“Yes, Your Honor,” Hamilton Burger said coldly.
Judge Alvord showed his exasperation. “I do not wish to superimpose my judgment upon that of the prosecution in this case,” he said. “Nor, on the other hand, do I propose to have this Court used to usurp the functions of a grand jury. I simply tried to make my observations in a manner friendly to both counsel, yet bearing in mind that it is the object of this Court to see that justice is done.
“Now, Mr. Prosecutor, you have established a prima-facie case. It is a well-known fact that once that has happened Courts usually bind the defendant over for trial, that even if the defense is able to put on evidence which raises a question as to the accuracy of the evidence introduced by the prosecution, the Court in a preliminary hearing will not take the responsibility of weighing that evidence or resolving the conflict in that evidence but will bind the defendant over for trial.
“The Court feels that it is, therefore, entitled to ask the prosecutor why the prosecution is so anxious to continue with these witnesses and a line of testimony which apparently is merely cumulative.”
“The prosecution desires to do so because it feels it is good policy to do so,” Hamilton Burger said. “The prosecution is dealing with a resourceful, tricky trial attorney who is accustomed to capitalize upon the dramatic in order to upset the conventions of courtroom precedent. The prosecution, therefore, insists that it have the right to put on its case as it sees fit and that the Court does not restrain the prosecution from calling witnesses.”
“Very well,” Judge Alvord said, his manner indicating that he was becoming progressively more angry, “the Court is not going to restrain the rights of the prosecution to put on witnesses. On the other hand, this is a court of justice and the Court does not intend to be used as a grand jury, nor does it intend to see any defendant deprived of his or her rights.
“Now then, Mr. District Attorney, you want to call Glamis Barlow to the stand. It is quite apparent that before this case is finished there is every possibility Glamis Barlow will be joined as a codefendant in a trial in the Superior Court. The Court does not propose to have Miss Barlow called as a witness simply in order to entrap her into a situation where she may have forfeited any of her constitutional rights.
“You want to call Miss Barlow as a witness. Go ahead and call her.”
“Glamis Barlow,” Hamilton Burger said in an unnecessarily loud voice.
An officer opened the door of the witness room and escorted Glamis Barlow to the stand.
“Now, just a moment,” Judge Alvord said, after the witness had taken the oath. “Miss Barlow, you are being called as a witness in this case by the prosecution. The Court feels it is only fair to you to warn you that testimony has been received indicating a strong possibility that you may be implicated in the murder which is the subject of this investigation, or that an attempt may be made to implicate you as a defendant.
“The Court advises you that you are not called upon to answer any question which, in your opinion, may tend to incriminate you. The prosecution does not have any right to call you as a witness in a case in which you are the defendant. While you are not formally a defendant in this case, you may later on become one. The Court wants you to understand your situation and the Court further advises you that if you wish to confer with counsel at any time the Court is going to give you the opportunity to do so. Do you understand?”
“Yes, Your Honor,” Glamis Barlow said.
“And,” Judge Alvord went on, “anything you may say now, any answer you may give to questions now asked you can be used against you at any time. Do you so understand?”
“Yes, Your Honor.”
“The Court has committed one witness for contempt for failing to answer a question. This Court will, however, be far more charitable with a witness who is obviously being called in an attempt to lay the foundation for a later prosecution, and where the idea seems to be to surprise her into making a statement before she has the advice of counsel.”
“I resent the Court’s remarks,” Hamilton Burger said. “I feel they are uncalled for.”
Judge Alvord said, “I do not agree. I advise this witness that if she wishes to refuse to answer any question there will be no contempt until after she has been given an opportunity to confer with counsel of her own choosing in order to see if she cares to answer such question.
“You may proceed, Mr. District Attorney.”
Hamilton Burger turned to the witness savagely. “Are you acquainted with the decedent, Vera M. Martel, or were you acquainted with her during her lifetime?”
“Objected to, if the Court please,” Mason said. “Incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial.”
The Court said, “I will overrule the objection to this question.”
“I did not know Vera M. Martel,” Glamis Barlow said.
“I will direct your attention to the morning of the thirteenth of this month and ask you if, between the hour of eight and eight thirty, you were at your residence at 6231 Vauxman Avenue?”
“I was.”
“Between those times, or at any other time during the morning, did you have occasion to go to the workshop of the defendant, Carter Gilman? Now, by that workshop I am referring to this workshop indicated on the diagram, People’s Exhibit B. I want to be sure there is no misunderstanding. I am indicating on the diagram the workshop in question. Can you orient yourself according to this diagram, Miss Barlow?”
“I can.”
“Did you go to that workshop?”
“Just a minute,” Perry Mason said. “That is objected to as incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial. It is further objected to on the ground that the question is leading and suggestive, that it is an attempt on the part of counsel to cross-examine his own witness, that very apparently this question is designed for the purpose of trapping the witness into a position where she will be forced to be a witness against herself by the time the case comes to trial in the Superior Court; that the constitutional rights of the witness are being detoured by a technique which is not a legitimate part of the preliminary hearing in this case.”
“The Court is inclined to sustain that objection,” Judge Alvord said.
“If the Court please,” Hamilton Burger said angrily, “this witness has been advised of her constitutional rights. I am asking her now if she went to that particular room on that particular date at that particular time, and I have a right to an answer to that question. The witness is not charged with any crime as yet.”
“Will you state that it is not your intention to charge her with a crime as soon as this preliminary hearing is finished?” Judge Alvord asked.
“I will make no statement whatever to Court or counsel in regard to the intentions of the prosecution. I am at the moment calling a witness who, I believe, is familiar with certain facts in this case. I want to have her testimony made a part of this record. I am within my rights, I am not abusing the process of the Court, and I insist that the witness answer that question.”
“I want to answer that question,” Glamis Barlow shouted. “I wasn’t anywhere near that room.”
Hamilton Burger’s face twisted into a triumphant grin. “Let’s not misunderstand each other, Miss Barlow,” he said suavely. “This diagram, People’s Exhibit B, shows the ground-floor plan of the house at 6231 Vauxman Avenue in this city as it existed on the thirteenth day of this month, and in the question that I asked you I indicated the workshop shown on that diagram — and so that there can be no misunderstanding about it I will now ask you to write your name on the diagram indicating the room in question which you said you did not visit on the morning of the thirteenth between the hours of eight and eight thirty a.m.”