The Case of the Black-Eyed Blonde

12

The preliminary hearing in the case of The People versus Diana Regis found the prosecution wearing that complacent smirk which indicates an airtight case. After suffering several ignominious defeat at the hands of Perry Mason, it was a triumphant moment when Claude Drumm, the chief trial deputy, had at last a case so bulletproof that it would try itself, a case that simply couldn’t be upset no matter which way the cat jumped.

With cold-blooded triumphant verve, Drumm began the presentation of his case, smashing each point home with telling effect, striking his blows with as much sure precision as though he had been a carpenter driving nails into the scaffold on which Diana Regis was to be hanged.

And because Drumm wanted to fully enjoy the taste of triumph now that he had it at his command, he put on evidence on the preliminary hearing with as much painstaking care as though he had been trying a murder case in front of a jury, realizing, of course, that behind him interested members of the press were taking notes on the testimony of each witness, supplementing their notes with photographs taken in the corridors of the courthouse and following the recesses of court.

First, Drumm put on the manager of the apartment house who identified Diana Regis, the defendant, as the young woman who had shared an apartment with Mildred Danville, and Mildred Danville, she testified, was dead. The witness had been taken to the morgue where she had viewed the body of Mildred Danville and had no hesitancy in identifying it as the body of the young woman who shared the apartment with Diana Regis.

Then Drumm went on to introduce the state meteorologist. The meteorologist testified that it had been overcast during the entire day of the murder, that it had not commenced to rain until seven forty-seven that at seven forty-seven there had been about three minutes of a gentle sprinkle, followed by a deluge of unusual severity which had lasted for some two hours, following which the rain had become more gentle, although a total precipitation of two and four-tenths inches had resulted from the storm which had begun officially at seven forty-seven and had ended at six thirty-two a.m.

Dr. George Z. Perllon, a police autopsy surgeon, testified that the body had been placed in his custody at approximately one a.m. that death had been caused by a thirty-eight caliber bullet which had entered the back of the neck above the odontoid process and had traversed forward and upward that in his opinion, from the condition of the body at the time it was delivered to him, death had taken place approximately four to five hours before he examined the body. He had based his opinion upon body temperature, as well as “other factors.”

“Cross-examine,” Claude Drumm announced.

Mason’s voice was suave. “You think death might have occurred as late as four hours before you saw the body, Doctor?”

“Yes.”

“In other words, nine p.m. on the day previous.”

“Yes.”

“And you think that it could not have occurred more than five hours prior to the time you saw the body?”

The doctor shifted his position. “Well, of course, in fixing arbitrary limits for death, a person has to take into consideration certain variable factors which...”

“Can you answer the question, Doctor?”

“Certainly. I am answering it.”

“I don’t think so. I am asking you for a direct answer, Doctor. Could death have taken place more than five hours before you saw the body?”

“Oh, it could have, yes,” the doctor said testily. “I am telling you when I think death occurred. If you want to explore the most remote possibilities it could have been eight or nine hours. But that’s so unlikely as to be fantastic.”

“Let’s not have your thoughts, Doctor, let’s have your best estimate predicated upon medical facts which you can produce. Now did I understand you to say that death could have taken place as much as eight or nine hours before you saw the body?”

“It is conceivable, yes, but hardly probable.”

“What are the extreme limits within which you would say death could possibly have occurred?”

“Well, perhaps as late as ten-thirty the night before or perhaps as early as six o’clock — if you want to go to absurd lengths of extreme possibilities.”

“Six o’clock would then be seven hours before you worked on the body?”

“Yes.”

“When you said as much as nine hours you really didn’t mean that, Doctor?”

“Well, I meant that that would be the extreme limit of even a remote possibility.”

“But there is a remote possibility that death took place as much as eight hours prior to the time you made your examination?”

“If you want to go into all of the extreme interpretations of evidence in the case, yes.”

“You mean the medical evidence, Doctor?”

“Yes.”

“Then as an extreme limit, death could have taken place as much as eight or nine hours prior to one o’clock. Is that right?”

“Well, yes — if you want to discard probabilities.”

“Thank you,” Mason said, “that is all.”

Claude Drumm took the doctor for redirect examination.

“As I understand it,” Drumm said smiling reassuringly at Dr. Perllon, “your answers to Mr. Mason’s questions went to extreme limits.”

“Absolutely.”

“The limits during which death might have occurred under the most unusual, under the most medically improbable circumstances?”

“Exactly. Circumstances that are fantastically improbable.”

“Now then, Doctor, what are the time limits within which death most probably took place? Calling now, Doctor, not for your mere opinion, but for an interpretation of the medical facts.”

“Death probably took place between four and live hours prior to the time I saw the body.”

“And on what do you base that statement, Doctor?”

“In part, upon the peculiar development of rigor mortis.”

“What was there about that, Doctor, which you consider distinctive?”

The doctor settled himself more solidly in his chair. He was on firm ground now. “Rigor mortis makes its initial appearance in the jaws, and usually takes place from three to five hours after death. The rigor mortis then generally involves the lower muscles, spreading to the neck, the chest, the arms, the abdomen, the legs and the feet. In the body of the deceased, rigor mortis had made its initial appearance only in the jaw muscles, but before proceeding with the detailed autopsy I permitted rigor mortis to develop sufficiently in other muscles so that I could form some estimate as to the rate at which it was developing therefore I fixed the time of death as being four to five hours before the body was delivered to me. In other words, from a period between eight and nine o’clock of the preceding evening.”

“Thank you,” Drumm said in the tone of one gentleman to another, and his smile indicated to both the judge and the witness that the attempts of a shyster to obscure the situation had been very adroitly foiled. “I don’t suppose,” he said, “that Mr. Mason cares for any recross examination.”

Mason said casually, “I have just one question and only one.”

“Very well,” Drumm snapped.

Mason smiled at the doctor, a cold icy smile. “Death could have occurred as much as nine hours before you examined the body, Doctor?”

“As I have stated,” the doctor said with ponderous dignity, “the state of rigor mortis is a determining factor. Now rigor mortis has a tendency to develop within certain general time limitations...”

“Could death have occurred as much as nine hours before you examined the body?” Mason asked.

“I am trying to explain, Mr. Mason.”

“I don’t want an explanation, I want an answer. You answer my question, and then you can explain it afterwards if you want to, but I want an answer to my question. Could death have taken place as much as nine hours before you examined the body?”

There was a moment of tense silence.

“Yes or no?” Mason asked. “Could it have taken place as much as nine hours before you examined the body?”

“Yes!” the harassed doctor all but screamed.

Mason’s smile included both Drumm and the doctor. He said in a low voice which contrasted with the doctor’s enraged shout, “Thank you, Doctor, that is all.”

Lieutenant Tragg took the witness stand, explained his position, recounted something of his police experience, mentioned the length of time he’d been assigned to the Homicide Squad. On the night of the twenty-sixth of last month, the night of the murder, he had gone to a residence at sixty-seven fifty San Felipe Boulevard. He had there found the body of Mildred Danville sprawled out in the rear of the house lying face down in the mud. It was raining at the time and had been raining for some three hours prior to the time the body was discovered. He had also discovered a purse on the sidewalk in front of the house, a purse which was subsequently identified by the defendant as being her property. The purse contained some fifteen hundred dollars in cash in addition to the usual feminine articles including a driver’s license made out to the defendant.

At this point Drumm suggested that the witness be excused temporarily in order to enable him to introduce maps and diagrams, and there being no objection on the part of the defense, the court permitted a draftsman to take the stand who introduced in evidence various maps showing the location of the premises at sixty-seven fifty San Felipe Boulevard.

Tragg, returning to the witness stand, identified the place where the body was found, and also the place where the purse was found by making appropriate “X” marks on the various maps which had been received in evidence. He then testified to a search of the premises where the defendant shared an apartment with the decedent, and where he had instituted a very thorough search. He had looked in a hamper of soiled clothes and had there found a thirty-eight caliber revolver which he had marked for identification by making certain cabalistic scratches on the barrel of the gun. He identified a gun which was handed him by the prosecuting attorney as being the one he had found.

At that time, Drumm asked that the weapon be received in evidence, assuring the Court that it would be connected up by a ballistic expert as the one with which the murder was committed. Then Drumm called to the attention of the Court the fact that it was the usual hour for the noon recess, and intimated that it would be convenient for the prosecution to take the usual adjournment at this time.

The judge glanced at the clock, nodded, and adjourned court until two o’clock that afternoon.

Paul Drake, working through the crowded courtroom, reached Mason’s side.

“We’ve got the cop, Perry.”

“The one that arrested Mildred Danville for a traffic violation?”

“Yes. Overtime parking.”

“Where is he?” Mason asked with excitement.

“He’s at my office, Perry. I’m holding him there. Certainly had plenty of trouble finding him. He was a relief officer who was on duty in this precinct only for that one day.”

“Let’s go talk with him,” Mason said. “What’s his name?”

“Philip C. Rames.”

“What sort of a chap, Paul?”

“Pretty good. Of course you know how those cops are. They have very elastic memories when their jobs are at stake, and usually a cop hates to testify to something that will knock the prosecution’s theory of the case into a cocked hat.”

“Well, let’s have a talk with him,” Mason said. “We’ll get a statement out of him if we can.”

“How’s the case going, Perry?”

“About as I expected it,” Mason said. “They’re building a foundation. Hang it, Paul, I’ve got a defense in this case, but I’m not certain whether I can prove it. And if I can’t establish it by evidence, I’m licked. But I know that the faucet in that rain water system was open. I remember it definitely. So far I haven’t been able to get a look at the police photographs, but I’m afraid that... Oh well, we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it. Let’s go see what Rames has to say.”