Chapter 26 Part One - Twenty Three

The judge finally finished his speech, picked up the question sheet casually, and handed it to the chief juror who walked up to him.The jurors stood up one after another, happy to be able to leave the court, but as if shy, they didn't know where to put their hands, and walked into the conference room one by one.As soon as they went in and closed the door, a gendarme came to the door, drew his saber from its sheath, put it on his shoulder, and stood outside the door.The judges stood up and walked out.The defendants were also taken away. When a juror enters the conference room, the first thing he does is to take out his cigarettes as before.In the court just now, they sat in their respective seats, somewhat feeling that their situation was a bit awkward, and their behavior was a bit contrived.But as soon as I walked into the boardroom and started smoking, the feeling passed.Feeling relieved, you sat down separately in the conference room, and immediately started talking with great interest.

"The girl is not guilty, she was confused," said the kind merchant, "she should be punished leniently." "That's exactly what we're talking about," the lead juror said. "We can't act on personal impressions." "The President's summary was well done," said the colonel. "Huh, that's great! I almost fell asleep listening to it." "If Maslova hadn't been in collusion with them, they wouldn't have known about the money. That's the point," said the Jewish-faced clerk. "You mean, then, that she stole the money?" asked one of the jurors.

"I don't believe any of that," cried the good merchant, "that red-eyed swindler has done the whole thing." "They're all the same," said the colonel. "But she said she didn't set foot in that door." "You trust her too much. I'll never trust that slut in my life." "But you just don't trust her and you don't solve the problem," said the clerk. "She has the key." "So what in her hands?" retorted the merchant. "And what about the ring?" "Didn't she talk about it again and again," the merchant called again, "The buyer was irritable, and after drinking wine, she stabbed her fiercely. Later, she naturally hurt her again. He said: 'Here you are, don't cry.' That guy is said to be two feet twelve inches tall and weigh eight poods!"

-------- ① 1 pood is equal to 16.38 kilograms, and 8 poods are equivalent to 131 kilograms. "None of this matters," interrupted Pyotr Gerasimovitch, "the question is whether she planned and abetted it, or the two waiters?" "It can't be just those two waiters. She has the key." They talked like this for a while. "Excuse me, gentlemen," said the foreman, "let us sit down to the table and discuss. Please," he said, taking his chair. "Girls like that are badass," said the clerk.To prove that Maslova was the chief culprit, he related how a friend of his had had his pocket watch stolen by one of these girls on the boulevard.

The colonel took the opportunity to tell a more astonishing case of the theft of a silver samovar. "Gentlemen, please discuss the questions in order," said the foreman, tapping his pencil on the table. Everyone shut up.Issues to be discussed include: (1) Simon Petrov Karzinkin, a farmer in Borki Village, Krabivin County, aged 33.Did he commit the following crimes: On January 17, 188x, in a certain city, deliberately murdered the merchant Smelkoff, and conspired with others to put poison in the brandy, causing Smelkoff's death? , and stole from him about 2,500 rubles and a diamond ring?

(2) Petty citizen Yefemia Bochkova, aged forty-three, has she committed any of the crimes listed in the first question? (3) The petty citizen Ekaterina Mikhailovna Maslova, aged twenty-seven, has she committed any of the crimes listed in the first question? (4) If the defendant Yefemia Bochkova did not commit the crimes listed in the first question, did she commit the following crimes: Stealing 2,500 rubles in cash from a locked suitcase in the room of the merchant Smerikov, who was staying at the hotel, during service at the hotel, for which he opened the suitcase with the key he had brought with him?

The foreman read the first question. "Well, gentlemen?" Everyone quickly answered this question.It was unanimously said, "Yes, he committed a crime,"—that he was involved in murder.Only one elderly member of the labor union disagreed with the conviction of Karzinkin, and he absolved the accused of whatever the issue was. The chief juror, thinking that he did not understand the law, explained to him that Karzinkin and Bochkova were undoubtedly guilty in every respect, but he replied that he knew this too, but that it would be better to be lenient . “We are not saints ourselves,” he insisted.

As for the second question concerning Bouchkova, after a long discussion and explanations, it was agreed that "she did not commit a crime," because of the lack of conclusive evidence that she participated in the poisoning murder, which her lawyer especially emphasized . The businessman wanted to exonerate Maslova, but insisted that Bochkova was the culprit.Several jurors agreed with him, but the chief juror had to strictly follow the law and believed that there was no basis for saying that Bauchkova was an accomplice in the poisoning murder. After a long debate, the foreman's opinion prevailed.

As to the fourth question about Bouchkova, everyone replied: "Yes, she committed a crime," but added, at the request of members of the labor union: "But it will be lenient." A third question, concerning Maslova, has sparked a heated debate.The chief juror insisted that she was guilty of both poisoning and theft of money, the businessman disagreed with him, the colonel, clerks and labor union members supported the businessman, the rest wavered, but the opinion of the chief juror Gradually gain an advantage, mainly because the jurors are all tired, and they are willing to agree with the opinion that can be unified earlier, so that everyone can leave the courtroom and act freely.

Nekhludoff, from the court proceedings and from what he knew of Maslova, was convinced that she was innocent of both theft and poisoning.At first he believed that this would be the verdict, but then he saw that the merchant, out of love for Maslova's beauty, confessed it and defended her very poorly.At the same time, since the chief juror attacked him on this basis, mainly because everyone was tired, they all tended to convict Maslova. Nekhludoff wanted to refute, but he was afraid to speak for Maslova. , everyone will immediately discover his special relationship with her.But he felt that this matter could not be left alone, and he should stand up and refute.He blushed, then turned pale, and was about to speak, when Peter Gerasimovich, who had been silent all this time, apparently irritated by the presiding juror's self-important tone, suddenly retorted him, saying Exactly what Nekhludoff wanted to say.

"Excuse me," said he, "you say she stole the money, because she had the key. Didn't the two waiters use the skeleton key to open the trunk after she was gone?" "Yes, yes!" responded the merchant. "Besides, she couldn't have taken that money, because in her position she had nowhere to put it." "Yes, I said the same thing," said the businessman, backing his opinion. "Mostly, she went to the hotel to withdraw money, which made the two waiters have evil intentions. They took the opportunity to commit the crime, and afterwards pushed all the blame on her." Pyotr Gerasimovich spoke with great emotion.The presiding jury, too, became annoyed and insisted with particular obstinacy on the contrary, but Peter Gerasimovich had a good point, and most of them agreed with him that Maslova had no part in the theft of money and rings , the ring was given to her by a businessman.When it came to whether she had participated in the crime of poisoning, the businessman who zealously defended her said that she must be ruled not guilty of such a crime because she had no reason to poison him.The lead juror said she could not be found not guilty because she herself admitted that she had placed the powder. "She did it, but she thought it was opium," the merchant said. "Opium kills, too," said the colonel.He liked to divert the conversation off topic, so he took the opportunity to talk about his brother-in-law and daughter-in-law who committed suicide by taking opium once, and if there was not a doctor nearby who rescued her in time, she would have died.The colonel spoke so eloquently, so confidently, and with such dignity that no one dared to interrupt him.Only the clerk, influenced by the colonel's tendency to digress, decided to interrupt him so he could tell his own story. "Some people get used to it," he began, "and can take forty drops of opium at a time. I have a relative..." But the colonel would not let him interrupt him, and went on to tell the story of the consequences of opium on his brother-in-law and daughter-in-law. "Well, gentlemen, it's past four o'clock," said one of the jurors. "Then what, gentlemen," said the foreman, "we'll find her guilty of robbery, of robbery, of theft of property. Is that all right?" Pyotr Gerasimovich, pleased with his victory, agreed. "But it should be lenient," the businessman added. Everyone agrees, only one member of the labor union insists: "No, she is not guilty." "Doesn't that mean," explained the foreman, "that there was no intentional robbery, and that there was no theft of property. Then she would be innocent." "Let's do it that way, add a request for leniency, and it'll be as good as it gets," said the businessman cheerfully. Everyone was dizzy and tired from the debate, and no one thought of adding a sentence to the answer: guilty, but not intentional murder. Nekhludoff was too excited to notice this omission.The answers were thus recorded and sent to court. Rabelais writes about a jurist who, citing various legal clauses in his case, read twenty pages of a Latin code which he did not understand, and finally advised the judge to roll dice to see whether the number was odd or even.If it is an even number, the plaintiff is right; if it is an odd number, the defendant is right. -------- ① Rabelais (1490-1553) - French writer, humanist, good at satire, and author of novels. The same is true today.This decision was passed instead of that decision, not because everyone agreed with this decision, but because first, although the chairperson made such a long summary, he missed the usual sentence: "Yes, She was guilty, but she did not intend to kill"; secondly, the colonel's story about his sister-in-law was too long and boring; thirdly, Nekhludoff was too excited to notice the omission of "not intentionally murder" This saving clause, he thought that the "not intentional robbery" saving clause would be enough to dismiss the indictment; Fourth, Peter Gerasimovich was not in the room at the time, and he happened to be out when the chief juror reread the questions and answers. but mainly because we all felt tired and wanted to get away quickly, so we agreed on the decision to end sooner. The jurors rang the bell.The gendarme with his unsheathed saber put it back into its sheath and stepped aside.The judges took their seats.The jurors came out one by one. The foreman held the form solemnly.He went up to the President and handed him the form.After reading the form, the chief judge was obviously very surprised. He spread his hands and discussed with the other two judges.The President was surprised because the jurors raised the first saving clause: "not intended to robbery", but did not raise the second saving clause: "not intentional to kill".According to the jury's decision, it can only be concluded that Maslova did not steal, did not rob, but poisoned someone for no reason. "You see how absurd their answer is," said the president to the judge on the left, "so that she will be sentenced to hard labor, and she is not guilty." "Well, how is she not guilty?" said the stern judge. "She is not guilty. In my opinion, Article 818 can be invoked in this situation." (Article 818 stipulates that if the court finds that the verdict is improper, the jury's decision may be annulled.) "What do you think?" the President asked the genial judge. The kind judge did not answer immediately, but looked at the number of the official document in front of him, and calculated whether the number could be divided by three.He calculated, if it can be divided, he agrees.In the end, the number was indivisible, but he was kind-hearted and agreed with the chief judge. "I also think it should be done," he said. "And you?" the President asked the scowling judge. "You can't say anything," he replied emphatically. "There's a lot in the papers now about the jury always exonerating the criminal. What will they say if the judge does the same? I don't agree with anything." The President looked at his watch. "Unfortunately, but what can be done!" he said, handing the answer to the foreman to be read. All rise.The foreman switched feet, cleared his throat, and read the questions and answers.The court officials, including clerks, lawyers, and even prosecutors, all looked surprised. All three defendants sat there nonchalantly, apparently not understanding what was at stake in the answer.Everyone sat down again.The President asked the Deputy Public Prosecutor what sentence he thought the defendants should be sentenced to. This treatment of Maslova was a surprise success for the Deputy Prosecutor.He was very happy and attributed this success to his excellent eloquence.He looked up the code, got up and said: "I think that Simon Karzinkin should be punished according to Articles 1452 and 1453, and Yefimya Bochkova according to Article 1659. Article 1454 shall be used to punish Ekaterina Maslova.” These are the most severe punishments that the law can impose. "The trial is adjourned, and the judges are deliberating on the verdict," said the president, standing up. Everyone stood up after him, and walked out of the courtroom, or walked up and down the courtroom, with the relief of having done a good job. "Oh, man, we've done something wrong, it's a shame," Pyotr Gerasimovitch said, going up to Nekhludoff, who was addressing Nekhludoff at the same time. . "We are sending her to hard labor!" "What did you say?" exclaimed Nekhludoff, who for the moment ignored the teacher's informality. "No," he said. "We didn't say in the answer: 'She is guilty, but the murder was not intentional.' Just now the clerk told me: the deputy prosecutor sentenced her to fifteen years of hard labor." "Isn't that how we ruled?" said the foreman. Peter Gerasimovic argued that since she hadn't stolen the money, of course she couldn't have killed someone intentionally, which was a matter of course. "Didn't I just read the answer before I left the chamber?" said the presiding juror in defense. "There was no objection at the time." "I was just leaving the chamber," Peter Gerasimovic said. "Why didn't you pay attention?" "It never occurred to me," said Nekhludoff. "Hmph, you didn't think of that!" "It can still be remedied," said Nekhludoff. "Oh, no, it's all over now." Nekhludoff looked at the defendants.They, these doomed people, still sat dumbfounded between the railing and the soldiers.Maslova was smiling for some reason.In Nekhludoff's soul a vile feeling was at work.He had expected her to be acquitted and to remain in the city, and he felt uneasy about what to do with her.As far as he was concerned, it was difficult to treat her no matter what.And now, hard labor, going to Siberia, and that wiped out any possibility of any relationship with her: the bird that was wounded but not dead would no longer flop about in the game bag, and would no longer be reminded of it.