Williams rose for cross-examination. He did not begin with the hose. Instead he asked Whitmore about the message he had sent to another officer before his shift. The court had admitted the communication after arguments about its relevance and context, and a printed copy lay beside the prosecutor's notes.
"Please read the message you sent at six forty-eight that morning," Williams said.
Whitmore looked down. "Patrolling Laurelhurst. Let's see what doesn't belong."
"What did you mean by that?"
"People committing crimes. People acting suspiciously."
"Had you received a report that someone at Dr. Laurent's address was committing a crime?"
"No, not that specific address."
"You told your partner that a Black woman at an expensive home didn't add up. Do you remember saying that?"
Whitmore swallowed. "I may have used those words."
"Your partner testified that you did. You saw the video in which he described your remarks to a supervisor immediately afterward. Are you saying he's mistaken?"
"No."
Williams gave the jury a moment. "And when Dr. Laurent told you the house was hers, what did you ask?"
"Whether she could prove it."
"After her neighbor said she'd lived there for five years?"
"Yes."
"Why wasn't the neighbor's information enough to end the encounter?"
Whitmore stared at the edge of the witness stand. "I thought they might know each other."
"They did know each other. They were neighbors. Why did that make the information less credible?"
Brennan objected that the question was argumentative. The judge instructed Williams to rephrase. Williams complied, asking Whitmore to identify any factual reason he had for disbelieving both women. Whitmore could not name one.
The prosecutor then moved to the garden hose. He played a short portion of the recording and paused it at the point where Simone stumbled. He asked Whitmore whether the video showed her foot catching the hose. Whitmore acknowledged it did. He asked whether she immediately apologized for the splash. Again, Whitmore answered yes.
"What danger did that small amount of water pose to you?" Williams asked.
"I was concerned she was becoming aggressive."
"She was stepping away with her hands visible. Your partner was telling you it was an accident. Where is the aggression in that recording?"
Whitmore was silent. The prosecutor waited, not to embarrass him for the cameras, but because a defendant who had chosen to testify was required to answer questions within the court's rules. Finally Whitmore said, "I was angry."
"Angry about what?"
"That she kept questioning me. That everyone was filming and making me look bad."
Williams stepped back. "So you used the hose because you were angry at being questioned?"
"I lost my temper."
"Did you believe she had a weapon?"
"No."
"Did you believe you needed the hose to protect yourself?"
"No."
"Was she a threat while sitting on the grass with her hands over her face?"
"No," Whitmore whispered.
Williams let the answer settle before moving to the messages recovered from the officer's account. The court had admitted selected communications because they bore on the charged state-of-mind elements. Whitmore had joked with colleagues about "cleaning up" neighborhoods and had used contemptuous language about residents he believed did not belong. Under questioning, he acknowledged that his assumptions about race and neighborhood status had influenced how he interpreted Simone's presence.