“The objection is sustained. The last part of the answer will go out,” Judge Flint said.
“And what did you find?” Hamilton Burger asked, smiling slightly at the knowledge he had got his point across to the jury.
“After three or four false leads, we found a sand hill where there were faint indications that something had disturbed the surface of the sand, and by following those indications to the bottom of the sand hill and digging we found the badly decomposed body of a woman.”
“Were you able to identify that body?”
“Objected to as incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial,” Mason said.
“The objection is overruled. This evidence, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is being admitted purely for the purpose of corroborating the testimony of the previous witness and not with the idea that any less evidence would be required in the case at bar because there might be evidence indicating the possible commission of another crime. Nor are you to permit yourselves to consider any subsequent crime, even for the purpose of proving motivation, but only for the purpose of corroborating the testimony of the previous witness. You are to consider this evidence only for that limited purpose. Continue, Mr. Prosecutor.”
“I will ask you this, Lieutenant Tragg. Was there anything anywhere on the body that gave any clue as to its identity?”
“There was.”
“Will you describe it, please?”
“The tips of the fingers were badly decomposed. The weather had been intensely hot. The body had been buried in a rather shallow sand grave. Putrefaction and an advanced stage of decomposition made it difficult to make a positive identification. However, by a process of pickling the fingers in a formaldehyde solution and hardening them, we were able to get a fairly good set of fingerprints sufficient to give certain aspects of identification.”
“Now then, Lieutenant Tragg, I will ask you if you made prints of the thumbs of this body.”
“We did. We printed all the fingers as best we could.”
“I am at the moment particularly interested in the thumbs. I am going to ask you if you found any other physical evidence on the body.”
“We did.”
“What did you find?”
“We found a purse, and in that purse we found a receipt for rent of Apartment 907 at the Parkhurst Apartments. That receipt was made out in the name of Dorrie Ambler. We also found a key to Apartment 907. We found some other receipts made to Dorrie Ambler.”
“Did you find a driving licence made to Dorrie Ambler?”
“Not there.”
“Please pay attention to my question, Lieutenant. I didn’t ask you that question. I asked you if you found a driving licence made out to Dorrie Ambler.”
“We did.”
“Where did you find that?”
“That driving licence was in the possession of the defendant at the time of her arrest. It was tucked down in a concealed pocket in her purse.”
“And did that driving licence contain the thumbprint of the applicant?”
“It contained a photostat of it.”
“And did you subsequently attempt to compare the thumbprint of the cadaver you discovered with the thumbprint on the driving licence of Dorrie Ambler?”
“I did.”
“With what result?”
“Objected to as calling for a conclusion of the witness,” Mason said. “It is incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial. It is not the best evidence. The jury are entitled to have the thumbprints presented to them for comparison, and Lieutenant Tragg can, if he wishes, point out points of similarity in the prints. But he cannot testify to his conclusion.”
“I think I will sustain the objection,” Judge Flint said.
“Very well. It will prolong the case,” Hamilton Burger said.
“In a case of this magnitude the time element is not particularly essential, Mr. Prosecutor,” Judge Flint rebuked.
Hamilton Burger bowed gravely.
He introduced a photographic enlargement of the thumbprint of Dorrie Ambler, taken from her application for a driving licence. Then he introduced a photograph of the thumbprint of the woman whose body Lieutenant Tragg had found.
“Now then, Lieutenant Tragg,” Hamilton Burger said, “by pointing to these two enlarged photographs which are on easels standing where the jurors can see them, can you point out any similarities?”
“I can. I have listed the points of similarity.”
“How many do you find?”
“I find six.”
“Will you point them out to the jury, please? Take this pointer and point to them on the easels.”
Lt. Tragg pointed out the various points of similarity.
“And these are all?” Hamilton Burger asked.
“No, sir. They are not all. They are the only ones that I can be sufficiently positive of to make a complete identification. You will realize that due to the process of putrefaction and decomposition it was exceedingly difficult to get a good legible fingerprint from the body of the deceased. We did the best we could, that’s all.”
“Were you able to form an opinion as to the age and sex of the decedent?”
“Oh, yes. The body was that of a female, apparently in the early twenties.”
“And you took specimens of hair from the body?”
“We did. And those were compared with the hair colour of Dorrie Ambler as mentioned in the application for driving licence.”
“Did you find anything else at or near the body of this woman?” Hamilton Burger asked.
“We found a thirty-eight-calibre revolver with one discharged shell and five loaded shells. It was a Smith and Wesson with a two-inch barrel, Number C-48809.”
“Did you subsequently make tests with that gun in the ballistics department?”
“I did.”
“You fired test bullets through it?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And did you make a comparison with any other bullet?”
“Yes, sir.”
“What bullet?”
“A bullet that had been recovered from the skull of the body I found there in the sand hills.”
“And what did you find?”
“The bullets showed identical striations. The bullets had been fired from the same gun; that is, the fatal bullet matched absolutely with the test bullets.”
“Do you have photographs showing the result of the experiments?”
“I do.”
“Will you present them, please?”
Lt. Tragg presented photographs of the fatal bullet and the test bullet.
“What is this line of demarcation in the middle?”
“That is a line of demarcation made in a comparison microscope. The bullet above that line is the fatal bullet; the bullet below is the test bullet.”
“And those bullets are rotated on this comparison microscope until you reach a point where the lines of identity coincide? Where the striations are continuations of each other?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And when that happens, what does it indicate, Lieutenant?”
“That the bullets were both fired from the same gun.”
“And that is the case here?”
“Yes, sir.”
“You may cross-examine,” Hamilton Burger said abruptly.
Mason approached the witness. “Lieutenant Tragg, was the body you discovered that of Dorrie Ambler? Please answer that question yes or no.”
Lt. Tragg hesitated. “I think it—”
“I don’t want to know what you think,” Mason interrupted. “I want to know what you know. Was the body that of Dorrie Ambler or not?”
“I don’t know,” Tragg said.
“You didn’t get enough points of similarity from the fingerprint to establish identification?”
“I will state this,” Lt. Tragg said, “we got enough points of identification to show a very strong probability.”