The Case of the Daring Decoy

Chapter Twelve

Judge Clinton DeWitt nodded to Hamilton Burger. “Do you wish to make an opening statement, Mr. Burger?”

Burger nodded, got up from the counsel table and lumbered over to the jury box.

“Ladies and gentlemen of the jury,” he said, “I am going to make one of the briefest opening statements I have ever made. We expect to show that on the sixteenth day of October the defendant, Gerald Conway, was president of a corporation known as California & Texas Global Development & Exploration Company, usually referred to as Texas Global.

“Mr. Conway was engaged in a proxy fight with a former official of the company, one Gifford Farrell. There were advertisements in the newspapers asking stockholders to send in proxies to a committee which was pledged to vote Mr. Farrell into power. That stockholders’ meeting, ladies and gentlemen, is now three days away. At the insistence of the defendant, this case has been brought to trial so that the issues could be clarified before that meeting.

“We expect to show that the decedent, Rose M. Calvert, was employed by Gifford Farrell in a confidential capacity to make an ultra-secret list of the proxies which had been received. She typed out that list and gave it to Mr. Farrell.

“We expect to show that, in some way, the defendant found out the decedent was typing that list. When he found that he could not bribe her, he tried to take the list away from her at the point of a gun. She resisted and was shot.

“Thereupon, we expect to show that the defendant released to the press and gave to the police an utterly fantastic story designed to account for his presence in the room where the murder had been committed. We expect to show that the defendant went to his present attorney, Perry Mason, and consulted that astute lawyer, long before anyone knew a murder had been committed. We expect to show that Perry Mason immediately started working out what he hoped would be a good defense for the defendant.

“The defendant was spirited to the Gladedell Motel where he occupied Unit 21 during the night.

“We expect to show, at least by fair inference, that during that night the defendant went out and buried the weapon with which the crime had been committed.

“This was a Colt revolver No. 740818, being of .38 caliber and without any question, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, being the weapon that fired the bullet that took the fife of Rose Calvert.

“We expect to show that the defendant went to the Redfern Hotel, entered the room where the murder was committed after giving the clerk a fictitious name so as to make the clerk believe that the young woman in the room was his secretary. We expect to show that the room where the murder was committed had been rented by the victim under this fictitious name. We expect to show, according to his own admission, that the defendant had a key to that room, that he entered that room, was there for an appreciable interval, and then left the room and went at once to consult an attorney. We will show that the defendant’s attorney knew the identity of the murdered woman long before the police knew it, and that the only way he could have had this information was from the mouth of the defendant.

“Upon that evidence, ladies and gentlemen, we shall ask a verdict of first-degree murder.”

Hamilton Burger turned and walked with ponderous dignity back to the counsel table.

Judge DeWitt glanced down at Perry Mason. “Does the defense wish to make an opening statement at this time, or do you wish to reserve your opening statement until later?”

Mason said, “I wish to make it at this time, Your Honor.” He arose and walked over to stand in front of the jurors.

“May it please the Court and you ladies and gentlemen of the jury,” Mason said, “I am going to make the shortest opening statement I have ever made in my life.

“The defendant is charged with first-degree murder. He is involved in a proxy fight for the control of the Texas Global, a corporation which has very large assets. We expect to show that an attempt was made to frame the defendant so that he would either be convicted of murder or in any event would be so discredited that it would be possible to wrest control of the corporation from him.

“In order to make a frame-up of this kind, ladies and gentlemen, it is necessary to use either one of two kinds of evidence, or to combine those two kinds of evidence: that is, perjured evidence or circumstantial evidence. We expect to show that both types of evidence were used in this case; that, under the law, wherever circumstantial evidence is relied upon by the prosecution, the Court will instruct you that, if the defense can advance any reasonable hypothesis other than that of guilt which will explain the circumstantial evidence, it is the sworn duty of the jurors to accept that hypothesis and acquit the defendant.

“You jurors have told us that you will abide by the instructions of the Court, and the Court will instruct you that that is the law.

“Under those circumstances, we shall expect a verdict of acquittal.”

Mason turned and had started to walk back toward the counsel table when Hamilton Burger jumped to his feet.

“If the Court please,” he said, “I feel that the jurors should be advised that it is incumbent upon the defense to offer a reasonable hypothesis. It has to appeal to the reason, to the sound common sense of the jurors.”

“The Court will cover that matter in its instructions, Mr. District Attorney,” the judge said. “Proceed with your case.”

Hamilton Burger said, “My first witness will be Sgt. Holcomb.”

Sgt. Holcomb came forward, was sworn and gave routine testimony as to the conversation with Perry Mason, going upstairs in the hotel, finding the body of a young woman sprawled out on the bed.

“Did you have some conversation with Mr. Mason as to how he happened to discover the body?” Burger asked.

“Yes.”

“What did Mason say at that time?”

“Objected to as incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial,” Mason said. “The conversation took place outside of the presence of the defendant.”

“Did Mr. Mason admit to you that he was acting in his capacity as attorney for some client when he discovered the body?”

“He did.”

“Did he say he was acting as attorney for this defendant?” Judge DeWitt asked.

“He didn’t say so in so many words.”

“The objection is sustained, at least for the present.”

“You went up to Room 729?” Hamilton Burger asked.

“I did, yes, sir.”

“What did you find?”

“I found the body of a young woman.”

“Lying on the bed?”

“On the bed.”

“She was dead?”

“She was dead.”

“Can you describe the position of the body?”

“She was stretched out, half on her back, her right hand up in the air as though trying to protect herself and—”

“I move that part of the answer be stricken,” Mason said, “as a conclusion of the witness.”

“That will be stricken,” Judge DeWitt said. “The witness can testify to the position of the hand, but cannot give his conclusion as to why the hand was in that position.”

“Just indicate to the jury the position of the hand,” Hamilton Burger said, smiling triumphantly, knowing that the point had reached the jurors regardless of the judge’s ruling.

Sgt. Holcomb held up his hand.

“What time was this that you arrived at the hotel?” Burger asked.

“Approximately ten minutes to eight.”

“And you went up almost immediately to the room?”

“Yes, sir.”

“What time did you view the body?”

“I would say it was approximately eight o’clock. My notes show that I started looking around the suite at eight-four.”

“Cross-examine,” Hamilton Burger said abruptly. “The right hand was held up above the face in the position you have indicated?” Mason asked.

“Yes.”

“The left arm was hanging down?”

“Yes.”

“Did you touch the body?”

“I touched the wrist to make sure there was no pulse.”

“The wrist of which hand, the right or the left?”

“The right.”

“You found no pulse?”

“No.”

“The hand was held up in the position you have indicated?”

“Yes.”

“It was not resting up against the face?”

“No, sir, it was not.”

“There was a space between the back of the hand and the face?”

“There was.”

“Yet the hand was up there and the woman was dead?”

“Certainly,” Sgt. Holcomb snapped. “The condition was that known as rigor mortis.”

“You know about rigor mortis?”

“Certainly.”

“What is it?”

“It’s what happens after a person is killed and the body stiffens.”

“And the right hand was held up and rigor mortis had set in? Is that right?”

“Yes.”

“Now, what about the left arm?”

“It was hanging over the side of the bed.”

“Did you touch the left arm?”

“Yes, I touched the left arm.”

“You say it was hanging down from the bed?”

“Yes.”

“Do you mean by that that the left arm was not rigid?”

“It was hanging down. It was hanging from the shoulder.”

“Did you move the left arm?”

“Slightly.”

“You could move it?”

“Certainly.”

“It was limp?”

“It was swinging from the shoulder. I didn’t try to bend the elbow.”

“But the arm was swinging from the shoulder, is that right?”

“Yes.”

“Thank you,” Mason said. “That’s all. I have no further questions.”

“My next witness will be Gifford Farrell,” Hamilton Burger said.

Farrell had about him an air of hushed solemnity and grief as he walked quietly forward to the witness stand.

Some of the women jurors leaned forward to look at his lean, bronzed face. The men were more casual in their appraisal, but it was plain to be seen that the man’s manner aroused interest.

Hamilton Burger turned the examination of Farrell over to his trial deputy, Marvin Elliott.

“Were you acquainted with Mrs. Norton Calvert during her lifetime?”

“I was.”

“Her first name was Rose?”

“That is correct.”

“She was married?”

“She was married and had separated from her husband.”

“Do you know where Mrs. Calvert is now?”

“She is dead.”

“Did you see her dead body?”

“I did.”

“Where?”

“At the morgue.”

“When?”

“On the seventeenth day of October of this year.”

“Do you know what if anything Mrs. Calvert was doing at the time of her death?”

“She was working for me.”

“In what capacity?”

“I am engaged in a proxy fight for control of Texas Global. I have done extensive advertising in the newspapers, and Mrs. Calvert was acting as my very confidential secretary, keeping tabs on the proxies which had come in.”

Elliott turned to Perry Mason, said, “I show you a list containing the names of stockholders, the numbers of stock certificates, and a statement in regard to proxies which bears your initials and the initials of the defendant on each page. I believe you will stipulate this was a list which was turned over to the district attorney’s office on the morning of October seventeenth.”

“I will so stipulate. I will further stipulate that this was a paper which the defendant found under the front seat of his automobile late on the evening of October sixteenth. I will state further that we handed this list to the district attorney on the morning of October seventeenth with the statement that it might be evidence in the case, and the further statement that the defendant had no knowledge as to how or when it had been placed under the seat of his automobile.”

“Very well,” Elliott said, “we will stipulate as to the fact the defendant made this statement. We expect to disprove it.”

Elliott turned to Farrell. “Mr. Farrell, I show you this list and ask you if you know what it is?”

“Yes, sir.”

“What is it?”

“It is a list, dated the fourteenth of October, which purported to show the proxies that had been received to date.”

“Who had possession of that list?”

“Rose Calvert.”

“We ask that this list be received in evidence, Your Honor,” Elliott said.

“Just a moment,” Mason interposed. “I’d like to ask a few questions concerning this list before it is received in evidence.”

“Very well,” Judge DeWitt said.

Mason said, “My initials and the initials of the defendant are on that list. Is there any identifying mark of yours on that list?”

“No, sir, there is not.”

“Then how do you know it is the same list which Rose Calvert had in her possession?”

Farrell’s smile showed that he had been anticipating this question. “It is a completely phony list,” he said. “It was purposely prepared and given to Rose Calvert, so that if anyone tried to force her to surrender the list she was making, she would have this phony list which was purposely misleading.”

“That list did not reflect the true situation at that time?” Mason asked.

“It did not!”

“Who prepared that list?”

“It was prepared at my dictation.”

“And you saw it in Rose Calvert’s possession?”

“I did.”

Mason turned to Judge DeWitt and said, “I think the statement that it was given Rose Calvert to be surrendered in case anyone tried to take the list from her is completely incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial as far as this defendant is concerned. But because we are anxious to get at the truth of this case, we will not move to strike out that part of the answer. We have no objection to the list being placed in evidence.”

“Very well,” Judge DeWitt said, “it will be marked as the People’s Exhibit and given the appropriate number by the clerk.”

Marvin Elliott said, “I will now ask you, Mr. Farrell, if you gave Rose Calvert certain instructions on the sixteenth of October as to what she was to do at the Redfern Hotel?”

“Just a minute,” Mason said. “I object on the ground that that is incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial and not binding on the defendant. Unless it is shown that the defendant knew of this conversation or was present at the time it took place, it has no bearing on the case.”

“It is part of the res gestae,” Elliott said.

Judge DeWitt shook his head. “The objection is sustained.”

Elliott said, “I have no further questions at this time.”

Mason said, “That’s all. I have no cross-examination.”

Elliott said, “I’ll call Robert Makon King.”

Robert King walked quickly to the witness stand and took the oath.

“What is your occupation?” Elliott asked.

“I am a clerk at the Redfern Hotel.”

“On the evening of October sixteenth did you have occasion to see a body in the hotel?”

“I did.”

“Who showed you that body?”

“Sgt. Holcomb.”

“Where was the body?”

“In Room 729.”

“Were you able to identify that body?”

“Not by name, but as a guest in the hotel, yes.”

“You had seen that young woman during her lifetime?”

“I had.”

“Where and when?”

“She had entered the hotel and stated that she wanted a suite somewhere on the sixth or seventh floor, preferably the seventh. She stated that—”

“Never mind what she stated,” Mason said. “I object on the ground that it’s incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial.”

“This is very definitely part of the res gestae,” Marvin Elliott said. “It accounts for certain facts which otherwise would be confusing.”

“I think I will sustain the objection to the conversation,” Judge DeWitt said. “You may ask what she did as part of the res gestae.”

“Did she register for a room?”

“She did.”

“Under what name?”

“Under the name of Gerald Boswell.”

“I’m sorry,” Elliott said, “that I can’t ask you for the conversation. I will ask you if she paid for the suite in advance.”

“She did. Yes, sir.”

“You may cross-examine,” Elliott said.

“Did this young woman have any baggage with her when she registered?” Mason asked.

“I didn’t see any.”

“Could there have been baggage which you didn’t see?”

“It was the duty of the bellboy to take up the baggage.”

“But she did pay for the suite in advance?”

“Yes, sir.”

“And took it under the name of Gerald Boswell?”

“Yes, sir. She said he was her—”

“Just a minute,” Judge DeWitt interrupted.

“Your Honor, I’m going to withdraw my objection to the conversation,” Mason said. “I’m going to let the witness relate it.”

“Very well,” Judge DeWitt said.

King said, “She told me that she was the secretary of Gerald Boswell, that he wanted her to engage a suite for him, and that she would pay the rent in advance.”

“Did she say she would do that because she had no baggage?” Mason asked.

“Now that you mention it, I believe she did.”

“What time was this?”

“Sometime in the afternoon. I don’t know just when. The records show it was just before two o’clock.”

“What time did you come on duty?”

“At twelve o’clock in the afternoon.”

“What time did you normally leave?”

“At eight o’clock in the evening.”

Mason thought the situation over for a moment. “You’re certain this was the young woman who rented the suite?”

“I’m certain.”

“Your memory for faces is rather poor, isn’t it?”

“On the contrary, it is very good.”

“No further questions,” Mason said.

“That’s all,” Elliott said. “I will wish to examine this witness upon another phase of the case later on in the trial.”

“We object to the testimony being put on piecemeal,” Mason said. “We feel that this witness should be interrogated at this time as to all the evidence which counsel intends to develop.”

“Oh, Your Honor,” Elliott said, “it would mean putting on our case out of order. We have to introduce an autopsy report, we have to introduce photographs.”

“Well,” Judge DeWitt said, “if counsel for the defense wants the evidence to be presented now, I think it would save time, at least, to ask the questions of this witness now.”

“Very well,” Elliott said. “Did you deliver an envelope to anyone who asked for messages in the name of Gerald Boswell on the evening of October sixteenth?”

“I did.”

“To whom?”

“To the defendant.”

“The gentleman sitting there next to Mr. Perry Mason?”

“Yes, sir.”

“What time was that?”

“That was sometime around six-thirty. I can’t give you the exact time.”

“And did you have any further conversation with the defendant?”

“Not with the defendant. With his attorney and a gentleman with him, whom I have since learned was Paul Drake, a detective.”

“And what was that conversation?”

“This detective, Mr. Drake, asked for messages for Gerald Boswell. I asked him for some identification and he showed me the key to Room 729. Then he went to the elevator.”

“Carrying that key with him?”

“Yes.”

“You don’t know whether he went to Room 729?”

“Only by what he said afterward. He told me that he had.”

“In the presence of Mr. Mason?”

“Yes, sir.”

Mason said, “If the Court please, I am not objecting and because it is embarrassing for counsel to be a witness, I will stipulate that Mr. Drake and I went to the Redfern Hotel, that Mr. Drake asked for messages for Gerald Boswell, that he was told there were no messages, that he was asked for identification, that he produced a key to Room 729, that he went up to Room 729, that we discovered the body of this young woman on the bed, and that we notified police.”

“Very well, that will simplify matters,” Elliott said.

“Just a moment,” Mason said. “I have a couple of questions on cross-examination.

“When Mr. Drake first asked for messages for Mr. Boswell, Mr. King, you told him that you had delivered a message to him earlier in the afternoon, didn’t you?”

“Well, I was a little suspicious. I—”

“I’m not asking you whether you were suspicious. I’m asking you what you told him.”

“Yes, I believe I told him something to that effect.”

“Yet now you say it was the defendant to whom you delivered that message?”

“Well, I’ve had a chance to think it over.”

“And to look at the defendant?”

“Yes.”

“Yet on the sixteenth of October, when the occasion was more fresh in your mind, you stated to Paul Drake, the detective, that you had delivered the message to him. Did you not?”

“I may have said so, yes.”

“And if you could have made a mistake in confusing Paul Drake with the defendant, isn’t it possible that you could have made a mistake in regard to Rose Calvert and that it was some other young woman who rented the suite, 729?”

“No, sir. I am positive of my identification and I am not going to let you confuse me.”

“Thank you,” Mason said. “That’s all!”

“Call Dr. K. C. Malone,” Elliott said.

Dr. Malone came forward, was sworn, identified himself as Dr. Klenton C. Malone, an autopsy surgeon who had performed the autopsy on the body of Rose Calvert.

He testified as to the single bullet wound, the direction and nature of the wound, the fact that death was instantaneous, that there had been little external bleeding, that the wound was a contact wound, meaning that the gun had been held directly against the body when the wound was inflicted.

“When was the time of death?” Elliott asked.

“I fixed the time of death at between six-fifteen and seven o’clock on the evening of October sixteenth.”

“Did you recover the fatal bullet?”

“I did.”

“And what did you do with it?”

“I turned it over to Alexander Redfield, the ballistics expert.”

“He was present when the autopsy was performed?”

“He was.”

“Cross-examine,” Elliott said to Perry Mason.

“When did you perform the autopsy?” Mason asked.

“It was the morning of the seventeenth.”

“What time on the morning of the seventeenth?”

“About seven o’clock in the morning.”

“Is that the time you usually go to work, Doctor?”

“No, sir. I was called to perform this autopsy by the district attorney. I was asked to perform it as early as possible.”

“When were you called?”

“About ten o’clock in the evening.”

“Why didn’t you perform the autopsy that night?”

“There was not that much urgency about it. The district attorney wanted to have certain information by nine o’clock in the morning. I started the autopsy so I could give him the information he wanted.”

“Rigor mortis had developed when the body was discovered?”

“I understand it had.”

“When does rigor develop?”

“That is variable, depending upon several factors.”

“Can you give me the approximate times during which rigor develops?” Mason asked.

“That I cannot,” the witness said. “The authorities are in great dispute as to the development of rigor. Persons dying under conditions of excitement or emotion may develop rigor almost immediately. This is also true if death has been preceded by a physical struggle.

“I may state that there were conditions existing in this case which made it appear rigor had developed with considerable rapidity.”

“Did you consider rigor mortis in connection with determining the time of death?”

“I did not. I determined the time of death from the contents of the stomach and intestines.”

“Did you know when the last meal was ingested?”

“I was told that time could be fixed with great certainty. I know that death occurred approximately two hours after the last meal had been ingested.”

“You were told when the meal was ingested?”

“Yes.”

“That was hearsay?”

“It was the best information I was able to get.”

“It was hearsay?”

“Naturally, Mr. Mason, I wasn’t with this young woman when she took her lunch. I had to rely on what was told me.”

“You didn’t consider rigor mortis as an element in fixing the time of death?”

“I did not. There were indications that rigor mortis had set in almost immediately.”

“What about post-mortem lividity?” Mason asked.

“The lividity had apparently just begun to develop. However, Mr. Mason, I didn’t see the body at the time it was found. The deputy coroner made those observations.”

“Now then,” Mason said, “the wound in that body is as consistent with suicide as with murder, isn’t it, Doctor?”

Dr. Malone hesitated, then finally said, “No, sir, it is not.”

“Why?”

“From the position of the wound and the course of the bullet, it would have been virtually impossible for a right-handed woman to have held the weapon in exactly that position. And if the weapon was held in the left hand, the posture would have been cramped and somewhat unnatural. Moreover, Mr. Mason, we made chemical tests on the hands of the decedent to see if there was any indication a weapon had been held in the decedent’s hand. There was none.”

“You used the paraffin test?”

“Yes.”

“Thank you,” Mason said. “That’s all.”

Elliott called Dr. Reeves Garfield, who testified that he was from the coroner’s office, that he had gone to the scene of the crime within an hour after the body had been discovered. He had supervised the taking of photographs, and had made on-the-spot observations. He had assisted in performing the autopsy. He gave it as his conclusion that death had taken place sometime between six-fifteen and seven o’clock.

“Cross-examine,” Elliott said.

“The body was clothed when you saw it?”

“Yes.”

“In rigor?”

“I will say this: It was partially in rigor.”

“What do you mean by that?”

“Rigor mortis begins at the chin and throat muscles and slowly spreads downward until the entire body is involved. Then rigor begins to leave the body in the same order in which it was formed.”

“And rigor varies as to time?”

“Very much. Much more so than many of the authorities would indicate. A great deal depends upon individual circumstances. I have known of one case in which rigor developed almost immediately.”

“What was the reason for that?”

“There had been a physical struggle, and an emotional disturbance at the time of death. I have known one other case where rigor was quite well developed within thirty minutes. And by that I mean a complete rigor.”

“Under ordinary circumstances, the onset is much slower than that?”

“Oh, yes. Much slower.”

“You say the body had developed rigor mortis at least in part. Were you there when the body was moved from the hotel?”

“Yes.”

“And what was done with reference to rigor at that time?”

“The rigor was broken.”

“What do you mean by that?”

“When a person dies,” Dr. Garfield said, “the muscles are at first completely limp. The head can be moved from side to side with the greatest of ease. The limbs can be flexed. Then after a variable period of time, depending on circumstances, the rigor sets in, and when the rigor is completely developed, the body has become stiff.”

“How stiff?”

“Very stiff indeed.”

“Then what?”

“Then after a lapse of time as the muscles become alkaline again, the rigor leaves the body and the body once more becomes limp.”

“Now, what do you mean by saying that rigor can be broken?”

“You can forcibly move the limbs after rigor has developed and, once the rigor is broken, it does not return.”

Mason said, “Isn’t it a fact, Doctor, that when you saw the body, there was rigor in the right arm, but that there was no rigor in the left arm?”

“I won’t say that,” Dr. Garfield said, “but I did notice that there was no rigor in the left shoulder.”

“But there was in the right?”

“The right arm and shoulder were in complete rigor. The right hand was held up so that it was perhaps an inch or so from the face, but was stiff enough to remain in that position.”

“Thank you, Doctor,” Mason said. “Now I want to ask one more question: Isn’t it a fact that it was possible for death to have taken place earlier in the afternoon?”

“Well...” Dr. Garfield hesitated.

“Go ahead,” Mason said.

“There were certain conditions there that were puzzling. The development of the rigor, the post-mortem lividity, and a very faint discoloration of the left side of the body.”

“What was this discoloration?”

“I am not certain. I would prefer not to discuss it because we finally came to the conclusion that it was not significant.”

“But there was a discoloration?”

“Well, I wouldn’t exactly call it a discoloration. It was just a faint tinge which was all but invisible except in certain lights. We decided, after discussing the matter, that it had no real significance. However, it had no significance because the contents of the stomach and intestines furnished a very accurate means of fixing the time of death.”

“You personally examined the contents of the stomach and intestines?”

“Oh, yes.”

“Can you determine when death occurred with reference to when the last meal was ingested?”

“I would say within a period of two hours to two hours and fifteen minutes.”

“Then you think that this young woman had lunch at about four-thirty o’clock?”

“Apparently at exactly four-thirty.”

“How do you know that?”

“Room Service sent lunch up to the room at four-thirty. Potatoes au gratin had been sent up by Room Service, and those remnants were found in the stomach. Roast turkey was sent up by Room Service, and those remnants were found in the stomach, as well as remnants of other items on the hotel’s turkey plate luncheon.”

“You have investigated this, of course?”

“Of course.”

“And checked with Room Service in the hotel?”

“Yes.”

“And what was your conclusion, Doctor?”

“As to the time of death?”

“As to the contents of the stomach.”

“As compared with the lunch sent up?”

“Yes.”

The witness hesitated.

“Well?” Mason asked.

“It is hard to answer that question without bringing in hearsay evidence,” Dr. Garfield said. “The hotel restaurant was able to check the order sent out — a regular plate dinner of roast turkey with dressing. The decedent also ordered asparagus. We found all those articles in the stomach.”

“Any other articles?” Mason asked.

“Yes.”

“What?”

“Green peas.”

“But there were no green peas on the luncheon sent up?” Mason asked. “Those peas must have come from another source?”

“There were green peas on the luncheon,” Dr. Garfield said positively. “The hotel records show no peas listed on the check, but they were sent up. They had to be on that lunch tray. The hotel employees all admitted it was very possible the records were in error and the peas simply had not been put on the bill because of an oversight.”

“Did she sign the check for Room Service?”

“No, sir, she paid it in cash.”

Elliott said, “We expect to show the contents of the last meal which was sent up by Room Service, and we expect to show that green peas were added by an inexperienced waiter who neglected to put them on the bill. There can be no question as to what actually happened.”

“If the Court please,” Mason said, “I take exception to the statement by counsel that there can be no question as to what happened. Counsel is advancing his own conclusions.”

“I was merely trying to shorten the cross-examination of this witness, save the time of the Court, and keep from confusing the issues in the minds of the jury,” Elliott said.

Judge DeWitt said, “Just a moment, gentlemen. Despite the short time spent in getting a jury, it has reached the hour for the afternoon adjournment. Court will take a recess until ten o’clock tomorrow morning. In the meantime, the jurors are instructed not to discuss this case with anyone or permit it to be discussed in their presence, nor to form or express any opinion concerning the matter until it is finally submitted for their consideration. I have previously admonished the jury on this point and I think they understand their duties. Court will recess until ten o’clock tomorrow morning.

“The defendant is remanded to custody.”

Mason turned to smile reassuringly at Conway. “I think we’ve got them, Jerry,” he said.

Conway said, “I don’t see how you figure it. I think we’re licked.”

“What do you mean?”

Conway said, “Our only hope was in getting Giff Farrell to show himself in his true light before the jurors. He came off with flying colors.”

Mason grinned. “You mean I didn’t cross-examine him vigorously enough?”

Conway said, “You’re running the show, Mason. But you must be able to see for yourself what has happened. Farrell’ s testimony is now completely established and he hasn’t even been embarrassed. Why didn’t you ask him about his relations with the dead woman, about those photographs?”

“Because,” Mason said, “if we ever get that far, I am going to force the district attorney to put Gifford Farrell on in rebuttal, and by that time I’m going to have him sketched as quite a villain. When I get done with him then, he’s going to be an entirely different individual from the debonair man who occupied the witness stand this afternoon.”

“Well, I hope so,” Conway said. “However, one thing is certain. I’ve completely lost control of Texas Global.”

Mason patted him on the shoulder. “Take it easy, Conway,” he said. “And remember people are watching you in the courtroom. Don’t act discouraged. Act as though you felt certain right would triumph.”

“You can’t smile in a situation like that,” Conway said. “The bottom has dropped out, and—”

“Don’t grin,” Mason said, “simply look less overwhelmed.”

Conway straightened himself, gave Mason a smile.

Mason clapped him on the back, said in a loud voice, “Okay. See you tomorrow. And by tomorrow night you should be out. Sleep tight.”

Mason picked up his brief case and left the courtroom.