Before entering, Ethan asked where his father wanted him to wait during the intervals when witnesses could not remain in the room. They agreed on a bench near the side corridor. The arrangement was modest, but it meant Harold would not have to search the building for a familiar face after answering questions about a day when familiarity had offered no protection.
Harold testified first about the contact. He wore a plain suit and a tie June bought because she disliked the pattern he chose himself. Ethan sat in the gallery, where his father could see him without turning far.
The prosecutor asked Harold to identify his wallet, the relevant documents, and the events in the recording. Then the defense asked about age, hearing, memory, medication, and the stress he described. The judge required questions to remain within legitimate issues and stopped assumptions presented as established medical findings.
Harold answered what he knew. He did not take every question as an insult, though some felt designed to borrow the deputy's old suggestion that certainty belonged to younger people.
“Did you receive your money back?” the lawyer asked.
“Yes. After my lawyer asked where it went.”
“So you suffered no permanent financial loss of that amount.”
“The roof was paid six days late. Other losses are documented. The money being returned doesn't change what I heard when I asked for it on the road.”
The recording supplied the denial again. The jury heard it in the context before and after it, not as a dramatic fragment repeated until it became a slogan.
Garner testified later with the arrangements affecting his own position disclosed. He admitted seeing the taking, failing to intervene, and telling Harold he was free to leave instead of answering the question about the cash.
The defense emphasized that cooperation might improve how authorities assessed his conduct. Garner agreed that could matter. He did not claim his decision to tell the truth came without self-interest.
“Then why should the jury believe you now?”
He looked toward the screen displaying the roadside image.
“Because what I say needs to be checked. It matches the parts that can be checked. Where I didn't hear something, I haven't pretended I did.”
The lawyer asked whether Cross said he would keep the money permanently. Garner said no. He described the pouch, the instructions about the narrative, and the false proposed statement Stroud later provided. The court limited material where necessary to keep the examination tied to the relevant issues.
The prosecution presented supporting records through the people qualified to explain them. Denise testified about when she received the cash. The examiner explained the camera's recording and retained sources, including their limits. Ward described the chronology without presenting every suspicion as a finding.
Ada brought the original estimate and completed invoice. She wore a clean work shirt and seemed mildly offended by the implication that a roofing job required an elaborate invented explanation.
“Did Mr. Mercer arrange payment in advance?”
“Yes.”
“Did the amount correspond to the work?”
“Yes.”
“Was he confused about the agreement?”
“No. He asked more questions than most customers. I wish more people did.”
Harold nearly smiled. The point was not that careful customers could never be mistreated. It was that the explanation Cross refused to inspect had been available before anybody wore a suit to court.
During a break, Garner passed Harold in the hallway with counsel nearby. He stopped at a distance and said nothing. Harold knew he wanted to speak. He was grateful the man finally understood wanting access did not entitle him to it.
Ethan joined his father beside a window overlooking the courthouse square.
“How are you doing?” he asked.
“I'd like a sandwich nobody considers evidence.”
“That's a specialized order.”
They ate outside, discussing a gutter repair that had nothing to do with the case until Harold noticed how carefully his son kept the conversation ordinary.
“You can ask about it,” he said.
“I know. You can ask not to talk about it too.”
Harold looked at the courthouse doors, then back at his son.
“After lunch,” he said.
For that hour, lunch remained lunch. It was a modest boundary and one he was learning to value.
Cross testified after conferring with his lawyer. He described an uncertain roadside contact, an elderly driver he believed needed assistance, and a temporary decision to secure cash until appropriate arrangements could be made. His uniform was absent. The confidence remained.