies?”
“Judge, I’ve never been one to fret about trivia. Mr. Salomon assured me, in legalistic language, that ‘the fix was on’ if I have your American idiom correct. His assurances meant to me that the paper work was done, the legal requirements met, et cetera, and that I was free to operate. I believed him and did so. Was I mistaken? Should I expect an attempt to extradite me after I return home? I think it would be difficult; I have at last found a country where my work is respected.”
“I am not aware that anyone has any intention of trying to extradite you. I was curious, that’s all. What Counsel was getting at is this: There is present in this room a woman who claims to be that composite from your surgery. You can’t point her out?”
“Oh, certainly I can. Though not as a sworn witness. It’s that young lady seated by Jake Salomon. How are you, my dear? Felling chipper?”
“Very much so, Doctor.”
“Sorry if I’ve disappointed you. Oh, I could make positive identification…by sawing off the top of your skull, then digging out your brain and looking for certain indications. But—heh heh!—you would not be much use to yourself afterwards. I prefer seeing you alive, a monument to my skill.”
“I prefer it, too, Doctor—and truly, I’m not disappointed. I’m eternally grateful to you.”
“Your Honor, this is hardly proper!”
“Counsel, I will be the j
“Miss Smith, I’d like to examine you before I go home. For my journal, you know.”
“Certainly, Doctor! Anything—short of sawing off my skull.”
“Oh, just chest-thumping and such. The usual rituals. Shall we say tomorrow morning, ten o’clockish?”
“My car will be waiting for you at nine thirty, Doctor. Or earlier, if you will do me the honor of having breakfast with me.”
“The Court finds it necessary to interrupt. I’m sorry to say that both of you will be here at ten o’clock. The hour of recessing is almost on us and—”
“No, Judge.”
“What, Dr. Boyle?”
“I said, ‘No.’ I will not be here tomorrow morning. I speak this evening at twenty o’clock at a dinner of one of your chop-’em-up societies. The American College of Surgeons. Until shortly before that time I am at your disposal. I suppose you can require the presence of Miss Smith tomorrow morning, but not mine. I’m off to merry old China as quickly as possible. No shortage of opportunities for research there—you would be amazed what condemned prisoners will agree to. So I shan’t waste another day on silly-ass questions. But I am willing to tolerate them now.”
“Mmm—I’m afraid that the Court must concede that this is a case of Mahomet and the Mountain. Very well, we will not recess at the usual hour.”
“Witness will stand down. Do Petitioners offer more witnesses?”
“No, Your Honor.”
“Counsel?”
“Miss Johann Smith offers no further evidence.”
“Mr. Salomon, is it your intention to present an argument or summary?”
“No, Your Honor. The facts speak for themselves.”
“Petitioners?”
“Your Honor, is it your intention to bring this to a terminus today?”
“That’s what I am trying to find out. We’ve been at this for many weary days and I find myself in sympathy with Dr. Boyle’s attitude: Let’s sweep up the mess and go home. Both sides agree that there are no more witnesses, no more questions, no more exhibits. Counsel for Miss Smith states that he will not offer an argument. If Petitioners’ counsel wishes to argue, he may do so—in which case Miss Smith, in person or through counsel or both, is privileged to rebut. What I had in mind, Counsel, was a recess…then, if you have your thoughts in order, you can say what you wish. If you can’t, we can let it go over till tomorrow morning. You may at that time argue for a postponement—but I warn you that a lengthy postponement will not be tolerated; the Court has become impatient with delaying tactics and red herrings, not to mention language and attitudes flavored with contempt. What is your wish?”