Chapter 16

As Hickman’s defense attorney, Jerome Walsh from Kansas City, arrived in Los Angeles, prosecutor Asa M. Keyes was gathering more and more data to convict Edward Hickman. Doctors who analyzed Hickman stated that they felt he exhibited sanity in his responses to their questions regarding the murder and dismemberment of Marion Parker.

Dr. Thomas Orbison was one of a battery of psychiatrists who analyzed Hickman. He came away believing that Hickman’s sex life was “perfectly ordinary” and made note of the dichotomy between Hickman’s professed religious beliefs and his actions. He stated that there was an early conflict between Hickman’s religion and criminal instincts and that he chose the criminal side of it. Hickman said as much to Dr. Orbison, offering no reticence or any hesitation about it. Hickman, however, bristled when Orbison asked him his reasons for dismembering Marion Parker. He felt that if he answered these questions the way they wanted him to, it would be used to build up the case of the prosecution. Hickman avoided any questions that could be incriminating. His debate skills were actively responding to the doctor in a manner that would allow him to come off in the manner that he wanted depicted.

For someone who professed insanity, such instances displayed some rather clear thinking on the part of Edward Hickman. It was considered by some that his ploy was to appear like an insane person trying to seem that he was sane. It was a bit convoluted, but Edward felt he could manipulate the system successfully just as he believed his oratory skills could net a national prize. To Hickman, this was just another debate contest. However, aside from this superficial bravado, there were times when Hickman was resigned to facing the gallows. Certainly, his defense attorneys felt that anyone who could commit so horrible a crime as the murder and dismemberment of a twelve-year-old child was most certainly insane. And it was up to these attorneys to prove to a jury that insanity is what drove Edward Hickman to murder Marion Parker.

The barrage of analysts continued. Hickman was more comfortable discussing his sexual feelings and beliefs with another doctor, a Dr. Mikels.

“The first time that I masturbated was about two years ago, after I left high school. The first time I had intercourse was about thirteen years of age. The girl was about twelve. I did this several times while I was in Kansas City.”

Hickman also stated, “I don’t have any use for whores. Whenever I see a whore, I feel like choking her.”

When confronted by Dr. Orbison as to his sanity, Hickman stated, “I don’t think I am insane. It was claimed for me.”[1]

However, Hickman also continued to write, and he shared his writings with the doctors. Among the things he wrote included a disturbing passage regarding his feelings about the murder of Marion Parker: “The murder of Marion Parker and the horrible, terrible, simply awful mutilation of Marion Parker’s helpless body, a separate deed from the kidnapping of Marion Parker, a distinct crime done in blood with a knife by my own hands on the morning of December 17, 1927, in the bathtub in Apartment No. 315 at the Bellevue Arms Apartments of Los Angeles, California, was not mean by me, Edward Hickman, but through me under the guidance and protection of, and as a duty to this great Providence for the great work which it had been calling me since the age of twelve to perform for the safety and security of human rights and liberties in the United States of America.”[2]

Hickman had several conferences with his attorney and appeared in the California Supreme Court on January 3 to deliver a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity. Jerome Walsh filed an affidavit asking for delay in entering his client’s plea, but this was denied. After Hickman’s plea, Walsh again asked for a delay of thirty-five days, which was five days over the state’s legal limit. Judge Carlos Hardy noted that Walsh had no probable witnesses in his affidavit and set a trial date of January 25.

There were plans to speed up the jury selection process, the judge considering taking advantage of a new law that would allow him to examine prospective jurors. With Hickman’s insanity plea, he was, in essence, admitting to the murder, and thus the burden of proof would be in the hands of his defense attorneys.

Meanwhile, plans were made for Hickman to be tried along with Welby Hunt for the murder of druggist Ivy Thoms. Hunt’s attorney had already announced that his client would plead guilty, raising the speculation that Hunt may agree to testify against Hickman. The attorney also intended to have the sixteen-year-old Hunt tried in juvenile court, but the case was referred back to superior court. A trial date for Hunt was set for January 10. Word came through Walsh that Hickman’s mother, Eva, and his seventeen-year-old sister, Mary, would be arriving from Kansas City to assist in the defense. Colonel Charles E. “Cap” Edwards would also be among the defense witnesses. The former chief of police of Kansas City had continued to be an adviser to the Hickman family.

Perhaps the most startling news was that Hickman’s father, William Thomas Hickman, was planning to come to Los Angeles and aid in the defense of the son he had condemned to the press only days before. Initially shocked by the Marion Parker murder, William Hickman Sr. was content with letting the law take care of his son, telling the press that Edward should pay the extreme penalty. However, after pondering the situation, Hickman Sr. had a change of heart. He stated that his son was undoubtedly insane and requested to be called as a witness at Edward’s sanity trial. He believed that he could offer solid evidence regarding his ex-wife’s family history that would clearly indicate that Edward was indeed insane and that his insanity plea was not merely a ploy to stay alive. Prosecuting attorneys said that they would demand the death penalty. The defense would work to prove their insanity claim and save Hickman from the gallows. Attorney Jerome Walsh stated that all he sought to do was to find some humane and civilized solution to this tragedy.

As Hickman was being arraigned in the Marion Parker case, he sat next to Walsh, looking down at the floor and speaking only twice, briefly. After entering his plea, Hickman was asked if he knew that his insanity plea constituted an admission of the killing. He responded in the affirmative. At the rear of the courtroom sat Perry Parker Jr. He was the sole representative of the Parker family at the arraignment. He was laying eyes on Hickman for the first time as reporters closely watched the Parker boy’s reactions. Parker appeared to be very tense and under a tremendous amount of strain. Reporters recalled that his eyes nervously darted between the judge and the man who killed and dismembered his beloved little sister. When the arraignment ended and Hickman was taken from the room, Parker offered no comments to the reporters who clamored around him and shouted out questions. He left the courtroom without saying a word to anyone.

The newspapers reported that the insanity hearing of William Edward Hickman would be the probable beginning of a long legal fight by the youth’s counsel to save him from the gallows. Prosecuting attorneys had frequently declared that they would demand the death penalty for Hickman.

The prosecution had already announced that Marion’s long-suffering father, Perry Parker Sr., would be participating in the trial for the prosecution. Perry Parker was not relishing this. His beloved daughter was dead, she would not be coming home, and her killer was in police custody. Parker simply wanted the American judicial system to do what it was meant to do and sentence William Edward Hickman to death.

But Parker realized the importance of his testimony. He would not be cross-examined, and he could be brief and to the point. Parker mulled it over for a long time and talked it over with his son, still protecting his wife and daughter from most of the details. After a long period of conflicting thoughts and serious pondering, Perry Parker agreed to testify against William Edward Hickman for the second time in his life. This time it was for something much more serious than counterfeiting at the bank.

Notes

1.

Richard Cantillon, In Defense of the Fox (Anderson, SC: Droke House/Hallux, 1972).

2.

Cantillon, In Defense of the Fox.