Red herring

“Red herring” names a misleading lead, but its two uses here make the phrase itself a contested piece of evidence. In court, Nico Delia Guardia invokes it to defend Tommy Molto’s inaction; later, Rusty Sabich admits that pursuing Molto may serve as a diversion. The repetition binds public rhetoric to private uncertainty, while Sandy Stern’s reply—“And scapegoats.”—points toward the human cost of assigning blame.

The Phrase in Court

During Sandy Stern’s cross-examination of Raymond Horgan, the questioning turns to what investigation Molto conducted into the allegations in a file. The answer is that the witness does not know. Nico abruptly rises, visibly angry, and declares that Molto took no action because he would not pursue Rusty’s “red herrings.” The phrase recasts the allegations not as leads deserving inquiry but as distractions planted by Rusty.

Nico’s intervention would ordinarily be improper before the jury. Yet the exchange follows a hallway warning from Larren Lyttle that seems to invite just such a response. The narration suggests that Nico and Molto may have discussed the tactic on their return from the corridor, with Nico choosing to make a spirited public defense of Molto. Stern does not object. Instead, he turns to Molto and adds, “And scapegoats.” Those words are his final ones on Raymond’s cross-examination, leaving the defense of Molto shadowed by another possibility: that someone is being made to bear blame rather than have the allegations pursued.

A Private Use of the Same Image

Later, near a rain-darkened bus terminal at midnight, Rusty tells Dan Lipranzer that he wants to find something, describing this as the most honest account of his purpose. When Lipranzer asks whether he means Molto, Rusty agrees. He says he wants to use the matter involving Molto as a diversion—as Nico had put it, a red herring.

The confession complicates Rusty’s search. The investigation is not presented as a straightforward pursuit of a settled theory: Rusty admits how little he can figure out, while Lipranzer’s faith in him is dwindling. Lipranzer also warns that the department has closed ranks and that Lionel Kenneally may face trouble for giving Rusty access. Rusty nevertheless asks him at least to run a sheet, invoking information from Sandy Stern’s private investigator that even a rap sheet could not be obtained from the department. The red herring, in this scene, is not simply an accusation Rusty rejects; it is a diversion he knowingly considers using.

Diversion and Scapegoating

The phrase changes force across the two scenes. Nico uses it to dismiss the allegations Molto did not investigate, making Rusty’s leads sound like deliberate misdirection. Rusty then applies the same idea to his own plan: investigating Molto could divert attention while he searches for something he cannot yet define. The courtroom exchange presents the phrase as a weapon in an adversarial defense; the midnight conversation makes it an uneasy description of investigative strategy.

Stern’s final reference to scapegoats sharpens that ambiguity without resolving it. A red herring misdirects attention, while a scapegoat bears blame; together, the terms raise the possibility that apparent distraction and the assignment of responsibility may be entangled. The repeated phrase therefore does more than echo between scenes: it exposes how readily the language of investigation can be turned against a lead, a person, or the investigator himself.