The Case of the Lonely Heiress

Chapter 18

Judge Osborn looked up from the papers he had been reading and said, “People versus Marilyn Marlow.”

“Ready for the Prosecution,” James Hanover said.

Mason arose. “Your Honor, the defendant is in court, represented by counsel. She has been advised of her rights and is ready to proceed with the preliminary hearing. The charge is first-degree murder and I am appearing upon behalf of the defendant.”

Deputy District Attorney Hanover said, “In view of Counsel’s statement, I will proceed with the evidence at this time. Call Dr. Thomas C. Hiller.”

Dr. Hiller was sworn in, droned through a list of his qualifications as an expert medical witness, testified that he had been called to the apartment of Rose Keeling, that he had tentatively fixed the time of death at about noon of the day on which he was called, perhaps a half hour earlier. He had subsequently performed a postmortem. There had been a blow on the head of sufficient force to render the decedent unconscious. Apparently while unconscious, she had been stabbed in the back with a knife having a blade approximately an inch and two-tenths in width and a thickness of perhaps two-tenths of an inch at the heaviest part of the knife. The length of the blade was, of course, something that he couldn’t swear to, but it had penetrated the body of the deceased to approximately seven inches.

Dr. Hiller gave it as his opinion that death had been practically instantaneous from the stab wound, but pointed out that also, in his opinion, the stab wound had been inflicted after the decedent had fallen to the floor and was stretched motionless and in approximately the same position as that in which her body had been found.

There had been considerable hemorrhage. The knife had been thrust in from the back or slightly to one side of the back. Microscopic tests he had made of the nails and other tests had indicated to him that the decedent had been bathing but a short time before the fatal injuries were inflicted.

“Cross-examine!” Hanover snapped truculently.

“No cross-examination,” Mason said.

Lieutenant Tragg was called to the stand.

He testified to his official position, testified to having been called to Rose Keeling’s flat on the day of the murder.

Asked to comment on the condition of the flat when he arrived, Tragg stated that Perry Mason and his secretary, Della Street, were, when he arrived, alone in the place with the body of the murdered woman.

He then went on to describe further the condition of the room, from time to time identifying photographs which were offered and received in evidence as being photographs taken under the supervision of the police force.

Then Hanover brought Tragg around to the effort he had made to find the murder weapon.

“Just tell the Court what search you made.”

“I looked through the flat, searching for the murder weapon. I couldn’t find it anywhere.”

“Now,” Hanover said, “I will ask you whether or not you located an automobile belonging to the defendant in this case.”

“I did.”

“Where was it?”

“In a public rental garage.”

“And do you know who had left it there?”

“I only know what was told me.”

“You cannot, of course, testify as to that. Is the proprietor of that garage in court, the one who gave you the information?”

“Yes, sir.”

Hanover smirked triumphantly.

Mason said, “There’s no need to call him. I will stipulate that I drove my client’s car into a public storage garage and left it there while my client went to a private sanitarium after she had been released on a writ of habeas corpus."

“Very well,” Hanover said. “That will save time. Thank you.”

He opened a small handbag, removed a box and approached the witness stand. From the box he removed a knife, stained and encrusted with dried blood.

“Lieutenant Tragg, I’ll ask you if you ever saw this knife before.”

“Yes, I have seen that knife before. I can identify it because it has my initials scratched on the handle. I found that knife under the floor mat in the trunk compartment of the defendant’s automobile. At the time I found it, it was in exactly the same condition as it now appears, except that some of the encrusted blood stains on the blade have been subjected to chemical tests in the police laboratory. This has somewhat altered their appearance. There is also a slight change in the appearance of the knife, in that the handle and portions of the blade have been dusted with powder for the purpose of developing latent fingerprints.”

“Were any developed?”

“No, sir, none were developed. The handle had been very carefully wiped, so as to remove all traces of fingerprints.”

“That’s a conclusion of the witness,” Mason protested.

Lieutenant Tragg smiled, and said, “Well, I will put it this way: The handle was absolutely devoid of all latent fingerprints, all prints of any sort. Not even the faintest smudge.” He added triumphantly, “And, as a man who has had considerable experience with homicide cases and the development of latent fingerprints, I know that such a condition couldn’t possibly have existed unless the handle had been very carefully wiped.”

“Are you,” Mason asked Hanover, “preparing to introduce this knife in evidence?”

“Exactly,” the deputy district attorney said.

“Under the circumstances,” Mason announced, “there will be no objection. Go ahead and put it in evidence.”

Judge Osborn seemed frankly puzzled. “Of course,” he pointed out, “there has been as yet no attempt to show that this is the so-called murder weapon. While it is true that the decedent apparently died from a stab wound, and I gather that the dimensions of the knife are approximately similar to the width of the stab wound, there is as yet no other evidence.”

“Exactly,” Hanover said. “I have other evidence, Your Honor, which I would wish to introduce.”

“But,” Mason interpolated, “the deputy district attorney wishes to introduce this knife in evidence. It has been identified as the knife which was found in the defendant’s automobile, and I have no objection to it being received in evidence.”

“As the murder weapon?” Hanover asked.

Mason’s smile was frosty. “I have no objection to it being received in evidence as a knife which was found in the back of the defendant’s automobile.”

“Very well,” Hanover snapped, “introduce it on that basis and we’ll connect it up later.”

Judge Osborn pursed his lips, as though debating whether to make some comment, finally decided against it and said, “Very well, the knife will be received in evidence and marked with the appropriate exhibit number by the clerk. Proceed, gentlemen.”

“Now then, Your Honor,” Hanover said, “I’d like to excuse Mr. Tragg for a moment, put another witness on the stand and then recall Lieutenant Tragg.”

“No objection,” Mason said.

Tragg left the stand.

“Call Sergeant Holcomb,” Hanover said.

Sergeant Holcomb was sworn, testified as to his name, age, address and occupation, then settled back comfortably in the witness chair. “You’re acquainted with the defendant, Marilyn Marlow?” Hanover asked.

“Yes, sir.”

“And did you have any conversation with her concerning her relations with Rose Keeling? Now that’s a preliminary question, Sergeant. Just answer it ‘yes’ or ‘no.’ ”

“Yes.”

“When was that?”

“On the seventeenth of this month.”

“That was the date the body of Rose Keeling was discovered in her flat?”

“That’s right.”

“Where did this conversation take place?”

“In the office of the Homicide Squad at police headquarters.”

“At that time did the defendant, Marilyn Marlow, make any statements to you as to whether she had been in the flat of Rose Keeling at any time during the day?”

“She did.”

“What did she say?”

“Just a moment,” Mason said. “The proper foundation has not been laid. There has been no statement on the part of this witness as to whether or not this statement was a free and voluntary statement or whether it was obtained by duress.”

“It’s not necessary to lay that foundation, Your Honor,” Hanover said. “We’re not asking for a confession. We’re asking only for an admission. It is a well-settled rule that an admission against interest does not necessarily require that it was made voluntarily.”

“Nevertheless,” Mason said, “I think that what Counsel is claiming as an admission affects the rights of the defendant so that I am entitled to find out first if it was a free and voluntary statement. Your Honor, may I ask a few questions of Sergeant Holcomb on this point?”

“Very well, go ahead,” Judge Osborn said.

“There were several officers present when this statement was made?” Mason asked Sergeant Holcomb.

“That’s right.”

“These officers were grouped in a circle around the defendant?”

“They were around where they could hear.”

“How was the room illuminated?”

“With electric lights,” Sergeant Holcomb said. “We quit using kerosene before I came on the job.”

A ripple of merriment sounded from the spectators.

“Was there one big light in the room?”

“Yes.”

“And that was directed full on the face of the defendant?”

Sergeant Holcomb said, “You can’t illuminate a room and not have it so that some light doesn’t shine on the face of the defendant. We try to give ’em service but we can’t give ’em that much service.”

People in the courtroom tittered.

“Wasn’t that light so arranged that it concentrated its rays upon the face of the defendant?”

“The defendant was just sitting there,” Sergeant Holcomb said.

“Facing the light?”

“That’s right.”

“Who was questioning the defendant?”

“I was.”

“And didn’t some of the others question her?”

"Some of them, yes.”

“Didn’t all of them question her?”

“Well, they may have.”

“During the time that the defendant was in that room, did some other person enter the room?”

“How do I know? I didn’t keep track of everybody that came and went. Perhaps they did. Perhaps they didn’t.”

“Did anyone enter that room at your suggestion?”

“Perhaps.”

“Didn’t you ask a young woman to come to that room?”

“I think maybe I did.”

“And did you ask that woman to identify the defendant?”

Sergeant Holcomb shifted his position. “Well, yes.”

“Had that woman actually ever seen the defendant before?”

“I don’t know. I can’t tell what people that woman had seen and what people she hadn’t seen.”

“You instructed that woman before she entered the room to come in the door, to point at the defendant and say, ‘That’s the woman,’ or words to that effect?”

“I told her to come in and identify the woman.”

“Who was this person whom you told to enter the room and identify the defendant?”

“A night stenographer in the traffic department.”

“And sometime later you signaled Lieutenant Tragg to come in?”

“I may have.”

“And resorted to a prearranged act by which he dispersed all the officers and took the defendant into his office?”

“Well, what if he did?”

Mason said, “There you are, Your Honor, a typical case of a police third degree.”

“I don’t think I’ll entertain evidence of a confession,” Judge Osborn said, “but I will receive evidence as to an admission. Go ahead, Mr. Hanover.”

“Now then,” Hanover said, “did the defendant make any statement at that time as to what she had done on that day with reference to being in the apartment of Rose Keeling?”

“She certainly did. She said she went to see Rose Keeling, that Rose Keeling was dead, that the defendant went to the telephone and called Perry Mason and that she was responsible for Perry Mason being there. She admitted that she was there in Rose Keeling’s apartment right about the time the murder was committed and that she had got in there with a key Rose Keeling had given her.”

“Cross-examine!” Hanover said triumphantly.

“The defendant admitted to you that she was in the apartment at about the time the murder was committed?”

“Well, she said she was there and it was about the time the murder was committed, because the police got there very shortly after Rose Keeling had been killed.”

“But she didn’t tell you that she was there at the time the murder was committed?”

“Well, not in so many words.”

“Or at about the time the murder was committed?”

“Not in so many words.”

“Or that she knew anything about the murder?”

“Not in so many words.”

“And did she tell you she entered the apartment with a key?”

“She said she had a key to the flat.”

“But did she tell you that she used it?”

“Not in so many words.”

“Didn’t she say she found the door open or slightly ajar?”

“Well, she may have put across some idea like that, but she had the key and...”

“What did she tell you?”

“I think she said she found the door open, but she had the key.”

“Thank you,” Mason said with sarcastic exaggeration of politeness. “That’s all, Sergeant Holcomb. Thank you for being such a fair and impartial witness.”

Sergeant Holcomb heaved himself to his feet, sneered at Mason and lumbered down off the witness stand.

“Now we’ll recall Lieutenant Tragg,” Hanover said. “Just take the stand again, Lieutenant.”

Tragg returned to the witness stand.

Hanover’s voice had an edge of triumphant power. “Now, Lieutenant, when you arrived at the apartment of Rose Keeling, what did you find specifically?”

“I found a house of the type known as a four-flat house,” Lieutenant Tragg said. “The flat which had been occupied by Rose Keeling was that on the second story on the south side.”

“I’ll show you a map and some photographs and ask you if you can identify these.”

“That’s right,” Tragg said. “This is a photograph of the four-flat house. This diagram is a map showing the layout of the apartment where the body was found. The location of the various rooms is shown on this map and the places marked here showing the approximate position of the body. Now this photograph is one that shows the bedroom and the body. This one shows the interior of the bathroom. This one shows the interior of the living room. This one shows the bedroom from another view. This is a close-up of the body. I can identify all of these maps and photographs as showing the things which I have mentioned. In other words, they’re true representations.”

“I ask that these be marked with appropriate numbers and be received in evidence,” Hanover said.

“No objection,” Mason said. “Let’s just get the records straight.”

The court clerk stamped the various exhibits, giving them appropriate numbers.

Hanover said, “Now, Lieutenant Tragg, calling your attention to the photograph, People’s Exhibit Number Four, I indicate two suitcases.”

“Yes, sir.”

“Did you notice those two suitcases when you first entered the flat?”

“I did, yes, sir.”

“What was in those suitcases, if anything?”

“Clothes,” Tragg said, and added quite casually, “she’d been packing up at the time she was killed.”

“Oh, indeed!” Hanover said, and added parenthetically, “Taking a trip?”

“She was packing up for a long trip, all right,” Lieutenant Tragg said. “She hadn’t finished packing when she was killed.”

“I see. And over here in the photograph of the living room there’s a telephone shown in the picture.”

“That’s right.”

“Now what did you do with that telephone, if anything?”

“Well, we dusted it pretty carefully for fingerprints.”

“And did you find any?”

“Fingerprints of only one person,” Tragg said. “Those of Mr. Perry Mason, attorney for the defendant.”

Judge Osborn leaned forward. “What’s that?” he said.

“Just the fingerprints of one person. Perry Mason’s fingerprints are on it.”

“No other fingerprints at all?”

“No.”

“Have you asked any explanation of the?... Well, go ahead, Mr. Hanover.”

Hanover said smilingly, “I was coming to that, Your Honor. Now, Lieutenant Tragg, just what happened when you arrived at the apartment?”

“Well, when we first got there to that flat,” Tragg said, “we were answering a call which had been put in by Mr. Perry Mason. We found Mr. Perry Mason and his secretary, Miss Street.”

“Did you have any conversation with them?”

“With Mr. Mason, yes. He told me that he’d found the door open and had walked in, and that he’d found the body and had telephoned police headquarters. He said he’d also telephoned Marilyn Marlow, his client.”

“Did he say anything to you about Miss Marlow having been at the flat?”

“No. Definitely not.”

Judge Osborn frowned ominously.

“Now, did the defendant subsequently make any statements to you as to how she happened to be at this flat?”

“Yes, she said she had an appointment to play tennis with Rose Keeling.”

“I notice in this photograph of the bedroom, there are tennis shoes, a tennis racket, and a container holding tennis balls.”

“That’s right. I noticed those particularly.”

“Did you have any conversation with the defendant concerning them?”

“Yes.”

“What was it?”

“I kept accusing the defendant of putting those things out after she had murdered Rose Keeling, putting them out so as to give a prop to her story about the tennis game.”

“And what did she say?”

“She would never admit that she’d done it.”

“Did the defendant ever offer you any explanation as to how it happened that Rose Keeling would extend an invitation to play tennis at a time when Miss Keeling was quite evidently hurriedly packing to get out of town as fast as she could?”

“No explanation,” Tragg said, and grinned.

“Now, did you have any conversation about a letter she had received from Rose Keeling?”

“That’s right.”

“What about it?”

“She said she’d destroyed it.”

“I now hand you what purports to be a carbon copy of a letter written in long hand addressed to Marilyn Marlow and bearing the signature of Rose Keeling and ask you if you’ve ever seen that carbon copy before.”

Mason said, “I submit, Your Honor, this certainly falls far short of an identification.”

“Marilyn Marlow destroyed the letter. We’re entitled to use the carbon copy,” Hanover said.

“Certainly you are,” Mason said, “provided you establish two things. One of them is that the original has been destroyed or not available, and, secondly, that this is a carbon copy of that original.”

Hanover said, “In view of this technical objection, Your Honor, it will be necessary for me to call other witnesses whom I have not planned to put on the stand. I think there can be no question but what this is a true carbon copy. It would expedite matters if I did not have to call these other witnesses.”

Mason said, “You have what purports to be a carbon copy of a letter. If you want to introduce it, you’ll have to show that it is a carbon copy. You’ll have to show that it is in the handwriting of the person who purported to sign that letter, and you have to go farther and prove that the letter of which this purports to be a carbon copy was received by the defendant.”

“Very well, if you want to get technical,” Hanover said angrily, “I’ll do it the hard way. Your Honor, I notice that it is approaching the noon luncheon hour, and if we may have a recess until two o’clock, I believe I can have witnesses here who will go through the long, tedious process of identifying something which the defendant knows very well is perfectly authentic.”

“It’s your case,” Mason said. “Put on the evidence if you want to.”

“I most certainly will,” Hanover snapped.

“Very well,” the Court said, “we’ll adjourn until two o’clock. The defendant is in custody and will be remanded. Two o’clock, gentlemen.”