“We’re going to connect it up,” Hamilton Burger said.
“The objection is overruled,” Judge Fallon said. “I will state that I probably would have sustained the objection if the question had related to any other meal than breakfast, but a breakfast is certainly not the result of a casual meeting. Proceed.”
Burger turned to the witness. “Answer the question,” he said.
“Yes,” Beason said.
“Mr. Beason, were you in the office where you are employed all the day on Monday, the fourth of this month?”
“No, sir.”
“Where were you?”
“Objected to as incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial,” Mason said.
Judge Fallon hesitated a moment, then said, “I’m going to sustain the objection at this time. I think the prosecution is trying to connect up all of this, but one piece of extraneous evidence cannot be used to connect up another piece of evidence which is equally extraneous.”
“If the Court please,” Hamilton Burger said, “if we could have just a little leeway here we could connect this all up.”
Judge Fallon said, “The expression, a little leeway, Mr. Prosecutor, indicates that you want to get just a little bit off course and the Court has a duty here to protect the rights of the defendant. I am going to sustain the objection.”
“Were you in company with the defendant on Monday, the fourth?” Hamilton Burger asked.
“Objected to, if the Court please; incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial,” Mason said.
“I’m going to overrule that objection. The witness will answer the question.”
Beason looked at the defendant, then hastily averted his eyes.
“Yes,” he said at length. And then added, “During part of the time.”
Hamilton Burger said, “All right, since it seems impossible to connect this up except by asking leading questions, I will ask you this: Isn’t it a fact that on Sunday, the third, you and the defendant drove to Ventura where you inspected a piece of property that the defendant was thinking of buying and on which she wanted your opinion?
“Now, you can answer that question yes or no.”
Beason again shifted his position, then said, “Yes.”
“And at that time didn’t the defendant state to you in the presence of a real estate broker that the price of the property was more than she could afford to pay, that she couldn’t raise that much actual cash?”
“Yes.”
“Then, on the following day, on Monday, the fourth, didn’t the defendant ask you to meet her for breakfast at an early hour in the morning? Didn’t she tell you at that time that things were going to work out so she could make the cash payment on the Ventura property and that she was going up and close the deal?”
“Well... Yes.”
“And did the defendant tell you what had happened between Sunday night, the third, and early Monday morning, the fourth, which had changed her financial condition so that she could close a deal on the property?
“Didn’t she tell you Garvin Hastings was dead and that she expected to be wealthy?”
“No. She said she had made a settlement with him that would enable her to go ahead with the purchase.”
“And didn’t the defendant meet you on the morning of Tuesday, the fifth, at an early breakfast before six o’clock and ask you to take the gun from Mr. Mason’s office?”
“No.”
“You did have breakfast with her on the morning of Tuesday, the fifth?”
“Yes. I want to explain my answer, however, by stating that it is always my custom to eat breakfast at five-thirty in the morning at a certain restaurant. I am an early riser and the defendant knew that.”
“How did she know it?”
“I have told her from time to time.”
“You had discussed your eating habits and your sleeping habits with the defendant?”
“I had told her that I usually ate breakfast around five-thirty in the morning.”
“That’s all,” Hamilton Burger said, and sat down with a triumphant smile.
“No further questions on cross-examination,” Mason said.
The discomfited Simley Beason left the witness stand.
Hamilton Burger, who had now taken active charge of the case, said, “I want to call Huntley L. Banner to the stand.”
Banner came forward and was sworn.
“Your name is Huntley L. Banner, you are an attorney at law duly licensed to practice in this state?” Hamilton Burger asked.
“Yes, sir.”
“And during his lifetime, you were the attorney for Garvin S. Hastings?”
“During the latter part of his life, yes.”
“Did you prepare a will for Garvin Hastings?”
“I did.”
“That will was executed?”
“It was.”
“Did you prepare another will for Hastings?”
“I did.”
“Was that will executed?”
“No.”
“Directing your attention to the executed will,” Hamilton Burger said, “I show you this copy of a will purporting to be signed by Garvin S. Hastings, as testator, and by yourself and one Elvina Mitchell as witnesses, and under the terms of which will all the property is left to Minerva Shelton Hastings. Is that the will you refer to as the executed will?”
“It is.”
“Will you please tell the Court the circumstances under which that will was executed?”
“Mr. Hastings came to my office. He had previously instructed me to prepare such a will. I had the will prepared, I handed it to him, he read it, he executed it in the presence of Elvina Mitchell and myself, he stated that it was his last will and testament, he asked us to subscribe our names as witnesses and we subscribed our names as witnesses in the presence of Garvin Hastings and in the presence of each other.”
“Now, what about this other will that was not signed?” Hamilton Burger asked.
“Garvin Hastings intended to make another will, leaving the bulk of his property to the defendant, Adelle Hastings, but differences developed before such a will was executed.
“I may state that I drew up two or three tentative wills, that there was some question as to exactly what property Garvin Hastings wanted to leave her. He wanted to leave some property to trusted employees in his business, men who had been with him for years.
“While this matter was being held in abeyance Garvin Hastings decided that his marriage was not working out the way he had anticipated. He suggested that his wife, the defendant in this case, go to Las Vegas, establish a residence and get a divorce. It was, as far as I know, a very friendly and amicable separation.
“However, it was necessary to negotiate a property settlement in connection with such divorce action and an arrangement was made by which Hastings was going to pay her a sum of money over a period of ten years and leave her a further sum in his will. Because those sums were the subject of negotiation, Hastings asked me to postpone drawing the will in final form.”
“And that was the status of the matter at the time of his murder?” Hamilton Burger asked.
“Yes.”
Hamilton Burger said, “This will is a certified copy. Where is the original?”
“The original is on file in the probate department. Minerva Shelton Hastings, the executrix in that will, is seeking to have the will admitted to probate and I am representing her as her attorney.”
Hamilton Burger said, “I offer this certified copy in evidence, if the Court please.”
“Do you have any objection, Mr. Mason?” Judge Fallon asked.
“I don’t know, Your Honor. I want to cross-examine this witness on the voir dire before stipulating that the will may be admitted.”
“Very well, cross-examine.”
“Elvina Mitchell is your secretary?” Mason asked Banner.
“Yes, sir.”