The courtroom was in a hubbub as Judge Fisk left the bench. Newspaper reporters crowded around Perry Mason asking him what he was trying to do, what his strategy was, where the fingerprints came from, how he had secured possession of them, what significance could be attached to them.
Mason parried all questions with a smiling, “No comment.”
When court was reconvened an indignant deputy prosecutor was on his feet. “Your Honor,” he said, “we have had this witness give her fingerprints to an expert from the sheriff’s office, an expert who is abundantly qualified. It now appears that there is not the slightest resemblance between the fingerprints on this card presented by Perry Mason and the fingerprints of the witness, and I submit that Perry Mason must have known that at the time. I submit that he is guilty of misconduct in taking advantage of the procedure of the court and attempting to intimidate the witness and create a false impression with the jurors.”
Mason said urbanely, “If the expert you quote is prepared to go on the stand and swear that these are not the same fingerprints I will be bound by his testimony. I will withdraw my question to the witness as to whether or not they are her fingerprints. I suggest that this cross-examination be interrupted so the expert can go on the stand.”
“Very well,” Ormsby said, seething with anger. “You may step down, Mrs. Palmer, and I’ll call Hervey Lavar.”
“Mr. Lavar is a fingerprint expert in the office of the district attorney?” Mason asked.
“In the sheriff’s office.”
“Very well,” Mason said, “I will stipulate to Mr. Lavar’s qualifications, and you may proceed with the interrogation.”
“I hand you two pieces of paper bearing fingerprints,” Ormsby said. “One of them is marked Number F-A, and one of them is marked for identification Number F-B.”
“Yes, sir.”
“I will ask you what the document F-B is, first.”
“That is a set of fingerprints made from the fingers of the witness who was just on the stand, Mrs. Nadine Palmer.”
“And what is F-A?”
“That is a set of fingerprints which was shown to the witness by Mr. Mason, asking her if those were her fingerprints.”
“Is there any similarity between any of the fingerprints on the card F-A and any of the fingerprints on the card F-B?”
“There is not.”
“Were those fingerprints made by the same person?”
“They were not.”
“Were any of those fingerprints on the card F-A the fingerprints of the person whose fingers made the prints on F-B?”
“No, sir.”
“Did the witness, Nadine Palmer, make any of the fingerprints on the card F-A, or did any of those fingerprints come from her fingers?”
“No, sir.”
“I have no further questions,” Ormsby said.
“I will waive cross-examination at this time,” Mason said. “I ask that both of the documents be marked as exhibits.”
“The prosecution doesn’t want them as exhibits in its case,” Ormsby snapped.
“Then enter them as exhibits in the defendants’ case,” Mason said, waving his hand in a gesture of generosity, indicating his utter fairness in the matter. “Put them in as defendants’ exhibit one and two.”
“Very well,” Judge Fisk said. “They may go in evidence as defendants’ exhibit one and two. Now you will return to the stand, Mrs. Palmer, for further cross-examination.”
“I have no further cross-examination,” Mason said.
“Any redirect?” Judge Fisk asked.
“None.”
“Very well, Mrs. Palmer, you are excused.”
“That’s the People’s case,” Ormsby said.
“Does the defense wish a recess?” Judge Fisk asked.
“The defense does not,” Mason said. “The defense will call as its first and only witness Estelle Rankin.”
“As your only witness?” Ormsby asked in surprise.
“As my only witness,” Mason said. “I don’t think I’ll need any more.”
Judge Fisk said, “Just a moment, gentlemen. There will be no asides, please. Miss Rankin, will you take the stand, please?”
Estelle Rankin, a tall, well-formed redhead with large brown eyes, took the stand, crossed her knees, glanced at the jurors, then turned toward Perry Mason.
“Where do you live, Miss Rankin?”
“Las Vegas, Nevada.”
“Did you live there on the fifteenth of March of this year?”
“I did.”
“What was your occupation?”
“I worked evenings running a gift shop.”
“Can you tell us something of the merchandise handled by that gift shop?”
“Ornate leather goods, curios, a small line of toilet accessories, postcards of various sorts, souvenirs of Las Vegas, and a line of magazines and cigars and cigarettes. Also a certain amount of luggage.”
“On the evening of March fifteenth did you receive an order from a bellboy for a briefcase?”
“From the bell captain, yes, sir.”
“What time was that?”
“It was nine forty-five in the evening.”
“Would you know that briefcase if you saw it again?”
“Yes.”
Mason said, “I call your attention to the People’s Exhibit 26-A and ask you if you have ever seen that briefcase before.”
The witness took the briefcase, turned it over in her hands and said, “Yes. That is the briefcase that I sold at that time.”
“And up to the hour of nine forty-five on the evening of March fifteenth that briefcase had been in the stock of the curio shop and general store where you were working?”
“Yes, sir.”
“You’re positive.”
“Positive.”
“That’s all,” Mason said. “Cross-examine.”
Ormsby arose with something of a sneer. “As far as you know, Miss Rankin, this briefcase, People’s Exhibit 26-A, could have been ordered by Mr. Mason that night simply for the purpose of confusing the police. The negotiable instruments which were found in it by the police could well have been taken by Mr. Mason from another briefcase.”
“Objected to,” Mason said, “on the ground it calls for a conclusion of the witness. The prosecution purported to show that this particular briefcase with negotiable securities was brought by me from Los Angeles. I have a right to show where it came from.”
“But that evidence doesn’t mean a thing,” Ormsby said. “It was merely an assumption by a witness.”
“I suggest,” Mason said, “Counsel can argue the case to the jury, and I submit that it does mean a great deal because I was being shadowed while I was in Las Vegas by a member of the Las Vegas Police Department.”
“There’s nothing in the evidence to show that,” Ormsby said. “And anyway the point is immaterial.”
“Well, then I’d like to recall Lieutenant Tragg for further cross-examination and establish that I was under constant surveillance,” Mason said.
“My case is closed. You can’t reopen it to cross-examine a witness now,” Ormsby protested.
“Very well,” Mason said affably. “I have such complete confidence in the integrity of Lieutenant Tragg I’ll call him as my witness.”
Lieutenant Tragg came forward, puzzled.
Mason said, “Referring you to People’s Exhibit 26-A, Lieutenant Tragg, the briefcase which was found in my room. Who found that briefcase?”
“I did.”
“Did you notice any other briefcase in the room?”
“No, sir, I didn’t. But there was a suitcase in the room.”
“I’m talking about a briefcase,” Mason said. “Was there any other briefcase in the room?”
“Not in plain sight.”