Judge Harmon Strouse looked down at the defense counsel table at Perry Mason, Mason’s client, Stewart G. Bedford, seated beside him, and, immediately behind Bedford, a uniformed officer.
“The peremptory challenge is with the defense,” Judge Strouse said.
“The defense passes,” Mason said.
Judge Strouse glanced at Hamilton Burger, the barrel-chested, bull-necked district attorney whose vendetta with Perry Mason was well known.
“The prosecution is quite satisfied with the jury,” Hamilton Burger snapped.
“Very well,” Judge Strouse said. “The jurors will stand and be sworn to try the case.”
Bedford leaned forward to whisper to Mason. “Well, now at least we’ll know what they have against me,” he said, “and what we have to fight. The evidence they presented before the grand jury was just barely sufficient to get an indictment, and that’s all. They’re purposely leaving me in the dark.”
Mason nodded.
Hamilton Burger arose and said, “I am going to make a somewhat unprecedented move, Your Honor. This is an intelligent jury. It doesn’t have to be told what I am going to try to do. I am waiving my opening statement. I will call as my first witness Thomas G. Farland.”
Farland, being sworn, testified that he was a police officer, that on the sixth day of April he had been instructed to go to The Staylonger Motel, that he had met the manager there, a man named Morrison Brems, that he had exhibited his credentials, had stated that he wished to look in unit sixteen, that he had gone to unit sixteen and had there found a body lying on the floor. The body was that of a man who had apparently been shot, and the witness had promptly notified the Homicide Squad, which had in due time arrived with a deputy coroner, fingerprint experts, et cetera, that the witness had waited until the Homicide Squad arrived.
“Cross-examine!” Hamilton Burger snapped.
“How did you happen to go to the motel?” Mason asked.
“I was instructed.”
“By whom?”
“By communications.”
“In what way?”
“The call came over the radio.”
“And what was said in the call?”
“Objected to as incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial. Not proper cross-examination and hearsay,” Hamilton Burger said.
Mason said, “The witness testified that he was ‘instructed’ to go to unit sixteen. Under the familiar rule that whenever a part of a conversation is brought out in direct examination the cross-examiner can show the entire conversation, I want to know what was said when the instructions were given to him.”
“It’s hearsay,” Hamilton Burger said.
“It’s a conversation,” Mason said, smiling.
“The objection is overruled,” Judge Strouse said. “The witness, having testified to part of the conversation, may relate it all on cross-examination.”
“Well,” Farland said, “it was just that I was to go to the motel, that’s all.”
“Anything said about what you might find there?”
“Yes.”
“What?”
“A body.”
“Anything said about how the announcer knew there was a body there?”
“He said it had been reported.”
“Anything said about how it had been reported?”
“He said an anonymous telephone tip.”
“Anything said about who gave the anonymous tip—whether it was a man’s voice or a woman’s voice?”
The witness hesitated.
“Yes or no?” Mason said.
“Yes,” he said. “It was a woman’s voice.”
“Thank you,” Mason said with exaggerated politeness. “That’s all.”
Hamilton Burger put a succession of routine witnesses on the stand, witnesses showing that the dead man had been identified as Binney Denham, that a .38 caliber bullet had fallen from the front of Denham’s coat when the body was moved.
“Morrison Brems will be my next witness,” Hamilton Burger said.
When Brems came forward and was sworn, Hamilton Burger nodded to Vincent Hadley, the assistant district attorney who sat on his left, and Hadley, a suave, polished courtroom strategist, examined the manager of the motel, bringing out the fact that on April sixth, sometime around eleven o’clock in the morning, the defendant, accompanied by a young woman, had stopped at his motel; that the defendant had told him he was to be joined by another couple from San Diego; that they wished two units; that the witness had suggested to the defendant it would be better to wait for the other couple to arrive and let them register, in which event they would be paying only for their half of the motel unit. However, the defendant had insisted on paying the whole charge and having immediate occupancy of the double.
“Under what name did the defendant register?” Vincent Hadley asked.
“Under the name of S. G. Wilfred.”
“And wife.”
“Then what happened?” Hadley asked.
“Well, I didn’t pay too much attention to them after that. Of course, looking the situation over and the way it had been put up to me I thought—”
“Never mind what you thought,” Hadley interrupted. “Just tell us what happened, what you observed, what you saw, what was said to you by the defendant, or by others in the presence of the defendant.”
“Well, just where do you want me to begin?”
“Just answer the question. What happened next?”
“They were in there for a while, and then the girl—”
“Now, by the girl, are you referring to Mrs. Wilfred?”
“Well, of course she wasn’t any Mrs. Wilfred.”
“You don’t know that,” Hadley said. “She registered as Mrs. Wilfred, didn’t she?”
“Well, the defendant here registered her as Mrs. Wilfred.”
“All right Call her Mrs. Wilfred then. What happened next?”
“Well, Mrs. Wilfred went out twice. The first time she went around to the outer door of unit fifteen and I thought she was going in that way, but—”
“Never mind what you thought. What did she do?”
“I know she locked him in, but I can’t swear I saw the key turn in the lock, so I suppose you won’t let me say a thing about that. Then after she’d done whatever it was she was doing, she went to the car and got out some baggage. She took that in to unit sixteen. Then a short time later she came out and went to the glove compartment of the car. I don’t know how long she was there that time because I was called away and didn’t get back for half an hour or so.
“Then quite a while later they both left the place, got in the car and drove away.”
“Now just a minute,” Hadley said. “Prior to the time that you saw them drive away, had anyone else been near the car?”
“That I just can’t swear to,” Brems said.
“Then don’t swear to it,” Hadley said. “Just tell us what you know and what you saw.”
“Well, I saw a beat-up sort of car parked down there by unit sixteen for a few minutes. I thought it was this other couple that had—”
“What did you see?”
“Well, I just saw this car parked there for a spell. After a while it drove away.”
“Now the car didn’t drive out. Someone must have driven it out.”
“That’s right.”
“Do you know the person who was driving that car?”
“I didn’t then. I do now.”
“Who was it?”
“This here Mr. Denham—the man who was found dead.”
“You saw his face?”
“Yes.”
“Did he stop?”
“No, sir.”
“He didn’t stop when he drove his car out?”
“No, sir.”
“Did he stop when he went in?”
“No, sir.”
“All right. Now try to remember everything as you go along. What happened after that?”
“Well, of course I’ve got other things to do. I’ve got a whole motel to manage down there, and I can’t just keep looking—”
“Just tell us what you saw, Mr. Brems. We don’t expect you to tell us everything that happened. Only what you saw.”
“Well, the defendant and this girl—”
“You mean the one who had registered as Mrs. Wilfred?”
“Yes, that’s the one.”
“All right. What did they do?”
“They were out for quite a while. Then they came back in. I guess it was pretty late in the afternoon. I didn’t look to get the exact time. They drove into the garage between the two units—”
“Now, just before that,” Hadley interrupted. “While they were gone, did you have occasion to go down to the unit?”
“Well, yes, I did.”
“What was the occasion?”
“I was checking up.”
“Why?”
“Well … well, you see, when couples like that come in … well, we have three rates—our regular customer rate, our tourist rate, and our transient rate.
“Now, take a couple like this. We charge ’em about double the regular rates. Whenever they go out we check the units to see whether they’re coming back or not.
“If they’ve left baggage, we look at it a bit if it’s open. Sometimes if it isn’t locked, we open it. Running a motel that way you have to cater to the temporary transients if you’re going to stay in business, but you get high rates for doing it and usually a big turnover.
“Anyhow it isn’t the sort of trade you like, and whenever the people go out, you go in and look around.”
“And that’s why you went in?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And what did you do?”
“I tried the door of unit fifteen and it was locked. I tried the door of unit sixteen and it was locked.”
“What did you do?”
“I opened the door with a passkey and went in.”
“Which door?”
“Unit sixteen.”
“What, if anything, did you find?”
“I found that the girl … that is, this Mrs. Wilfred … had a suitcase and a bag in unit sixteen and that the man had a brief case in unit fifteen.”
“Did you look in the brief case?”
“I did.”
“What did you see in it?”
“I saw a revolver.”
“Did you look at the revolver?”
“Only in the brief case. I didn’t want to touch it. I just saw it was a revolver and let it go at that, but I decided right then and there I’d better—”
“Never mind what you thought or what you decided. I’m asking you what you did, what you saw,” Hadley said. “Now, let us get back to what happened after that.”
“Yes, sir.”
“Did you see the defendant again?”
“Yes, sir. He and this … this woman … this Mrs. Wilfred got back to the motel along late in the afternoon. They went inside and I didn’t pay any more attention to them. I had some other things to do. Then I saw a car driving out somewhere around eight o’clock, I guess it was. Maybe a little after eight. I took a look at it and I saw it was this car the defendant had been driving, and this woman was in it. I didn’t get a real good look at her, but somehow I didn’t think anybody else was in that car with her.”
“Had you heard anything unusual?”
“Personally, I didn’t hear a thing. Some of the people in other parts of the motel did.”
“Never mind that. I’m talking now about you personally. Did you hear anything unusual?”
“No, sir.”
“And you so reported to the police when they questioned you?”
“That’s right.”
“When did you next have occasion to go to either unit fifteen or sixteen?”
“When this police officer came to me and said he wanted in.”
“So what did you do then?”
“I got my passkey and went to the door of unit sixteen.”
“Was the door locked?”
“No, sir. As a matter of fact, it wasn’t.”
“What happened?”
“I opened the door.”
“And what did you see?”
“I saw the body of this man—the one they said was Binney Denham—lying sprawled there on the floor, with a pool of blood all around it.”
“Did you look in unit fifteen?”
“Yes, sir.”
“How did you get in there?”
“We went back out the door of unit sixteen and I tried the door of unit fifteen.”
“Was it locked?”
“No, sir, it was unlocked.”
“Was the defendant in there?”
“Not when we went in. He was gone.”
“Was his brief case there?”
“No, sir.”
“Did either the defendant or the woman who was registered by the defendant as his wife return to your motel later on?”
“No, sir.”
“Did you subsequently accompany some of the authorities to the back of your lot?”
“Yes, sir. You could see his tracks going—”
“Now wait just a moment. I’m coming to that. What is in the back of your lot?”
“A barbed wire fence.”
“What is the nature of the soil?”
“A soft, loam-type of soil when it’s wet. It gets pretty hard in the summertime when the sun shines on it and it bakes dry. It’s a regular California adobe.”
“What was the condition of this soil on the night of April sixth?”
“Soft.”
“Would it take the imprint of a man’s foot?”
“Yes, sir, it sure would.”
“Did you observe any such imprints when you took the authorities to the back of the lot?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Are you acquainted with Lieutenant Tragg?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Did you point out these tracks to Lieutenant Tragg?”
“I pointed out the route to him. He pointed out the tracks to me.”
“And then what, if anything, did Lieutenant Tragg do?”
“Well, he went to the barbed wire fence right where the tracks showed somebody’d gone through the fence, and he found some threads. Some of the barbs on the barbed wire were pretty rusty and threads of cloth would stick easy.”
“Now, from the time you saw Binney Denham, with his automobile which you have referred to as a rather beat-up car, near unit sixteen earlier in the day, did you see Mr. Denham again?”
“Not until I saw him lying there on the floor dead.”
“Your motel is open to the public?”
“Sure. That’s the idea of it.”
“Mr. Denham could have come and gone without your seeing him?”
“Sure.”
“You may cross-examine,” Hadley said.
Mason said, “As far as you know, Denham could have gone into that unit sixteen right after the woman you have referred to as Mrs. Wilfred left, could he not?”
“Without your seeing him?”
“Yes.”
“That’s readily possible?”
“Sure it is. I look up when people drive in with automobiles and act like they’re going to stop at the office, but I don’t pay attention to people who come in and go direct to the cabins. I mean by that, if they drive right on by the office sign, I don’t pay them any mind. I’m making a living renting units in a motel. I don’t aim to pry into the lives of the people who rent those units.”
“That’s very commendable,” Mason said. “Now, you rented other units in the motel during the day and evening, did you not?”
“Yes, sir.”
“On the evening of April sixth and during the day of April seventh, did you assist the police in looking around for a gun?”
“Objected to as incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial, not proper cross-examination,” Hadley said, and then, getting to his feet, added, “If the Court please, we have asked this witness nothing of what he did on April seventh. We have only asked him about what took place on April sixth.”
“I think, under the circumstances, the morning of April seventh would be too remote,” Judge Strouse ruled. “The objection is sustained.”
“Did you ever see that gun again?” Mason asked.
“I object to that as not proper cross-examination,” Hadley said. “As far as the question is concerned, he may have seen it a week later. The direct examination of this witness was confined to April sixth.”
“I’ll sustain the objection,” Judge Strouse ruled.
“Referring to the afternoon and evening of April sixth,” Mason said, “did you notice anything else that was unusual?”
Brems shook his head. “No, sir.”
Bedford leaned forward and whispered to Mason, “Pin him down. Make him tell about that prowler. Let’s get a description. We’ve simply got to find who she is!”
“You noticed Binney Denham at the motel,” Mason said.
“Yes, sir. That’s right.”
“And you knew that he wasn’t registered in any unit?”
“Yes, sir.”
“In other words, he was a stranger.”
“Yes, sir. But you’ve got to remember, Mr. Mason, that I couldn’t really tell for sure he wasn’t in any unit. You see, this defendant here had taken two units and paid for them. He told me another couple from San Diego was coming up to join him. I had no way of knowing this here Denham wasn’t the person he had had in mind.”
“I understand,” Mason said. “That accounts for the presence of Mr. Denham. Now, did you notice any other persons whom we might call unauthorized persons around the motel that day?”
“No, sir.”
“Wasn’t there someone in unit twelve?”
Brems thought for a minute, started to shake his head, then said, “Oh, wait a minute. Yes, I reported to the police—”
“Never mind what you reported to the police,” Hadley interrupted. “Just listen to the questions and answer only the questions. Don’t volunteer information.”
“Well, there was a person I didn’t place at the time, but it turned out to be all right later.”
“Some person who was an unauthorized occupant of one of the motel units?”
“Objected to as calling for a conclusion of the witness and argumentative,” Hadley said.
“This is cross-examination,” Mason said.
“I think the word ‘unauthorized’ technically calls for the conclusion of the witness. However, I’m going to permit the question,” Judge Strouse said. “The defense will be given the utmost latitude in the cross-examination of witnesses, particularly those witnesses whose direct examination covers persons who were present prior to the commission of this crime.”
“Very well,” Hadley said. “I’ll withdraw the objection, Your Honor, just to keep the record straight. Answer the question, Mr. Brems.”
“Well, I’ll say this. A woman came out of unit twelve. She wasn’t the woman who had rented the unit. I talked to her because I thought … well, I guess I’m not allowed to tell what I thought. But I talked to her.”
“What did you talk to her about?” Mason asked.
“I questioned her.”
“And what did she say?”
“Now there, Your Honor,” Hadley said, “we are getting into something that is not only beyond the scope of cross-examination, but calls for hearsay evidence.”
“The objection is sustained,” Judge Strouse ruled.
“What did you ask her?” Mason asked.
“Same objection!” Hadley said.
“Same ruling.”
Mason turned to Bedford and whispered, “You see, we’re up against a whole series of technicalities there, Bedford. I can’t question this witness about any conversation he had with her.”
“But we’ve got to find out who she was. Keep after it. Don’t let them run you up a blind alley, Mason. You’re a resourceful lawyer. Fix your question so the judge has to let it in. We’ve got to know who she was.”
“You say this woman who came out of unit twelve had not rented unit twelve?”
“That’s right.”
“And you stopped her?”
“Yes.”
“And did you report this woman to the police?”
“Objected to. Not proper cross-examination. Incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial,” Hadley said.
“Sustained,” Judge Strouse said.
“You have testified to a conversation you had with the police,” Mason said.
“Well, of course, when things got coming to a head they wanted to know all about what had happened around the place. That was after they asked if they could look in unit sixteen to investigate a report they had had. I told them that they were welcome to go right ahead.”
“All right,” Mason said. “Now, as a part of that same conversation, did the police ask you if you had noticed any other prowlers during the afternoon or evening?”
“Objected to as incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial, not proper cross-examination and hearsay,” Hadley said.
Judge Strouse smiled. “Mr. Mason is now again invoking the rule that where part of a conversation has been brought out in direct examination, the entire conversation may be brought out on cross-examination. The witness may answer the question.”
“Why, for the most part they kept asking me whether I’d heard any sound of a shot.”
“I’m not talking about their primary interest,” Mason said. “I’m asking if they inquired of you as to whether you had noticed any prowlers during the afternoon or evening.”
“Yes, sir, they did.”
“And did you then tell them, as a part of that conversation, about this woman whom you had seen in unit twelve?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And what did you tell them?”
“Oh, Your Honor,” Hadley said, “this is opening a door that is going to lead into matters which will confuse the issues. It has absolutely nothing to do with the case. We have no objection to Mr. Mason making Mr. Brems his own witness, if he wants to.
“He can then ask him any questions he wants, subject, of course, to our objection that the evidence is incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial.”
“He doesn’t have to make Mr. Brems his own witness,” Judge Strouse ruled. “You have asked this witness on direct examination about a conversation he had with officers.”
“Not a conversation. I simply asked him as to the effect of that conversation. Mr. Mason could have objected, if he had wanted to, on the ground that the question called for a conclusion of the witness.”
“He didn’t want to,” Judge Strouse said, genially. “The legal effect is the same whether you ask the witness for his conclusion as to the conversation or whether you ask him to repeat the conversation word for word. The subject of the conversation came in on direct evidence. Mr. Mason can now have the entire conversation on cross-examination if he wants.”
“But this isn’t related to the subject that the police were interested in,” Hadley objected. “It doesn’t have anything to do with the crime.”
“How do you know it doesn’t?” Judge Strouse asked.
“Because we know what happened.”
Judge Strouse said, “Mr. Mason may have his theory as to what happened. The Court is going to give the defendant the benefit of the widest latitude in all matters pertaining to cross-examination. The witness may answer to the question.”
“Go on,” Mason said. “What did you tell the officers about the woman in unit twelve?”
“I told them there’d been a prowler in the unit.”
“Did you use the word ‘prowler’?”
“I have the idea I did.”
“And what else did you tell them?”
“I told them about talking with this woman.”
“Did you tell them what the woman said?”
“Here again, Your Honor, I must object,” Hadley said. “This is asking for hearsay evidence as to hearsay evidence. We are now getting into evidence of what some woman may have said to this witness and which conversation was in turn relayed to the officers. It is all very plainly hearsay.”
“I will permit it on cross-examination,” Judge Strouse ruled. “Answer the question.”
“Yes, I said that this woman had told me she was a friend of the person who had rented that unit. She said she’d been told to go in and wait in case her friend wasn’t at home.”
“Can you describe that woman?” Mason asked.
“Objected to as incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial. Not proper cross-examination,” Hadley said.
“Sustained,” Judge Strouse ruled.
Mason smiled. “Did you describe her to the officers at the time you had your conversation with them?”
“Yes, sir.”
“How did you describe her to the officers?”
“Same objection,” Hadley said.
Judge Strouse smiled. “The objection is overruled. It is now shown to be a part of the conversation which Mr. Mason is entitled to inquire into.”
“I told the police this woman was maybe twenty-eight or thirty, that she was a brunette, she had darkish gray eyes, she was rather tall … I mean she was tall for a woman, with long legs. She had a way about her when she walked. Sort of like a queen. You could see—”
“Don’t describe her,” Hadley stormed at the witness. “Simply relate what you told the police.”
“Yes, sir. That’s what I’m telling—just what I told the police,” Brems said, and then added gratuitously, “Of course, after that I found out it was all right.”
“I ask that that last may go out as not being responsive to the question,” Mason said, “as being a voluntary statement of the witness.”
“It may go out,” Judge Strouse ruled.
“That’s all,” Mason said.
Hadley, thoroughly angry, took the witness on redirect examination. “You told the police you thought this was a prowler?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Subsequently you found out you were mistaken, didn’t you?”
“Objected to,” Mason said, “as leading and suggestive, not proper redirect examination. Incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial.”
“The objection is sustained,” Judge Strouse said.
“But,” shouted the exasperated assistant district attorney, “you subsequently told the police you knew it was all right, didn’t you?”
“Objected to as not proper redirect examination,” Mason said, “and as not being a part of the conversation that was testified to by the witness.”
Judge Strouse hesitated, then looked down at the witness. “When did you tell them this?”
“The next day.”
“The objection is sustained.”
Hadley said, “You talked to the woman in unit twelve about it that same night, didn’t you?”
“Objected to,” Mason said, “as incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial, calling for hearsay evidence, a conversation had without the presence or hearing of the defendant, not proper redirect examination.”
“The objection is sustained,” Judge Strouse ruled.
Hadley sat down in the chair, held a whispered conference with Hamilton Burger. The two men engaged in a vehement whispered argument; then Hadley tried another tack.
“Did you, the same night, as a part of that same conversation, state to the police that after you had talked with the woman you were satisfied she was all right and was telling the truth?”
“Yes, sir,” the witness said.
“That’s all,” Hadley announced triumphantly.
“Just a moment,” Mason said as Brems started to leave the stand. “One more question on re-cross-examination. Didn’t you also at the same time and as a part of the same conversation describe the woman to the police as a prowler?”
“I believe I did. Yes, sir, at that time.”
“That was the word you used—‘a prowler’?”
“Yes, sir.”
Mason smiled across at Hadley. “That’s all my re-cross-examination,” he said.
“That’s all,” Hadley said sullenly.
“Call your next witness,” Judge Strouse observed.
Hadley called the manager of the drive-yourself car agency. He testified to the circumstances surrounding the renting of the car, the return of the car, the fact that the person returning it had not sought to cash in on the credit due on the deposit.
“No questions,” Mason said.
Another employee of the drive-yourself agency testified to having seen the car driven onto the agency parking lot around ten o’clock on the evening of April sixth. The car was, he said, driven by a young woman, who got out of the car and started toward the office. He did not pay any attention to her after that.
“Cross-examine,” Hadley said.
“Can you describe this woman?” Mason asked.
“She was a good-looking woman.”
“Can you describe her any better than that?” Mason asked, as some of the jurors smiled broadly.
“Sure. She was in her twenties somewhere. She had … she was stacked!”
“What’s that?” Judge Strouse asked.
“She had a good figure,” the witness amended hastily.
“Did you see her hair?”
“She was blonde.”
“Now then,” Mason asked, “I want to ask you a question, and I want you to think carefully before you answer it. Did you, at any time, see any baggage being taken out of the car after she parked it in the lot?”
The man then shook his head. “No, sir, she didn’t take out a thing except herself.”
“You’re certain?”
“I’m certain.”
“You saw her get out of the car?”
“I’ll say I did.”
There was a ripple of laughter in the courtroom.
“That’s all,” Mason announced.
“No further questions,” Hadley said.
Hadley called a fingerprint expert, who testified to examining units fifteen and sixteen of The Staylonger Motel for fingerprints on the night of April sixth and the early morning of April seventh. He produced several latent prints which he had developed and which he classified as being “significant.”
“And why do you class these as being significant?” Hadley asked.
“Because,” the witness said, “I was able to develop matching fingerprints in the automobile concerning which the witness has just testified.”
Hadley’s questions brought out that the witness had examined the rented automobile, had processed it for fingerprints, and had secured a number of prints matching those in units fifteen and sixteen of the motel where the body had been found, that some of these matching fingerprints were, beyond question, those of the defendant, Stewart G. Bedford.
“Cross-examine,” Hadley announced.
“Who left the other ‘matching’ prints that you found?” Mason asked the witness.
“I assume that they were made by the blonde young woman who drove the car back to the agency and—”
“You don’t know?”
“No, sir, I do not. I do know that I secured and developed certain latent fingerprints in units fifteen and sixteen of the motel, that I secured certain latent prints from the automobile which has previously been described as having license number CXY 221, and that those prints in each instance were made by the same fingers that made the prints of Stewart G. Bedford on the police registration card when he was booked at police headquarters.”
“And you found the prints which you have assumed were those left by the blonde young woman in both units fifteen and sixteen?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Where?”
“In various places—on mirrors, on drinking glasses, on a doorknob.”
“And those same fingerprints were on the automobile?”
“Yes, sir.”
“In other words,” Mason said, “as far as your own observations are concerned, those other fingerprints could have been left by the murderer of Binney Denham?”
“That’s objected to,” Hadley said. “It’s argumentative. It calls for a conclusion.”
“He’s an expert witness,” Mason said. “I’m asking him for his conclusion. I’m limiting the question as far as his own observations are concerned.”
Judge Strouse hesitated, said, “I’m going to permit the witness to answer the question.”
The expert said, “As far as I know or as far as my observations are concerned, either one of them could have been the murderer.”
“Or the murder could have been committed by someone else?” Mason asked.
“That’s right.”
“Thank you,” Mason told him. “That’s all.”
Hamilton Burger indicated that he planned to examine the next witness.
“Call Richard Judson,” he said.
The bailiff called Richard Judson to the stand. Judson, an erect man with good shoulders, slim waist, a deep voice, and cold blue eyes which regarded the world with an air of a banker appraising a real estate loan, proved to be a police officer who had gone out to the Bedford residence on the tenth of April.
“And what did you do at the Bedford residence?” Hamilton Burger asked.
“I looked around.”
“Where?”
“Well, I looked around the grounds and the garage.”
“Did you have a search warrant?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Did you serve the search warrant on anyone?”
“There was no one home; no one was there to serve the warrant on.”
“Where did you look first?”
“In the garage.”
“Where in the garage?”
“All over the garage.”
“Can you tell us a little more about the type of search you made?”
“Well, there was a car in the garage. We looked over that pretty well. There were some tires. We looked around them, some old inner tubes—”
“Now, you say ‘we.’ Who was with you?”
“My partner.”
“A police officer?”
“Yes.”
“Where else did you look?”
“We looked every place in the garage. We looked up in the rafters, where there were some old boxes. We made a good job of searching the place.”
“And then,” Hamilton Burger asked, “what did you do?”
“There was a drain in the center of the garage floor—a perforated drain so that the garage floor could be washed off with a hose. There was a perforated plate which covered the drain. We unscrewed this plate, and looked down inside.”
“And what did you find?”
“We found a gun.”
“What do you mean, a gun?”
“I mean a .38 caliber Colt revolver.”
“Do you have the number of that gun?”
“I made a note of it, yes, sir.”
“That was a memorandum you made at the time?”
“Yes, sir.”
“That was made by you?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Do you have it with you?”
“Yes, sir.”
“What do your notes show?”
The witness opened his notebook. “The gun was blued steel .38 caliber Colt revolver. It had five loaded cartridges in the cylinder and one empty, or exploded, cartridge case. The manufacturer’s number was 740818.”
“What did you do with that revolver?”
“I turned it over to Arthur Merriam.”
“Who is he?”
“He is one of the police experts on firearms and ballistics.”
“You may cross-examine,” Hamilton Burger said to Perry Mason.
“Now as I understand it, you had a search warrant, Mr. Judson?” Mason asked.
“Yes, sir.”
“And what premises were included in the search warrant?”
“The house the grounds, the garage.”
“There was no one home on whom you could serve this search warrant?”
“No, sir, not at the time we made the search.”
“When was the search warrant dated?”
“I believe the eighth.”
“You got it on the morning of the eighth?”
“I don’t know the exact time of day.”
“It was in the morning?”
“I think perhaps it was.”
“And after you got the search warrant what did you do?”
“Put it in my pocket.”
“And what did you do after that?”
“I was working on the case.”
“What did you do while you were, as you say, working on the case and after putting the search warrant in your pocket?”
“I drove around looking things over.”
“Actually, you drove out to the Bedford house, didn’t you?”
“Well, we were working on the case, looking things over. We cruised around that vicinity.”
“And then you parked your car, didn’t you?”
“Yes, sir.”
“From a spot where you could see the garage?”
“Well, yes.”
“And you waited all that day, did you not?”
“The rest of the day, yes, sir.”
“And the next day you were back on the job again?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Same place?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And you waited all that day?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And the next day you were back on the job again, weren’t you?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Same place?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And you waited during that day until when?”
“Oh, until about four o’clock in the afternoon.”
“And then, from your surveillance, you knew that there was no one home, isn’t that right?”
“Well, we saw Mrs. Bedford drive off.”
“You then knew that there was no one home, didn’t you?”
“Well, it’s hard to know anything like that.”
“You had been keeping the house under surveillance?”
“We had been, yes.”
“For the purpose of finding a time when no one was home?”
“Well, we were just keeping the place under surveillance to see who came and who went.”
“And at the first opportunity, when you thought there was no one home, you went and searched the garage?”
“Well … I guess that’s about right. You can call it that if you want to.”
“And you searched the garage but didn’t search the house?”
“No, sir, we didn’t search the house.”
“You searched every inch of the garage, every nook and corner?”
“Yes, sir.”
“You waited until you felt certain there was no one home, then you went out to make your search.”
“We wanted to make a search of the garage. We didn’t want to be interrupted and we didn’t want to have anyone interfering with us.”
Mason smiled frostily. “You have just said, Mr. Judson, that you wanted to make a search of the garage.”
“Well, what’s wrong with that? We had a warrant, didn’t we?”
“You said of the garage.”
“I meant of the whole place—the house—the whole business.”
“You didn’t say that. You said you wanted to search the garage.”
“Well, we had a warrant for it.”
“Isn’t it true,” Mason asked, “that the only place you really wanted to search was the garage, and you only wanted to search that because you had been given a tip that the gun would be found in the garage?”
“We were looking for the gun, all right.”
“Isn’t it a fact that you had a tip before you went out there that the gun would be found in the garage?”
“Objected to as incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial, not proper cross-examination,” Hamilton Burger said.
Judge Strouse thought for a moment “The objection is overruled… if the witness knows.”
“I don’t know about any tip.”
“Isn’t it a fact you intended primarily to search the garage?”
“We searched there first”
“Was there some reason you searched there first?”
“That’s where we started. We thought we might find a gun there.”
“And what made you think that was where the gun was?”
“That was as good a place to hide it as any.”
“You mean the police didn’t have some anonymous telephone tip to guide you?”
“I mean we searched the garage, looking for a gun, and we found the gun in the garage. I don’t know what tip the others had. I was told to go look for a gun.”
“In the garage?”
“Well, yes.”
“Thank you,” Mason said. “That’s all.”
Arthur Merriam took the stand and testified to experiments he had performed with the gun which he had received from the last witness and which was introduced in evidence. He stated that he had fired test bullets from the gun, had examined them through a comparison microscope, comparing the test bullets with the fatal bullet He had prepared photographs which showed the identity of striation marks on the two bullets while one was superimposed over the other. These photographs were introduced in evidence.
“You may cross-examine,” Hamilton Burger said.
Mason seemed a little bored with the entire proceeding. “No questions,” he said.
Hamilton Burger’s next witness was a man who had charge of the sporting goods section of one of the large downtown department stores. This man produced records showing the gun in question had been sold to Stewart G. Bedford some five years earlier and that Bedford had signed the register of sales. The book of sales was offered in evidence; then, as a photostatic copy of the original was produced, the Court ordered that the original record might be withdrawn.
“Cross-examine,” Hamilton Burger said.
“No questions,” Mason announced, suppressing a yawn.
Judge Strouse looked at the clock, said, “It is now time for the afternoon adjournment. The Court admonishes the jurors not to discuss this case among yourselves, nor to permit anyone else to discuss it in your presence. You are not to form or express any opinion until the case is finally submitted to you.
“Court will take a recess until tomorrow morning at ten o’clock.”
Bedford gripped Mason’s arm. “Mason,” he said, “someone planted that gun in my garage.”
“Did you put it there?” Mason asked.
“Don’t be silly! I tell you I never saw the gun after I went to sleep. That liquor was drugged and someone took the gun out of my brief case, killed Binney Den-ham, and then subsequently planted the gun in my garage.”
“And,” Mason pointed out, “telephoned a tip to the police so that the officers would be sure to find it there.”
“Well, what does that mean?”
“It means that someone was very anxious that the officers would have plenty of evidence to connect you with the murder.”
“And that gets back to this mysterious prowler who was in that motel where Elsa—”
“Just a minute,” Mason cautioned. “No names.”
“Well, that woman who was in there,” Bedford said. “Hang it, Mason! I keep telling you she’s important. She’s the key to the whole business. Yet you don’t seem to get the least bit excited about her, or try to find her.”
“How am I going to go about finding her?” Mason asked impatiently. “You tell me there’s a needle in a haystack and the needle is important. So what?”
The officer motioned for Bedford to accompany him.
“Hire fifty detectives,” Bedford said, holding back momentarily. “Hire a hundred detectives. But find that woman!”
“See you tomorrow,” Mason told him as the officer led Bedford through the passageway to the jail elevator.