“He can’t do that,” Sprague said to the coroner.
“I’ve already done it,” Mason told him.
The coroner said, “I don’t know whether he can or not, but I know that this young woman is nervous. I don’t think you’re making proper allowance for that condition, Sprague. Under ordinary circumstances, a widow is given condolences and sympathy. She’s particularly spared from any nerve shock. This witness certainly has been subjected to a series of trying experiences during the last twenty-four hours. As far as the coroner is concerned, she’s going to be excused. We’re trying to complete this inquest at one sitting. I’m getting facts, that’s all. And I want to keep moving. You’ll have plenty of opportunity to ask her questions before the Grand Jury, and on the witness stand... I’m going to ask Mrs. Helen Watkins Sabin to come forward as a witness.”
“She ain’t here,” the sheriff said.
“Where is she?”
“I don’t know, I haven’t been able to serve a subpoena on her.”
“How about Steven Watkins?”
“The same with him.”
“Is Waid here, the secretary?”
“Yes. He’s been subpoenaed and is here.”
“Well, let’s hear from Sergeant Holcomb,” the coroner said. “Sergeant Holcomb, come forward and be sworn, please.”
Sergeant Holcomb took the witness stand. The coroner said, “Now, you’re a sergeant on the homicide squad of the Metropolitan Police, aren’t you, Sergeant, and you know all about the investigation of murder cases, and the scientific method of apprehending criminals?”
“That’s right,” Sergeant Holcomb admitted.
“Now you got this box with the creel of fish in it, that Sheriff Barnes sent in?”
“Yes, that was received at the technical laboratory of the police department. We had previously received a telephone call from Sheriff Barnes about it.”
“What did you find out about the fish?” the coroner asked.
“We made some tests,” Sergeant Holcomb said. “I didn’t make the tests myself, but I was present when they were made, and know what the experts found.”
“What did they find?”
“They found that there had been a limit of fish in the creel; that the fish were, of course, badly decomposed, but, as nearly as could be ascertained, the fish had been cleaned and wrapped in willow leaves. They had not been washed after being wrapped in willow leaves.”
“And you went up to the cabin with Sheriff Barnes the next day?”
“That’s right. Sheriff Barnes wanted me to see the cabin, and we were to meet Richard Waid there. He was coming on from New York by plane, and we wanted to meet him in a place where our first conversation wouldn’t be interrupted by newspaper reporters.”
“All right, go on,” the coroner said.
“Well,” Holcomb observed, “we went to the cabin. We met Mr. Mason on the road up to the cabin. Richard Waid came while we were there at the cabin.”
“What did you find at the cabin, in the line of physical conditions?” the coroner asked.
“Just about the same as has been described.”
“At this time,” the coroner said, “I think the jury had better take a look at all of these photographs, because I’m going to ask Sergeant Holcomb some questions about them.”
The coroner waited while the photographs were passed around to the jurors, then turned back to Sergeant Holcomb.
“Sergeant Holcomb,” he said, “I want to give the members of this jury the benefit of your experience. I want you to tell them what the various things in that cabin indicate.”
The coroner glanced down at Perry Mason and said, “I suppose you may object that this is a conclusion of the witness, but it seems to me this man has had a lot of experience, and I don’t know why he shouldn’t...”
“Not at all,” Mason said. “I think it’s a very wise question. I think it’s a perfectly proper way of getting at the ultimate facts of the case.”
Sergeant Holcomb shifted himself to an easier position in the witness chair, gazed impressively at the jury, and said, “Helen Monteith killed Fremont C. Sabin. There are dozens of things which would be sufficient to establish an absolutely ironclad case against her, before any jury. First, she had motive. Sabin had married her under an assumed name; he had placed her in the position of being a bigamous wife. He had lied to her, tricked her, and deceived her. When she found out that the man she had married was Fremont C. Sabin, and that Sabin had a wife very much alive at the moment, she shot him. She probably didn’t intend to shoot him when she went to the cabin. Our experience has been that, in emotional murders of this nature, a woman frequently takes a gun for the purpose of threatening a man, for the purpose of frightening him, or for the purpose of making him believe that she isn’t to be trifled with; then, having pointed the gun at him, it’s a simple matter to pull the trigger, an almost unconscious reflex, a momentary surrender to emotion. The effects, of course, are disastrous.
“Second, Helen Monteith had the murder weapon in her possession. Her statement that she gave it to her husband is, of course, absurd on the face of it. The crime could not have been suicide. The man didn’t move from the time he fell to the floor. The gun was found some distance away, and was wiped clean of fingerprints.
“Third, she admits having been present at the cabin at the exact moment Sabin was murdered. She, therefore, combines motive, means and opportunity.”
“How do you fix that exact moment of the murder?” the coroner asked.
“It’s a matter of making correct deductions from circumstantial evidence,” Sergeant Holcomb said.
“Just a minute,” Mason interrupted. “Wouldn’t it be better to let the sergeant tell the jury the various factors which control the time element in this case, and let the jurors judge for themselves?”
“I don’t know,” the coroner admitted. “I’m trying to expedite matters as much as possible.”
Sergeant Holcomb said, “It would be absolutely foolish to resort to any such procedure. The interpretation of circumstantial evidence is something which calls for a highly specialized training. There are some things from which even the layman can make logical deductions, but on a complicated matter it requires years of experience. I have had that experience, and I am properly qualified to interpret the evidence for the jury. Therefore, I say that Fremont C. Sabin met his death sometime between ten o’clock in the morning and around noon, on Tuesday, the sixth day of September.”
“Now, just explain to the jury how you interpret the evidence so as to fix the time,” the coroner said.
“First, we go back to known facts, and reason from them,” Sergeant Holcomb said. “We know that Fremont C. Sabin intended to go to his cabin on Monday, the fifth, in order to take advantage of the opening of fishing season on the sixth. We know that he actually did go there; we know that he was alive at ten o’clock in the evening of the fifth, because he talked with his secretary on the telephone. We know that he went to bed, that he wound the alarm clock and set the alarm. We know that the alarm went off at five-thirty. We know that he arose, went out, and caught a limit of fish. It is problematical how long it would take him to catch a limit, but, in discussing fishing conditions with other anglers on the creek, it would seem that with the utmost good fortune he could not possibly have caught a limit before nine-thirty o’clock. He returned to the cabin, then, at between ten and eleven in the morning. He had already had a breakfast, two eggs, probably scrambled, some bacon and some coffee. He was once more hungry. He opened a can of beans, warmed those up and ate them. He did this before he even bothered to put his fish in the icebox. He left his fish in the creel, intending to put them in the icebox as soon as he had washed them. But he was hungry enough to want to finish with his lunch before he put the fish away. In the ordinary course of things, he would have put those fish away immediately after he had eaten, probably before he had even washed his dishes. He didn’t do that.”