“Under the law any confession, no matter how it is obtained, can be admitted if there is corroborating evidence showing it to be true.
“I will, if the Court please, read from Volume 8, California Jurisprudence, at page no: ‘Inasmuch as the theory upon which involuntary confessions are excluded is their possible falsity, if the confession discloses incriminating facts which are shown to be true, the reason of the rule ceases to exist, and so much of the confession as discloses the fact and the fact disclosed are competent.’ Now then, if the Court please, this rule was followed in the case of People versus Castello, 194 California 595, 229 Pacific, 855, where it was stated that where physical facts and circumstances corroborate confessions of guilt, the reason of the rule which would otherwise exclude involuntary confessions to this extent ceases to exist
“If the Court please, we expect to show that this confession is completely corroborated by physical facts to such an extent that extrinsic evidence unmistakably stamps the confession with the mark of truth.
“In this case, as the Court will note when it hears the tape recording, the defendant stated that she went to the gun room of Mosher Higley, that she cut open two shells and put shot from those shells in the bottle of poison and that she threw that bottle in the lake.
“Now we will show that this bottle of poison was recovered, that the two shotgun shells which had been pried open were recovered from the exact place behind the gun cabinet where the defendant said she had put them.
“And this,” Hamilton Burger went on, “notwithstanding the fact that someone,” and here Hamilton Burger turned and bowed sardonically to Perry Mason, “had attempted to confuse the issues by planting another bottle filled with shot and a harmless sugar substitute out in the lake. And, if the Court please, we expect to prove before this case is done that Perry Mason was seen going out to the lake and throwing an object into the lake at this exact place shortly before he hired some young boys to make an opportune recovery of this planted bottle of evidence.”
Judge Ashurst frowned. “This is a very serious situation,” he said. “I think that the Court will permit you, as a part of this offer, to put on evidence in regard to the shotgun shells and the bottle of poison, Mr. District Attorney, and if the corroboration is as you indicate, the Court will then take up the question of permitting the tape recording to be played to the jury and permitting the evidence as to the bottle and in regard to the shotgun shells to be again introduced for the consideration of the jury.”
“Very well,” Hamilton Burger said. “I’ll make the proof to the Court right now. I’ll produce these shotgun shells and state to the Court, as an officer of the Court, that these shells were found in the place described by the defendant in her confession.”
Hamilton Burger motioned to his assistant and produced two shotgun shells which were presented to the Court.
Mason inspected the shotgun shells.
“These shells are sixteen-gauge shotgun shells stamped ‘UMC No. 16,’ ” Judge Ashurst said. “They have the wads pulled out. All of the shot has been dumped out from one shell and part of the shot from another.”
“That is correct,” Hamilton Burger said. “The shot just fills the vial and that vial contains tablets of cyanide of potassium.”
“What about the other vial?” Judge Ashurst asked.
“That other vial,” Hamilton Burger said, “contains a sugar substitute, a chemical sweetening tablet, and contains similar shot.”
“Do you have those vials with you?”
“I have them both here,” Hamilton Burger said. “One of them is marked Exhibit A for identification and the other Exhibit B.”
Burger produced the bottles.
Judge Ashurst looked accusingly at Perry Mason. “It is, of course, a most significant fact that two bottles were recovered from the place where the defendant mentioned she had thrown the bottle containing the poison. One of the bottles contains poison exactly as described by the defendant, and the other bottle contains a harmless chemical substitute. Is that correct, Mr. District Attorney?”
“That is correct,” Hamilton Burger said, leering triumphantly at Perry Mason.
Mason said, “If the Court please, I think I can account for the bottle which contains the harmless sugar substitute, and since there has been an insinuation that I was responsible for planting that, I would like at this time to call a witness who will testify on that phase of the matter.”
“The Court will permit that,” Judge Ashurst said. “This witness, of course, is called in connection with a motion which is addressed solely to the discretion of the Court, or, rather, in connection with an objection to the admissibility of evidence on which the Court desires to take evidence.”
“This is correct,” Mason said. “I’m going to ask Mr. Jackson Newburn to come forward and be sworn.”
Jackson Newburn got up from the audience, came forward, raised his right hand and was sworn.
“Take the witness stand,” Judge Ashurst said.
Mason said, “Your name is Jackson Newburn. You are married to Sue Newburn, who is a surviving niece of Mosher Higley. Is that correct?”
“That is correct.”
“And as such husband and because of the relationship, you had access to the house of Mosher Higley, did you not?”
“Yes, sir.”
“You were there from time to time?”
“Yes, sir.”
“You were there on the day that Mosher Higley died?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And after his death you learned, did you not, that the defendant had made statements to the effect that she had taken tablets of what she thought was a sugar substitute from a bottle kept in the usual place, that immediately after giving Mosher Higley the chocolate containing these tablets Mosher Higley accused her of having poisoned him, went into choking convulsions and died shortly thereafter?”
“Yes, sir.”
“You were friendly with the defendant?”
“Not exactly friendly. At that time I sympathized with her.”
“You say at that time?”
“Yes. At that time I thought she was being rather abused by Mosher Higley. I didn’t at that time know certain facts which I discovered later, facts which indicated she was engaged in blackmailing my wife’s uncle.”
“Now your wife is a relatively young woman?”
“On the sunny side of thirty,” Newburn said.
“She has a good figure?”
“I consider it a very good figure.”
“She tries to protect that figure by a careful diet?”
“Yes.”
“And in her house she has a certain chemical sugar substitute in the form of tablets which she uses for sweetening?”
“Yes, sir.”
“In fact, it was through her recommendation of this chemical sweetening that Mosher Higley was induced to start using these same tablets?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And after you found out that the defendant had stated she had placed the tablets she feared were cyanide in a bottle together with shot, and had thrown the bottle out into a lake known as Twomby’s Lake, you tried to protect her by going to your home, taking a partially filled bottle of these same sugar tablets, filling it with shot and throwing it out in the lake?”
“I did not.”
“What?” Mason exclaimed in surprise. “You didn’t?”
“No, sir.”
“Why, you told me you did. You admitted it.”
“No, I didn’t.”
“Do you mean to tell me,” Mason said, “that when I approached you there at a club on West Adams Street, a club known as the Wildcat Exploration and Development Club, you didn’t tell me there on the porch of that club that you had done this very thing?”