### **Chapter 12: The Testimony**
Harvard Law had trained its students to defend the system. Elle Hoods was preparing to put it on trial.
Her independent project had sent ripples through the school—professors debated her claims behind closed doors, students whispered about her arguments in passing, and the administration, though silent, had begun watching. She wasn't naive. Institutional change wasn't built on a single paper, but it was built on persistence. And Elle had plenty of that.
The professor had scheduled a review—a formal panel discussion, meant to challenge her findings and measure their academic rigor. Elle arrived early, her notes in hand, but she wasn't nervous. She had spent her life watching people get cross-examined without fairness, forced to justify their existence before they even had a chance to speak. This was nothing new.
Preston Montgomery III sat in the front row, arms crossed, waiting to see if she would falter. Other students filled the seats behind him, eager to witness what had become one of the most controversial presentations in recent memory.
The professor cleared his throat. "Miss Hoods, your paper challenges fundamental assumptions about our legal system. You argue that justice isn't failing—it's *functioning as designed*, prioritizing institutional preservation over fairness. Do you stand by this claim?"
Elle met his gaze evenly. "I do."
The professor leaned forward. "That's a bold assertion."
Elle smirked. "Only if you've never seen the law used as a weapon."
A few murmurs spread through the crowd. The professor sat back, steepling his fingers. "Explain."
Elle set her notes down. "The legal system doesn't collapse under its flaws. It survives because of them. When wrongful convictions happen, when bias plays into sentencing, when due process is ignored, the system doesn't stop working—it keeps moving. Because it was never designed to halt for fairness. It was designed to uphold order. *And order isn't justice.*"
Preston exhaled, shaking his head. "That's an ideological stance, not a legal argument."
Elle turned to him, sharp. "No, it's an *observed reality*. Look at the patterns. The same communities policed more aggressively, the same disparities in sentencing, the same cases where guilt is assumed before evidence is examined. That's not incidental—that's systemic."
The professor frowned. "Do you believe the system is beyond reform?"
Elle folded her arms. "Reform without reckoning is just adaptation. The system has to be held accountable, not adjusted to appear fairer."
Silence.
Then, unexpectedly, the professor nodded. "That's the kind of argument that forces uncomfortable conversations. And uncomfortable conversations are necessary."
Elle didn't thank him. Validation wasn't the goal. Change was.
Harvard Law had taught its students how to defend existing structures. Elle Hoods was teaching them what happened when those structures failed.
And today, they were finally listening.