“If the Court please,” Mason said, “I object to that question as calling for a conclusion of the witness in a manner which invades the province of the jury. It is for the jury to determine whether this shoe made that print, if it should appear there is any print there, and the witness is not testifying purely to a figment of the imagination.
“This witness can testify as to what he has found. He can testify as to an opinion in connection with the legitimate field of expert evidence, but he cannot invade the province of the jury.”
Judge Decker said, “Let me see that photograph and the shoe please.”
The judge studied the photograph and the shoe for some seconds, then said, “the objection will be sustained. The jurors can and will draw their own conclusions. This witness can testify only as to the facts from which such conclusions can be drawn.”
The prosecution took the ruling with poor grace. “If the Court please,” Hamilton Burger said ponderously getting to his feet and frowning with displeasure, “this witness has qualified himself as an expert.”
“He may give his opinions as to collateral matters,” Judge Decker ruled. “He may set forth the various factors in this case, but on the question of whether this identical shoe made this identical print which the witness claims he has been able to decipher from the photograph, the Court feels it would be invading the province of the jury to permit an answer to the question.
“The Court may point out that, while the witness contends there were two footprints visible in the photograph, that very point may be contested by the defense.”
Hamilton Burger slowly sat down.
Hendrie resumed the examination. “You have testified that the second print, the one made with the man’s shoe, and which covers the first print, was made some two hours later?”
“I would say approximately two or three or perhaps four hours later.”
“How can you determine?”
“There are certain changes in blood which take place when the blood leaves the body. Blood will coagulate in some three minutes or less. After it has coagulated or clotted it can be restored to liquid form by pressure or by certain types of agitation. In this case it is my opinion that the person wearing the man’s shoes stepped in the pool of blood after it had coagulated and that the track which was made thereafter shows distinctly certain characteristics which indicate the condition of the blood, a condition which, in my opinion, would probably indicate an interval of some time, probably two or three hours.”
“Have you examined a man’s shoe which could have made the Covering track shown in this photograph?”
“I have.”
“Do you have that shoe with you?”
“I do.”
“Will you produce it please?”
The witness delved into his bag and produced a shoe.
“Is there something distinctive about this shoe?”
“There is.”
“In what way?”
“There is a relatively new rubber heel on the shoe and there is a little defect in that rubber heel which can be noticed here and the same defect in exactly the same place can be seen in this photograph of the track.”
“Have you tested this shoe for blood?”
“I have. Yes, sir.”
“Did you find blood on it?”
“Yes, sir. My chemical tests showed the presence of blood.”
“Those tests are responsible for the discoloration of the shoe?”
“That is right.”
“Where may I ask did you get this shoe?”
“From a suitcase, the property of Homer Garvin, Sr.”
Hendrie said, “May we have this shoe marked People’s Exhibit Number 33 for identification. Now, Mr. Clinton, did you examine the Casselman apartment for latent fingerprints?”
“I did.”
“What did you find?”
“The doorknobs of all doors had been carefully wiped by someone so that there were no latent fingerprints on any of the knobs with one exception.”
“And that exception?”
“The back door. There was a left thumb print on that back door without anything else in the line of a latent fingerprint appearing on it.”
“Do you know whose fingerprint it was that was found on the door of this apartment?”
“Yes. sir.”
“Whose was it?”
“The fingerprint of Mr. Homer Garvin.”
“Cross-examine,” Hendrie said turning to Perry Mason.
Mason said, “How do you know that the room had been wiped clean of fingerprints?”
“Because normally there are fingerprints in every room. There are latent fingerprints some of which are smudged, some of which can be developed so that they can be identified. But when one finds a complete absence of fingerprints, it indicates that someone has removed all fingerprints, particularly from objects like doorknobs.”
“When was this done?” Mason asked.
“I can’t tell you when it was done.”
“You found a fingerprint on the knob of the back door?”
“Yes, sir. A left thumb print.”
“And you were able to identify that?”
“I did. Yes, sir. It was the left thumb print of Homer Garvin.”
“Senior or Junior?”
“Senior.”
“When was it made?”
“I can’t tell you.”
“Was it made before the murder was committed?”
“I don’t know. I do know that it was made after the knobs had been wiped clean of fingerprints, and since there was only the one fingerprint on all the doorknobs, I know that the cleaning of these objects for fingerprints must have been done while Mr. Garvin was in the room.”
“How do you know that?”
“Because there were no other fingerprints. If he had entered the room after the knobs had been cleaned, there would have been fingerprints on the knobs where he had entered the room, where he had touched the doors, but, since there was only the one absolutely perfect fingerprint, which had been made by pressure of the thumb against the knob of the door, I know that the articles had been wiped clean at a time when he was in the room.”
“This fingerprint was on the knob of the back door?”
“Yes, on the knob of the back door.”
“Wasn’t it possible that someone could have wiped the finger-prints from the inside of the knobs and that Mr. Garvin, coming up the back stairs of the apartment and finding the apartment door slightly open, had decided to close it, that he had reached in and, in doing so, had touched his thumb to the knob in this manner?”
“No, sir. That fingerprint was deliberately left on the doorknob. It was not in a position where a person would have normally placed his hand to close the door.”
Mason said, “Someone could have reversed the doorknobs, could they not?”
“What do you mean?”
“The rounded doorknob is placed on a square spindle and held in place by a setscrew. The knob which you found on the inside of the door could at some previous time have been on the outside of the door, could it not?”
“It could have, yes,” the witness reluctantly conceded.
“And the print of Mr. Garvin could have been made on the outside knob, and thereafter someone wearing gloves could have conceivably transferred the outer knob to the inside?”
“Well, of course, if you want to engage in fanciful speculation as to the things which could conceivably have happened, it could have been done.”
“That’s all,” Mason said.
“Now then, if the Court please,” Hamilton Burger said, getting to his feet, “I am going to call a hostile witness. I am going to call Homer Garvin, Sr. to the witness stand.”