The Case of the Restless Redhead, page 17
part #45 of Perry Mason Series
Hamilton Burger arose ponderously to his feet. “Just a moment, Your Honor,” he said. “I’d like to be heard on that question. I believe there has been a very deliberate attempt on the part of someone, and I am not at the present time naming that someone, although I hope to be able to do so before this case is concluded—I think there has been a very deliberate attempt on the part of someone to tamper with the evidence in this case.”
“That, of course, is a most serious charge,” Judge Kippen said.
“Exactly,” Hamilton Burger said, “and I may state to the Court that that is why I am here in court at this time. I want to get this matter clarified so that we can fix the responsibility.”
“Very well, it is your contention that the evidence had been tampered with. Now may I ask you how, Mr. District Attorney? How could that have been done?”
“Well, as to that—I’m not prepared at this time to answer the question. I think that the evidence in regard to Bullet Number Four is probably more significant than this Bullet Number Three!”
Judge Kippen turned to Redfield. “Well, what about Bullet Number Four?” he asked.
“Bullet Number Four,” Redfield said, “was fired from a gun of this same type and caliber, but not from the gun that is now being introduced in evidence.”
“You’re certain?” Judge Kippen asked.
“Absolutely certain, Your Honor.”
“All right,” Judge Kippen said to the prosecutor. “Renew your motion to introduce that gun in evidence, and the Court will—”
“Just a moment, Your Honor,” Mason said. “I believe I’m entitled to cross-examine this witness on this point before the weapon is received in evidence.”
“Well, of course, the Court doesn’t want to preclude you from cross-examination, Mr. Mason, but under the circumstances the Court certainly intends to see that this weapon is received in evidence and is impounded in the custody of the Court so that we won’t have any more tampering with evidence or any more accusation of tampering with evidence.”
“Exactly, Your Honor,” Mason said urbanely. “I take it I may now cross-examine the witness.”
“Yes,” Judge Kippen snapped, and then added gratuitously, “There are things in this case that I don’t like. The Court joins with Mr. Hamilton Burger, the district attorney, in stating that it will be highly desirable to find out exactly what happened.”
“Exactly, Your Honor,” Mason said casually, as though he had no idea that remarks of the prosecutor and the Court were directed toward him in the least. “Mr. Red-field, when you received the weapon, Exhibit A, which is now the subject of discussion, there were two exploded shells in the cylinders, is that right?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Now are you familiar with what is known in ballistics as a breechblock signature?”
“Yes, sir.”
“What is it?”
“It is a means of identifying shells which have been fired from a weapon. It consists of a microscopic examination of the markings on those shells made by the breechblock.
“In other words, when a shell is fired there are expanding gases within the shell which force the bullet out through the barrel of the weapon, and, at the same time, press the brass cartridge case back against the breech of the gun.”
“And each breechblock has its individual markings?” Mason asked.
“Quite frequently it happens that by examining the exploded cartridge cases it can be definitely ascertained whether they were fired from a certain particular weapon.”
“And have you made an effort to examine the breechblock markings of the cartridges in the weapon marked Exhibit A in this case?”
“Why, no.”
“Why not?”
“Why, it isn’t necessary,” Redfield said, smiling. “The empty cartridges were already in the weapon. They must have been—”
“But,” Mason interrupted, “you have heard Sergeant Holcomb state that he removed the exploded cartridges from that gun, together with the unexploded cartridges.”
“That was done so I could fire test shots through the y> gun.
“And have you any of the exploded cartridge cases in your possession?”
“They’re in my laboratory, yes.”
“That is near here?”
“Yes, sir.”
“I would suggest,” Mason said, “that if you are going to qualify as a ballistics expert for the purpose of having this gun introduced in evidence, that you compare the so-called breechblock signatures or breechblock markings—”
“Well, that can be done very easily and very quickly,” Redfield said, “that is, I believe it can.”
“And,” Mason went on, “did you examine the markings on Bullet Number Four, that is, the individual or microscopic markings, and compare them with the fatal bullet?”
“Why, no. Of course not. Bullet Number Four very definitely was not fired from this weapon, Mr. Mason.”
“But, nevertheless,” Mason persisted, “it might be advisable to put Bullets One and Four in a comparison microscope just for the purpose of seeing whether you can find some identical individual or microscopic characteristics, at which point I will renew my cross-examination.”
Mason said to Judge Kippen, “I take it, Your Honor, that I am entitled to have these matters at least investigated before I am called upon to decide whether I want to stipulate that this weapon may be received in evidence, or whether I want to make an objection.”
“Well, the Court is entitled to it,” Judge Kippen said, “and I think the defendant is, too. This simply gets back to the point that the Court raised earlier in the day, about insufficient investigation in cases which are brought before a court for adjudication. It isn’t entirely a question of whether a defendant is entitled to have all of the evidence investigated and collected. The Court has some rights in the matter, too. The Court wants this matter of the bullets thoroughly investigated. I had assumed they would have been by this time.”
Hamilton Burger said grimly, “We want them thoroughly investigated, too, Your Honor. We want to find out how it can happen that four bullets were fired from one gun with only two empty cartridge cases being in the gun.”
“Oh, but they weren’t fired from one gun,” Mason said. “You mustn’t mislead the Court, Mr. Burger. The evidence now definitely shows that at least two guns figured in the matter.”
“And if one gun has been substituted,” Burger said, banging his fist down on the desk, “I’m going to use every resource of my office to find out where that gun was substituted, when it was substituted and by whom it was substituted.”
“I certainly hope you do,” Mason said, and sat down.
“Do you have another witness you can call?” Judge Kippen asked Strawn.
“Yes, Your Honor. I would like to call Mr. Mervyn Aldrich to the stand.”
“You can make those tests in your laboratory, Mr. Red-field,” the judge said. “If you need more time let me know, but inasmuch as time may be a very vital factor in this case the Court would like to have the results of even a preliminary examination. Now, Mr. Aldrich, you may take the stand.”
Mervyn Aldrich came forward with calm complacency as though completely unaffected by the atmosphere of tense excitement which was building to a climax in the courtroom.
He was sworn, gave his name, took the stand and sat erect and tight-lipped. He answered the preliminary questions as to his age, residence and occupation.
Strawn said, “Mr. Aldrich, I show you a Colt revolver with a two-inch barrel, number 17475-LW and marked for identification Exhibit A. Are you familiar with that weapon?”
“I am. Yes, sir.”
“According to the records you purchased that weapon.”
“I did. Yes, sir.”
“Where?”
“From a sporting goods store in Newport Beach called the Golf, Gun and Gaff Sporting Goods Store.”
“And what did you do with that weapon after you purchased it?”
“I carried it on my person some of the time. I kept it in my house some of the time. I carried it in my automobile some of the time.”
“Calling your attention to the tenth of this month, do you know where that weapon was located at that time?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Where?”
“In the glove compartment of my convertible.”
“And was that glove compartment locked?”
“Unfortunately it was not. I had tried to keep it locked, but apparently I was careless. When I went to my glove compartment to look for the weapon it was gone and the glove compartment was unlocked.”
“When was that?”
“On the evening of the tenth.”
“Of this month?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And how did it happen that you went to your automobile to look in the glove compartment?”
“Mr. Perry Mason showed me this weapon and asked me if I was familiar with it. I looked at it and told him that I was, that I felt quite certain it was a weapon I had purchased.”
“Was there any distinguishing mark on it other than the manufacturer’s number, anything by which you could tell that this was your weapon?”
“Yes, sir.”
“What?”
“You will notice if you look closely that there is a little indented line in the handle of the gun.”
“What caused that indented line?”
“It was caused by a file.”
“When was that line placed there and by whom?”
“It was placed there the day that I purchased the gun and was placed there by me. I went into my shop, took a three-cornered file and made this line in the handle of the gun.”
“Why did you do that?”
“Objected to,” Neely said, “as incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial.”
“I think the objection is well taken,” Judge Kippen ruled.
“Well, I’ll get at the same thing this way,” Strawn said angrily. “When you purchased this weapon, what else did you purchase?”
“I purchased another one just like it.”
“And what did you do with the other weapon?”
“I gave it to my fiancee, Helene Chaney.”
“Why?”
“For her personal protection.”
“Now then, did you do anything at the time of your purchase of these guns or immediately afterward to differentiate one from the other?”
Mason leaned over to Neely and whispered, “We want to get this second gun into the evidence. In a preliminary never object to any questions calling for new evidence. Only object to the form of questions so you keep the prosecutors off balance and keep them from letting a witness have things too easy. Otherwise let them drag in everything they want. You never can tell when something will do some good. The more a witness says the first time he’s on the stand the more he’s apt to contradict himself the second time he gets on the stand. I think now we’re getting ready to saw the limb off from under Mervyn Aldrich.”
“You mean he’s on a limb?” Neely asked.
Mason nodded.
Aldrich said, “I wanted to differentiate the gun which was mine from the one I was giving my fiancee, so I filed this nick in my gun.”
“In your gun?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Now when was the last time you remember having that gun in your possession?”
“On the ninth.”
“Of this month?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And where were you on the ninth?”
“I was in Riverside, California.”
“And what were you doing there?”
“I had gone to Riverside to attend the trial of the defendant in this action.”
Strawn said hastily, “I am, of course, aware of the rule that as a general proposition, the prosecution cannot introduce evidence of another crime. However, there are exceptions and I am prepared to introduce authorities—”
“There seems to have been no objection,” Judge Kippen said.
“Well, there probably will be, Your Honor.”
“Reserve your argument until then.”
“Very well, Your Honor.”
Strawn turned to the witness, “To what trial are you referring, Mr. Aldrich?”
“The trial of this defendant on a larceny charge. She was acquitted. She left the courthouse. I stayed behind to consult with the deputy district attorney and some of the witnesses. When I left the courthouse I saw her standing near my convertible. At the time I thought nothing of it and—”
“Never mind what you thought,” Strawn snapped at the witness. “Just tell the facts.”
“Those are the facts,” Aldrich declared. “At that time she was within six feet of the place where I had left my car.
“Cross-examine,” Strawn snapped at counsel.
“Go ahead. Take him in cross-examination,” Mason said to Neely.
“What do I ask him?” Neely asked.
“Ask him everything,” Mason said, tilting back in the counsel chair and clasping his hands behind his head.
Neely said, “You purchased both of these guns on the same day?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And paid for them by check?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And put a file mark on one so you could tell it from the other?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And the one with the file mark on it you put in your glove compartment?”
“Yes, sir. In the glove compartment of my automobile some of the time. Other times I wore it in a holster or in my pocket.”
“And why did you make a file mark on this gun?”
“So I could tell it apart from the other one. I thought that perhaps there might be occasions when Miss Chaney would be out with me and would have her gun perhaps in her handbag and there might be some confusion.”
“Now as I understand it, Mr. Mason showed this gun to you on the evening of the tenth?”
‘Yes, sir.”
“At what time?”
“Sometime between ten and ten-thirty.”
“Where were you?”
“At Miss Chaney’s house.”
‘Where was Mr. Mason?”
“At the same place.”
“And what did he do?”
“He showed me the gun.”
“And what did you do?”
“I told him I thought that was the gun that was missing from my glove compartment.”
“And took the gun?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And did what?”
“Went to the glove compartment of my automobile, opened it and found that the gun actually was missing.”
“So then what did you do?”
“I returned this weapon to Mr. Mason.”
“The same weapon?”
“Yes, sir.”
Neely leaned over and whispered to Mason, “I don’t seem to be getting anywhere.”
Mason whispered back, “You won’t as long as you follow that mode of cross-examination. Whenever you ask him the same things over in the same sequence in which he testified on direct examination you’ll get the same answers.”
“Well, I guess I’m sunk now,” Neely said.
“Ask him why he deemed it necessary to take this gun out to the glove compartment in order to find out if it was his gun,” Mason said.
Neely nodded, faced the witness, said, “And why, Mr. Aldrich, did you deem it necessary to take this weapon with you when you went out to look in the glove compartment of your car to see if your weapon was there?”
“Because I wanted to make certain.”
“In what way?”
“By making certain that the gun in the glove compartment in my automobile was missing.”
“But you didn’t need to take this gun with you in order to do that,” Neely said. “All you needed to do was to look in your glove compartment and see if your personal weapon was missing.”
“Well, I wanted to have this one as a … as a standard of comparison.”
“You mean you didn’t remember what your gun looked like?”
“Well, I thought I did.”
“Then why did you want this gun with you at the time?”
“Because I could compare … I mean I wanted to—well, I wanted to make sure that this was my gun that was missing and not Miss Chaney’s gun.”
“But you didn’t need to do that,” Neely said, “since you had made this file mark on your gun for purposes of identification you could have looked at the weapon then and told instantly whether it was your gun.”
Aldrich averted his eyes and was silent.
“Isn’t that right?” Neely asked.
“Well, I guess so, yes.”
“Then why did you take the gun with you when you went out to your automobile?”
“I guess I was confused.”
“You were confused then?”
“Yes.”
“You’re not confused now?”
“No.”
“Then can you tell us any sound reason, any single, sound, sane reason why you had to take this weapon with you when you ran out to look in the glove compartment of your automobile?”
“No, sir. I guess not. I … I say I was confused.”
Neely glanced at Mason. Mason nodded approvingly and said under his breath, “Quit.”
“That’s all,” Neely said.
Aldrich, looking somewhat confused, left the stand.
Mason gripped Neely’s arm. “Good work,” he said. “When you read about that in the newspapers you’ll find that the reporters have credited you with getting Mervyn Aldrich, the big executive, pretty well confused on the witness stand.”
Hamilton Burger said, “Your Honor, may we have a brief, five-minute recess?”
“Very well,” Judge Kippen ruled. “In view of the unusual developments here the Court will be lenient with counsel. We will take a fifteen-minute recess. At the end of that time I am hoping we will have a report which will iron out some of the confusion in this case.”
Court adjourned and a couple of lawyers who had been interested spectators came up to congratulate Neely.
“A nice point you made there, Counselor,” one of them said.
“Good work,” the other one announced, shaking hands. “Nice cross-examination. Mr. Mason, you have a worthy associate.”
