The Case of the Negligent Nymph

Chapter 17

THE CROWDED COURTROOM WAS CHARGED WITH AN ATMOSPHERE OF EXCITEMENT.

Claud Gloster, appreciating to the full the dramatic possibilities of the moment, arose as soon as court had convened and said, “Your Honor, we have a witness under subpoena, a Ronald Dixon, whose duties are such that it becomes necessary for him to be excused at as early an hour as possible. I would, therefore, ask permission of Court and counsel to temporarily withdraw the sheriff from the stand and put on Mr. Ronald Dixon out of order.”

“Any objections?” Judge Garey asked Mason.

Mason was smiling, confident, as one who is magnanimous in victory.

“No objection whatever, Your Honor.”

“Very well, on the strength of the district attorneys statement that it is necessary for this witness to be called out of order and, since no objection is made by the defense, it will be so ordered.”

Ronald Dixon, tall, studious, slightly stooped, came toward the witness stand and Mason, catching a quick glimpse of the man’s profile as he walked by, whispered to Della Street, “I’ve seen that man before.”

He turned to his left and said to Dorothy Fenner, “Do you know this man?”

“Night clerk at the apartment,” she said.

Mason grinned. “Here’s where they prove Alder s visit”

Ronald Dixon was sworn, gave his name, age, residence and occupation, settled himself in the witness chair as though he expected to be there for a long time and was making himself as comfortable as possible.

“You’re acquainted with the defendant, Dorothy Fenner?” Gloster asked.

“Yes, sir.”

“You have stated that you are one of the night clerks at the Monadnock Hotel Apartments?”

“Yes, sir.”

“What are your hours?”

“From four in the afternoon until twelve o’clock midnight.”

“On the third ot August of this year were you so employed and working those hours?”

“Yes, sir.”

“And did at that time?”

“Yes, sir.”

“Now, Mr. Dixon, directing your attention to the late afternoon of the third, will you tell us what happened of your own knowledge with reference to Miss Fenner’s apartment?”

“Well, I had read in the paper that she’d been…”

“Never mind that, never mind that,” Gloster interrupted. “Just what you know of your own knowledge.”

“Yes, sir. Well, she came in about five-thirty, I guess it was, about an hour or so after I’d come on and started work, and I congratulated her on … “

“You had a conversation?” Gloster interrupted quickly.

“That’s right I talked with her and she … “

“Then what happened?” Gloster interrupted again. “What did she dor

“She asked if there was any mail and I told her there had been about a million telephone calls and she took all the notes out of her key box and then went on over to the elevator to go up to her apartment.”

“Then what?”

“Then about an horn later a gentleman came in and said he wanted to see her. He told me she was expecting him so there was no need to announce him. Well, that’s against the rules of the place, but he looked like the sort of man you could trust—reserved, a gentleman—not the sort that would be apt to make any racket, cause any trouble or report a man for violating a rule.”

“So what did you do?” Gloster asked.

“Well, I sort of hesitated, and then he handed me a five-dollar bill.”

“So then what did you do?”

Dixon grinned and said, “So I did nothing.”

“Meaning that you did not announce him?”

“That’s right. I let him go on up.”

“Now, did you get a good look at that man?”

“I had a very good look at him.”

“Would you know him if you saw him again?”

“Yes, sir.”

“Did you see him again?”

“Yes, sir.”

“Where?”

“Lying on a slab at the undertaker’s.”

“In other words, this man was George S. Alder?”

“I was informed that was his name.”

“I show you a photograph, Mr. Dixon, and ask you if you recognize this photograph.”

“Yes, sir.”

“Who is it?”

“That’s a photograph of the man who came to see Dorothy Fenner that afternoon and gave me the five dollars.”

“And what time was this?”

“Oh, I’d say it was about probably around six-thirty.”

“How long was this man up there, do you know?”

Mason said, “He doesn’t know that the man ever went to the defendant’s apartment. All he knows is that the man gave him five dollars and said that he wanted to see the defendant. That conversation isn’t binding on the defendant Unless you connect it up in some way, IU move to strike it all out.”

“IU connect it up,” Gloster said grimly.

“Very well, proceed,” Judge Garey said.

“Well,” Dixon observed, grinning slightly, “if the man didn’t go to see Dorothy Fenner, he wasted a five-dollar investment.”

The courtroom broke into laughter.

Judge Garey, pounding with his gavel, said, “That will do. The witness will not volunteer any comments.”

“Go ahead,” Gloster said, with a wide smile on his face. “Tell us exactly what the man did that you saw.”

“Well, he gave me five dollars. He went over to the elevator. He punched the button. He got in the elevator. He closed the doors and the elevator went up, and about forty minutes later the man came down and said, Thank you’ to me and walked out.”

Mason laced his fingers back of his head, tilted back in the swivel chair and smiled good-naturedly. Now that his case had collapsed in a mass of legal wreckage, he was like a fighter in a corner, trying to measure the strength of his antagonist, to find some way of escape. However, his manner was that of one who is completely certain of himself, confident of the outcome.

And the fact that Gloster had considered this witness important enough to be put out of order, yet only to bring out a fact with which Mason was fully familiar, made the lawyer feel that perhaps the district attorney might not hold such high trumps after alL.

Mason kept his expression of smiling confidence, but permitted himself a sigh of relief.

Then suddenly his stomach tightened as he heard Gloster shoot in the next question.

“Now, then, did you see the defendant leaving the apartment house later on during the evening?”

“Yes, sir.”

“Under what circumstances, please?”

“Well, Td left the desk temporarily, just stepped out of the little office there for a moment, and as I returned I saw the figure of a woman walking rather quickly across the lobby and toward the street door. That woman was Dorothy Fenner.”

“And what time was this?”

“About seven-thirty in the evening.”

“That was the evening of the third?”

“Yes, sir.”

“Now, did you have occasion to see the defendant again on that evening?”

“Yes, sir.”

“When?”

“When she came back.”

“What do you mean by that?”

“Well, there are some doors we keep locked. We lock the outside door to the lobby at night but any of the tenants can open that door. The key to any of the apartments opens it. The baggage room is the same way. It opens on the alley. It’s kept locked but any tenant can use his key to get in. But when that door gets opened an electric signal tells us at the desk. A buzzer and a little red flashlight come on at intervals. In that way we know when anyone’s come in from the outside through the trunk room.”

“Very well, what happened?”

“Well, this buzzer and the light I’m telling you about came on about eleven-thirty. I thought I’d better investigate. I left the desk and started toward the stairs to the trunk room. While I was doing that, I heard the elevator coming down the shaft. Someone had signaled for it I ran down the stairs, opened the door a crack, and saw the defendant standing there waiting for the elevator.”

“How close were you to the defendant?”

“Not over ten feet.”

“You recognized her?”

“Definitely.”

“Any chance you were mistaken?”

“No, sir.”

“How was she dressed?”

“She had on a white sweater, some sort of blue dungarees that she usually wears for yachting, and a pair of tennis shoes.”

“And what happened?”

“The elevator came to a stop, the defendant got in and closed the door. I ran back upstairs to the lobby and noticed the indicator hand on the elevator. It went to the fourth floor and stopped.”

“And the defendant’s apartment is on the fourth floor?”

“Yes, sir.”

“Now, had you any means of knowing whether or not the defendant was in her apartment between the hours of seven o’clock in the evening and ten o’clock in the evening of that day?”

“Yes, sir.”

“Explain, please.”

“Well, I have to make an inventory every three months of things in the apartments the tenants had to sign for. I’d been wanting to get up to the defendant’s apartment, so when I saw her go out I rang the night housekeeper and said now was the time to check on the apartment. I told her Miss Fenner was out. I’d already told Miss Fenner we’d check her apartment, sometime when she wasn’t there so it wouldn’t disturb her. She said that was okay, to go ahead.”

“So what happened?”

“So I told the housekeeper to go on up like I just told you. I said Miss Fenner was out.”

“Do you know whether the housekeeper did or not?”

“Sure. She told me…”

“Weil, never mind. Well prove that by the housekeeper,” Gloster said. “Now, there is one more question. How was the defendant dressed when she went out?”

“She wore a light plaid skirt with jacket to match. I noticed that much about the way she was dressed when she went out, but I didn’t see her until after she’d left the elevator and was walking toward the door, so I was looking at her back. I don’t know what color blouse she had on. But I do know she’d changed her clothes while she was out. She went out wearing a skirt and returned in a sweater and dungarees.”

“Would you recognize the skirt she was wearing if you saw it again?”

“I would, yes, sir.”

“Now, then,” Gloster said triumphantly, “I refer you to the People’s Exhibit D, the skirt and jacket which the sheriff has testified were found on board the yacht owned by the defendant, the Kathy-Kay, and ask you if you have ever seen these garments before.”

“Yes, sir, those are the things that Dorothy Fenner, the defendant, wore when she left the apartment.”

“And when she came back she wasn’t wearing those things?”

“No, sir, she was wearing her yachting clothes, a white turtle-necked knit sweater and yachting slacks and tennis shoes.”

“Now, did you notice anything about whether she was carrying a purse when she left the apartment?”

“Yes, sir, she was carrying her purse with her when she left the apartment house that night. I distinctly remember seeing the purse in her right hand.”

“And did she carry a purse when she returned and had the elevator brought down to the trunk room?”

“No, sir, she did not”

Gloster turned to Perry Mason with something of a smirk. “Now, then, Mr. Mason, go ahead and cross-examine.”

Mason said casually, as though the testimony of the witness had not surprised him with a series of body blows, “Oh, I have just a few questions. Just a moment, please.”

Mason, smiling affably, arose from his chair. His eyes were amused and tolerant, as he said, “As I understand it from your testimony, it was against the rules to permit Mr. Alder to go up to the apartment unannounced?”

“Yes, sir.”

“But you did it?”

“Yes, sir.”

“For five dollars?”

“Well, if you want to put it that way, yes.”

“A violation of the rules for five dollars,” Mason said, smiling.

The witness said defiantly, “All right.”

“Would you,” Mason asked, “have done it for four?”

There was a rippl® of laughter in the courtroom.

The witness was stubbornly silent

“Would you?” Mason asked.

“Oh, Your Honor,” Gloster said, “I object to that. The question is argumentative and it’s not proper cross-examination.”

“Well, I suppose it is argumentativeJudge Garey ruled, “but I think it’s within the scope of proper cross-examination.”

“Would you have done it for four?” Mason asked.

“I suppose so,” the witness said sullenly.

“For three?”

“Yes!” he shouted angrily.

“For two?”

"I don’t know.” The witness was sullen again.

"For one?” --Nor

Mason said, Thank you, Mr. Dixon, I was just getting the value which you place on your honor.”

Mason held the witness with his eyes, but the margin of his consciousness told him what was going on, the amusement of the spectators in the courtroom, the anger of the district attorney.

“Now, then,” Mason said, “when the defendant came in on the afternoon of the third, you had some conversation with her?”

“Yes, sir.”

“You told her there were about a million telephone calls?”

“Yes. Of course that was a figure of speech.”

“Exactly,” Mason said. “A witness who is as scrupulously careful of the truth as you are wouldn’t want the jury to believe that you had actually packed a million telephone slips into an ordinary key box.”

Mason’s smile was affable.

The witness squirmed.

“Now, then,” Mason said, “you had some little talk with the defendant at that time?”

“Oh… yes, I guess we did.”

“About how long did that conversation take?” Mason asked. “How long was she standing there chatting with you?”

“About five minutes, I would judge.”

“And then she took the elevator and went up in the elevator?”

That’s right.”

That was an automatic elevator?”

“Yes, sir.”

“And how long was this before this gentleman came in—the gentleman who gave you the five dollars for violating the rules?”

Dixon flushed.

“How long was it?”

“Oh, I would say it was about an hour or an hour and a htdf, something like that.”

“And how long before you saw the defendant going out?”

“Well, she went out about forty minutes after the man who had been to see her left—I guess… well, you can fig-ure it out.”

“Now, then,” Mason said, “just tell the jury exactly what you and the defendant talked about during this five-minute conversation, exactly what you said to her.”

“Your Honor,” Gloster shouted, jumping to his feet, “that is incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial it’s not part of the res gestae it’s not proper cross-examination it calls for a self-serving declaration, and it’s utterly outside of the issues in this case.”

“Unless counsel can show that it has some specific bearing on the case,” Judge Garey said.

Mason smiled and said, “I believe, Your Honor, it is a rule of law that, when a witness on direct examination is asked as to a part of a conversation, the cross-examiner has the right to bring out the entire conversation.”

“That’s right,” Judge Garey said. “That is the general rule.”

“And I have no fault to find with it,” Gloster said, “which is the reason I was so careful to interrupt the witness every time he started to talk about that conversation. I didn’t want him to testify to it because I think it has no bearing on the case.”

“But,” Mason said, “you did ask him about the conversation, and he answered the question.”

“That is not true!” Gloster shouted. “I was particularly careful…”

“You asked the witness about what happened, and he told you that he told the defendant there were about a million telephone calls in her box—and I just asked the witness that question all over again to make sure there was no misunderstanding.”

Gloster, suddenly embarrassed, said lamely, “That’s not a conversation.”

“Well, it’s not a correspondence, it’s not clairvoyance, and it’s not telepathy. I don’t know what it is, if it isn’t a conversation,” Mason retorted.

Judge Garey frowned, then slowly nodded. “I guess,” he said, “that opens the door, if counsel for the defense wants to go into it”

“Your Honor,” Gloster said, “I happen to know what is back of all this. If we open this door, we will drag in innumerable and interminable side issues.”

“You should have thought of it before you opened the door then,” Judge Garey said. “Go ahead and answer the question,”

“Give all the conversatioh as nearly as you can,” Mason said to the witness, “what you said to her, and what she said to you.”

“Oh, Your Honor,” Gloster said, “this is ..

“The objection has been made, and a ruling has also been made,” Judge Garey pointed out, tartly.

“Your Honor, might I ask for a recess at this time? I think that … I would like to argue the matter with the Court outside of the hearing of the jury.”

“We have nothing to conceal,” Mason said. “If there was a conversation, we want it”

“All right,” Gloster said angrily. “I warn you that you may be able to get the conversation in but that isn’t going to open the door so that you can prove any of the things that were mentioned in the conversation. We’re going to object to anything corning into this case except the question of the murder of George S. Alder.”

“Why, certainly,” Mason said.

“Go ahead,” Judge Garey said to the witness, “answer the question. What was said?”

“Well,” Dixon said, “I congratulated her on having been released, and she told me that Mr. Alder had gone all to pieces under Mr. Mason’s cross-examination, and that the charge he had made that she had stolen some jewelry from him couldn’t be substantiated, and that he couldn’t even describe what the jewelry was that it was quite a triumph for her, and that she had an idea Mr. Alder would be trying to squirm out of a very embarrassing situation.”

Gloster, thoroughly angry, said, “Your Honor, I want an instruction to the jury that this testimony is merely as to a conversation between the defendant and this witness, that the fact the defendant may have made a certain self-serving declaration is no proof of the truth of the facts therein mentioned.”

Mason said quite affably, as befits a victorious antagonist, “I take it that the district attorney is merely stating his contentions?”

“I’m pointing out what the law is,” Gloster shouted.

“Well, you don’t need to educate me on the law,” Mason said, smiling. “So far, the shoe has been on the other foot, and I’m quite certain that the Court knows more law than you do.”

A gale of laughter swept the courtroom. Judge Garey smiled, but perfunctorily rapped the gavel. “Come, come, gentlemen, let’s have some semblance of order here, and well try and refrain from personalities.”

“I want the jury instructed, however, that this conversation is only a conversation,” Gloster said.

“A moment ago the district attorney was contending that it was not a conversation,” Mason said.

Before the confused district attorney could get his mental feet under him, Mason went on, “Furthermore, Your Honor, on behalf of the defense I want certain bits of evidence produced for our inspection. If the prosecution is holding any papers that were taken from the desk of the decedent, we want an opportunity to inspect those papers.”

Judge Garey raised his eyebrows. “Do you mean by that to ask for an inspection of the prosecution’s evidence in advance?”

“Not of the prosecutions evidence,” Mason said, “but there are certain things, certain papers which I believe would be evidence for the defense, and which I have reason to believe the prosecution has taken from the desk of the decedent and is holding, merely for the purpose of keeping the defendant from having access to them.”

Judge Garey looked questioningly at Gloster.

“I do not know what counsel is referring to,” Gloster said, “and I’m going to state here and now that we are only holding matters which we intend to introduce in evidence, and we are certainly under no obligation to show such evidence to the defense.”

“Provided it is evidence, and provided you introduce it,” Mason said.

“Well, we’re holding evidence, and the things we’re holding are held for evidence.”

“But suppose you should change your mind and decide not to introduce them?”

“That’s our privilege.”

“Then we want the privilege of inspecting them,” Mason said.

Gloster, starting to present his position at length, was interrupted by Mason saying suavely to the Court, “And, of course, Your Honor, the Court itself will notice the tactics of the prosecution in trying to suppress evidence.”

“What do you mean by making charges like that!” Gloster stormed. “That’s professional misconduct We haven’t suppressed anything, We…”

“Tut, tut,” Mason interrupted chidingly, “you remember that the Court instructed you to tell us where the dog was, and you haven’t done so.”

Gloster yelled, “I told you I didn’t know. I told you that the sheriff…”

“Just a moment,” Judge Garey interrupted. “Counsel for the defense is quite conrect on that. The order of the Court was that you were to communicate to the defense where the dog was being held.”

“I didn’t so understand it,” Gloster said, suddenly embarrassed. “I made the statement that I didn’t know where die dog was being kept, but that the sheriff did, and when the sheriff was on the stand, counsel for the defense had every opportunity to ask him, and failed to do so.”

Mason said, “The Court’s order was that you were to tell us where the dog was kept.”

“That was the intent of the Court’s order,” Judge Garey said.

“Well, I didn’t so understand it.”

“Well, where is the dog?” Mason asked.

“I … well, I can’t tell you where he is now. I can tell you where he was.”

“Why can’t you tell me where he is now?” Mason asked.

“Because,” Gloster said, angrily, “I’m not going to hand our entire case to you on a silver platter so that you can start picking it to pieces. The dog was taken to the Acme Boarding Kennels, but one of our witnesses wanted to take the dog and did so. And the dog is staying with her. I can’t give you the address of the dog without giving the address of the witness, and I don’t care to have you tampering with our witnesses.”

“What are you afraid of?” Mason asked. “Do you think I’d get her to tell a lie? Would she perjure herself at my request?”

“Of course not”

Then,” Mason said, smiling at die jury, “you must be afraid that I’d get her to tell the truth.”

“Your Honor,” Gloster protested, “this is all getting far afield. We’re getting this case in a mess because we’re trying to pursue a lot oi collateral matters.”

"I merely wanted to know where the dog was,” Mason asked cheerfully, “and the Court told you to tell me. Now you’re trying to squirm out from under the order of the Court”

“I’m not trying to do any such thing. You … “

Judge Garey pounded with his gavel, and said, “Gentlemen, let’s cease having these interchanges between counsel Let’s refrain from all personalities, and from now on counsel can each address the Court and not address opposing counsel.”

“Very well,” Mason said quickly, before Gloster could interpose any comment. “One other thing that the defense wants is an order permitting the defense and the defense experts to inspect the scene of the crime. If the Court please, we have been barred from these premises and have been refused permission even to inspect them in order to prepare our defense.”

Judge Garey frowned. The defense certainly are entitled to inspect the premises.”

The defendant had an opportunity to inspect them while she was murdering George Alder,” Gloster said.

“And I'll assign that remark as prejudicial misconduct on the part of the district attorney,” Mason said, “and ask the Court to admonish the jury to disregard such remark and…”

“I’ll withdraw the remark,” Gloster said contritely. “I was angry. The remark was made in the heat of the discussion.”

“Well,” Judge Garey said, “the Court will make an order that you and your experts may have a right to inspect the premises, Mr. Mason. What time would be convenient?”

“This afternoon?” Mason asked.

“Oh, if the Court please,” Gloster protested, “we’ve just started in with this case. If counsel is permitted to go out and inspect the premises this afternoon, we won’t be able to resume testimony in the case until Monday.”

As the Court hesitated, Mason said, “I have repeatedly requested the sheriff to permit experts for the defense to see these premises.”

“Permission which should have been granted,” the Court remarked. “The Court will adjourn at twelve o’clock noon until Monday morning at ten o’clock. During the afternoon, and during tomorrow, which is Saturday, the Court will make an order that the defense may be admitted to the premises at all reasonable times, subject, of course, to the right of the prosecution to have officers there to maintain supervision. Now, then, gentlemen, are you finished with this witness, and, if so, are there any other witnesses?”

Mason smiled at the discomforted man on the stand, and said, “Oh, I guess as far as Tm concerned I have no further cross-examination. I think the jury understands the situation.”

“No questions,” Gloster said angrily, “but since counsel is having so much fun I'll call a witness that will…”

“That will do,” Judge Garey interrupted. “I have repeatedly admonished counsel to refrain from these comments. A continued and persistent refusal to follow the instructions of the Court will result in drastic action. Now, gentlemen, W’s proceed with the trial of this case in an orderly manner. Mr. District Attorney, call your next witness.”