“And what about the shells that you found in the chamber of the gun?”
“I photographed those cartridges in place, so that the position of the cartridges could be determined. I made scratches upon the cartridges, numbering them one, two, three, four, five and six, and I made scratches upon the cylinder of the gun so that the position in which the respective cartridges had been found could be determined.”
“You have those photographs?”
“I do.”
“What do they show?”
“They show the cylinder of the gun. The cartridge chamber marked six is the one that was at the top of the cylinder, that is, the one that contained the U.M.C. cartridge. That would have been the last cartridge fired.”
“And what did you do with the shells themselves?”
“I have placed those in receptacles, each one of them numbered according to the places in the cylinder from which they were removed.”
“I ask that all of those and the photographs may be received in evidence as appropriate exhibit numbers,” Hamilton Burger said.
“No objection,” Mason said.
“That’s all,” Burger said.
“No cross-examination,” Mason said.
Judge Hoyt cleared his throat. “Mr. Mason.”
“Yes, Your Honor.”
“The Court is not unfamiliar with the fact that sometimes attorneys try to take advantage of the Court.”
“Yes, Your Honor.”
“I am not accusing you of doing that.”
“Thank you, Your Honor.”
“I am aware, however, that a desperate and resourceful attorney might seek to refrain from cross-examining witnesses and then raise the claim that the attorney had been intimidated by the remarks of the prosecutor and the remarks of the Court. I therefore charge you, Mr. Mason, that not only is the Court not trying to restrain you from any proper cross-examination of witnesses, but I believe it is your duty as the attorney representing the defendant to cross-examine witnesses who are called against her.”
“Yes, Your Honor.”
“Now then, in view of that statement do you wish to recall any of these witnesses for cross-examination?”
“No, Your Honor.”
Judge Hoyt said, “Let the record show that the Court has again given the defence an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and that the attorney for the defence refuses to make such cross-examination.”
“So stipulated,” Mason said cheerfully.
Hamilton Burger glowered at him.
“Harold Ogelsby take the stand,” Hamilton Burger said.
Ogelsby came forward, was sworn, identified himself as being a police detective.
“Did you have occasion to interrogate the defendant on the morning of the fourth of this month?”
“I did, yes, sir.”
“That was the day after the body of George C. Lutts had been discovered?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Did you ask her to make any statements?”
“I advised her of her rights. I told her that if she made any statements, they might be used against her. I told her that if she could make any explanation as to why she had been out in the vicinity at the time, that is, any explanation which would be reasonably satisfying, we would release her.”
“And did she make any statement?”
“No.”
“Just a minute,” Judge Hoyt said. “Do you wish to object to that, Mr. Mason?”
“No, Your Honor.”
“Well, the Court interposes an objection for you,” Judge Hoyt said. “There is no obligation on the part of a defendant to make a statement. I note that this is not a case where the defendant has specifically been accused of crime and fails to deny it. This is a case where the defendant was called on to make a statement, and she remained silent. The Court will strike the answer from the record. The Court will object to it on behalf of the defendant.”
“Very well, Your Honor,” Hamilton Burger said. “The point was merely preliminary.”
“Then get to the point you’re trying to make,” Judge Hoyt snapped, his nerves badly frayed.
“Yes, Your Honor.” Hamilton Burger was smiling now, suave and triumphant, all but ready to close his case, visualizing newspaper comments that, while Perry Mason had on occasion transformed the court of a committing magistrate into a three-ring circus, his pyrotechnics had signally failed to materialize when Hamilton Burger himself had taken over all phases of a preliminary hearing.
“Now then,” Hamilton Burger said, “did you have occasion to search the purse of the defendant?”
“I asked her if she would let me look in it.”
“Did she raise any objection?”
“No.”
“Did you look in it?”
“Yes.”
“Now, I am not going to ask you about all of the things that you found, many of which may be irrelevant, but I am going to ask you if in that purse you found a piece of paper?”
“I did.”
“And what was the nature of that paper?”
“It was a receipt from the Red Line Cab Company, receipt for cab seven-sixty-one, trip nine-eight-four, in an amount of two dollars and ninety-five cents.”
“You say that was cab seven-sixty-one?”
“Yes, sir.”
“You have that receipt here?”
“I do.”
“You found it in the defendant’s purse?”
“Yes.”
“I ask that it be introduced in evidence,” Hamilton Burger said, “and if the Court please, I will connect it up.”
“No objection,” Mason said cheerfully. “Stipulate that it may be received in evidence.”
“Cross-examine,” Hamilton Burger said.
“No questions,” Mason said.
Judge Hoyt again started to say something, then checked himself.
“Call Jerome C. Keddie to the stand,” Hamilton Burger said.
Jerome Keddie came forward, was sworn, gave his name, address and occupation as that of a taxi driver for the Red Line Cab Company.
“On the third of this month, were you operating a taxicab for the Red Line Cab Company?”
“I was.”
“What was the number of that cab?”
“Number seven-sixty-one.”
“Where were you operating that cab at about four-forty-five on the afternoon of the day?”
“I had deposited a fare at the country club at just about four-thirty. I was running back empty toward the city.”
“Did you follow a course which would take you near the point shown on this map, People’s Exhibit A?”
“I did, yes, sir.”
“What, if anything, happened as you approached the intersection of this roadway?”
“Well, when I came to the intersection I saw a very good-looking woman, dressed in a white skirt and white shoes and a sort of sport jacket with red trim, hurrying out of this road that—”
“Just a moment. Indicating on this map by the words ‘this road,’ what do you mean?”
The witness walked over to the map and indicated the road.
“Let the record show that the witness is indicating the road, in fact, the only road, leading from the property where the body was discovered to the main highway,” Hamilton Burger said. “Now then, just resume your position on the stand, Mr. Keddie, and tell me what happened.”
“This woman seemed very agitated and upset, very nervous. She flagged me down, and, of course, I was anxious to get a fare, so I pulled the car to a stop — I’d slowed down as soon as I saw her. I thought maybe she’d be looking for a cab. Well, she sure was. She was sure nervous and upset. She couldn’t tell me at first the way she wanted to go. She told me just to drive on toward town. I could see she was thinking.
“Well, then she told me that she wanted to go to the Union Station. Well, I knew that was a blind because—”
“That will do,” Judge Hoyt snapped. “If it is incumbent upon the Court to protect the rights of the defendant, the Court will endeavor to do so. The witness will give none of his conclusions. Simply state the facts.”