The Case of the Borrowed Brunette
Page 17
“Very well,” Mason said. Turning to the witness, he smiled. “You have stated that you gave Robert Hines permission to occupy your apartment?”
“Yes, sir.”
“That was in a conversation?”
“Yes, sir.”
“What else was said in that conversation?”
“Your Honor, I object to that,” Gulling said. “It is a blanket question—it calls for everything.”
“Exactly,” Mason said.
“Overruled.”
“Answer the question, Mrs. Reedley.”
Helen Reedley chose her words carefully, trying desperately to betray as few of the facts as possible. “I don’t remember the entire conversation. We had several conversations on the subject. But at the time when I gave Mr. Hines permission to occupy my apartment—”
“And if the Court please,” Gulling interrupted, “it’s only that one conversation that we are interested in. Any earlier conversations or negotiations looking toward the giving of that permission must be brought out elsewhere. On cross-examination, all that may be brought out is what was said at that one conversation.”
“That is correct so far as the present ruling of the Court is concerned,” Judge Lindale said.
“Well, at that one conversation,” Helen Reedley said, “I told Mr. Hines he could occupy my apartment. I gave him a key to it, and we arranged that he would relay any telephone calls to me. In other words, if any telephone calls from my friends were received at that apartment, they would be relayed to Mr. Hines, who would in turn pass them on to me.”
“Anything else you can think of?” Mason asked.
“Not at that conversation,” she said. “No.”
“Any conversation about getting two women to occupy the apartment?”
“It was understood that Mr. Hines was to get someone to occupy the apartment.”
“To take your place?”
“Not exactly.”
“To use your name?”
“Well, yes.”
Mason said, “I’ll show you an advertisement that was published in a theatrical paper, and ask you if you consulted Mr. Hines about inserting it.”
“In that particular conversation,” Gulling amended.
“That’s right—in that particular conversation.”
“No, that was done by Mr. Hines without consulting me,” Helen Reedley said.
“Did you, at that conversation, have some understanding with Mr. Hines as to the type of woman who was to occupy your apartment? Specifically, that she was to be a brunette with certain definite physical characteristics?”
“Well . . .”
“Yes or no?” Mason asked.
“Yes.”
“What were the specifications?”
“I gave him my measurements—height, weight, waist measure, and so forth.”
“Why?”
“Objected to as incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial, and not proper cross-examination,” Gulling said.
Judge Lindale was now plainly interested. He was leaning forward in his chair looking at the witness. “Do I understand,” he asked, “that you authorized Mr. Hines to use your apartment, that you gave him a key to your apartment, and that in addition it was arranged that he was to get a woman of your exact description to take your name and occupy your apartment?”
“Not at the conversation, if the Court please,” Gulling said. “It was the result of several conversations.”
“The Court wants an answer to that one question,” Judge Lindale said. He sounded irritated.
“That was the general understanding,” Helen Reedley admitted.
“And Mr. Mason has asked this witness why that understanding was reached?”
“Yes, Your Honor,” Mason said.
“And that is what is objected to, if the Court please,” Gulling said; “because it was an understanding reached in prior conversations and did not have anything to do with this one conversation at which permission was given to occupy the apartment. If the Court please, the loophole through which the defense attorney has squirmed to bring out this matter on cross-examination is exceedingly small—an opening based on a technicality only. I feel that the opening should not be enlarged.”
“Well,” Judge Lindale said, “I think that Counsel is perhaps right—technically right. But at some stage of the proceedings the Court wants to find out why this impersonation was permitted.”
“Not an impersonation, Your Honor,” Gulling said.
“Well, what was it?” Judge Lindale said.
“It was merely a subletting of the apartment.”
“Humph!” Lindale snapped. “To a woman who had the physical appearance of the witness and who was to assume her name?”
“Well, yes, Your Honor.”
“If that isn’t an impersonation, I don’t know one when I see it,” Judge Lindale said. “However, the Court will limit the cross-examination to matters that were covered on direct examination. Proceed with your questions, Mr. Mason.”
“Now,” Mason said, “you have stated that you did not see Robert Dover Hines on the third, the day of the murder.”
“Yes, sir.”
“Are you certain of that?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Where were you at twelve-thirty o’clock in the afternoon on that day?”
“I . . . I was at lunch.”
“Alone?”
“Objected to as incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial and not proper cross-examination,” Gulling said.
Judge Lindale sighed. “Well, technically I suppose the objection may be well taken—unless it should appear that the witness lunched with the decedent Hines; and I take it, Mr. Mason, there is no contention that such was the case?”
“None, Your Honor. I merely want to follow the movements of the witness from lunch until the time of the murder. I believe that this is a sufficiently narrow field to be reasonable cross-examination of a witness who has stated she did not see the decedent on that day.”
“What was the time of the murder?”
“I believe the prosecution fixes it at two o’clock.”
“At between one-fifty-five and two-fifteen, Your Honor.”
“Very well,” said Judge Lindale. “That is a period of twenty minutes during which it is claimed that the murder was committed. I believe that an examination of this witness as to her whereabouts from twelve-thirty on is permissible in view of the fact that she has stated she did not see the decedent during the entire day of the third.”
“You finished lunch at approximately one-thirty?” Mason asked.”
“Yes, sir.”
“And where did you go?”
She looked helplessly at Gulling.
“Incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial,” Gulling said mechanically. “Not proper cross-examination.”
“Overruled.”
“I . . . I went to . . . to a certain restaurant.”
“You had already had lunch,” Mason said. “You went to this restaurant for the purpose of seeing someone?”
“Well, yes.”
“And that person was Robert Hines?”
“Yes.”
“Did you see him?”
“No.”
“Did you talk with him on the telephone?”
“Earlier in the day I had talked with him on the telephone.”
“After one-thirty did you talk with him on the phone?”
“No.”
“Did you try to?”
“Yes.”
“You called him at a number he had given you?”
“Yes.”
“The number of a telephone in an apartment in the Siglet Manor Apartments—another apartment, that is?”
“I believe it is—yes.”
“An apartment rented by Carlotta Tipton?”
“I—I believe so, yes.”
“Had you ever met Carlotta Tipton?”
“Not to speak to. I had seen her once or twice. I think I had ridden up in the elevator with
her.”
“By the elevator, you mean the elevator of the Siglet Manor Apartments?”
“Yes.”
“And when you went to this restaurant on the day of the murder looking for Robert Hines, you had reason to believe he would be at this restaurant for lunch?”
“Yes.”
“Yet you made no attempt to get in touch with him until after one-thirty?”
“That’s right.”
“Rather late for lunch, isn’t it?”
“Well . . . I was hoping that perhaps he would be there.”
“Taking a chance on it?”
“If you want to put it that way, yes.”
“But had you gone there earlier, you would have been sure to catch him, wouldn’t you?”
“I . . . I suppose so.”
Mason said, “Is it a fair inference that the thing that made you so anxious to get in touch with Mr. Hines was something that happened during your own luncheon engagement. Is that right?”
“Your Honor, I object,” Gulling exclaimed. “That’s purely a conclusion.”
“Not a conclusion of the witness, but a conclusion of Counsel,” Mason said smiling.
“And,” Judge Lindale remarked dryly, “one that is quite obvious to the Court. Mr. Gulling, can’t we proceed with the hearing without quite so many objections from Counsel? After all, this is not a matter before a jury, and it would seem that we might dispense with some of the more technical objections.”
“I’ll withdraw the question,” Mason said. “And I have only one or two more questions to ask. Mrs. Reedley, you gave Mr. Hines some money at the time of this conversation, did you not?”
“Yes.”
“In hundred-dollar bills?”
“Hundreds and fifties.”
“How much?”
“Five hundred dollars.”
“Had you previously received some of that money from your husband?”
Gulling said sullenly, “Your Honor, I dislike to seem over-technical in the face of the Court’s admonition, but it is obvious what Mr. Mason is doing. He has trapped me into making technical objections until the Court has requested—”
“I think Counsel is right,” Judge Lindale said. “Mr. Mason, you will appreciate, of course, the necessity of coöperation by counsel on both sides. The Court has asked for fewer technical objections. That certainly means that Counsel asking the questions should lean over backwards to keep his examination within the rules of evidence, not take advantage of the condition.”
“Your Honor, I appreciate that,” Mason said, “and because the situation may reflect somewhat on my professional integrity, may I explain the purpose of the question?”
“Very well.”
“As I understand it,” Mason said, “it is the contention of the prosecution that at the time Hines was killed he had a wallet in his possession containing some three thousand dollars in currency. I understand further that the numbers on some of those bills have been traced to the husband of this witness. It therefore becomes vitally important to ascertain whether those bills found their way into that wallet as a consequence of this transaction with Mrs. Reedley, or whether they reached the wallet from some other source.”
Judge Lindale’s eyes showed his interest. He turned to Gulling. “Is that approximately correct, Mr. Deputy District Attorney?”
“Your Honor, I respectfully submit that this is an attempt to force the prosecution to put on its case out of order.”
“Mr. Mason has made a statement explaining the reason for a question,” Judge Lindale said. “I am asking if Mr. Mason’s statement is approximately correct.”
“The statement is approximately correct—but that certainly does not mean that the door can be opened so wide on cross-examination.”
“Well,” Judge Lindale said, “if we are going to get technical, this cross-examination may not be on any subject brought out in the direct examination; but it may go to show the bias of the witness. And if we’re going to be technical, gentlemen, we’ll be technical on both sides. The objection is overruled. Answer the question.”
“No,” Helen Reedley said. “There was not a single dollar of the money I gave Mr. Hines that I had received from my husband. I have not had any money from my husband for some six months.”
“Thank you,” Mason said. “That is all.”
“No redirect,” Gulling snapped.
“Your next witness?” Lindale asked.
“Your Honor, it becomes necessary for me to present one phase of my case slightly out of order. I wish to call one witness for just a question or two.”
“Very well.”
“Mr. Thomas Folsom,” Gulling said, “will you come forward and be sworn?”
Tom Folsom proved to be a tall, loose-jointed man. He was sworn, took the witness stand, crossed long legs, and settled back like a person to whom the witness chair is a familiar seat.
“Your name is Thomas Folsom, and you’re a private detective employed by the Interstate Investigators, and you were so employed on the third of this month and had been for some time prior to that date?”
“Yes, sir.”
“I will direct your attention to the defendant Adelle Winters, and ask if you saw her on the third of the month at approximately two-twenty in the afternoon?”
“I did.”
“Where?”
“At the Lorenzo Hotel.”
“What was she doing?”
“At that particular time?”
“At that particular time.”
“She was there with the other defendant, Eva Martell. They arrived at the hotel around a quarter past two in the afternoon. At about two-twenty, while Eva Martell was telephoning, the defendant Winters, whom I had been instructed to shadow, started to walk rather aimlessly around the hotel lobby. Then she went through a door marked ‘Baggage Room,’ and through another door that led to an alley, and finally turned down a side passageway back of the hotel dining room.”
“And what did she do there?”
“Three garbage cans were standing out there in a row. She raised the lid of the middle one, stood there briefly for a moment, apparently dropped something into it, then replaced the lid and turned back toward the main passageway.”
“This was at approximately two-twenty, and immediately afterwards?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Cross-examine,” Gulling snapped.
Mason said, “You were instructed to shadow the defendant Adelle Winters?”
“Yes, sir.”
“And had been shadowing her for some time before you saw her there at the hotel?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Both on the third and on the second?”
“Yes, sir.”
“She had gone to the Lorenzo Hotel directly from the apartment in the Siglet Manor Apartments?”
“That is correct—yes, sir.”
“Leaving the Siglet Manor shortly after two o’clock?” Mason asked.
“Yes, sir. She left the apartment at eleven minutes past two, if you want the exact time.”
“Now did you see her drop anything in the garbage can?”
“No, sir. I’ve been very careful to state only what I actually saw. I was shadowing her, but I didn’t want to be noticed, so I sort of kept behind her, out of sight. While she had her back turned toward me, she picked up the lid of the garbage can; at that moment her body hid what her hands were doing. Then she apparently dropped something in. As soon as she started to turn, I ducked around a corner and got back to the lobby.”
“And she returned to the lobby?”
“That’s right.”
“Where you kept her under observation until approximately what time?”
“Well, she didn’t stay in the hotel lobby. The two women were there for a while and did some telephoning. Then they went out and did some shopping.”
“It certainly seems to me, Your Honor, that all this is far afield,” Gulling said.
“I think so too,” Judge
Lindale ruled. “It may be very interesting to the defendant, and it might constitute a great temptation for a fishing expedition, but it would hardly seem proper cross-examination.”
“I’m sorry, Your Honor,” Mason said. “I’ll ask no more questions of the witness.”
“Anything about the matter on which he was examined on direct examination is perfectly permissible,” Judge Lindale said.
“No, Your Honor, I feel I have covered the ground and I have no desire to appear to be taking advantage of the Court’s request that we expedite the examination.”
“Any redirect?”
“I certainly have, Your Honor,” Gulling said. “Now then, Mr. Folsom, you have been asked whether or not you saw the defendant drop anything in that garbage can. I want to ask you just one question. If she had dropped anything, could you have seen what it was?”
“No, sir, I tried to explain that. From the position in which I stood, I could not see what her right hand was doing; her body screened the motion. In fact, I didn’t see her left hand at all. But I did see her bend over the garbage can, and I saw her left arm come up and the top of the can come up with it. I then saw her replace the cover on the can.”
“That is all,” Gulling said.
“Just a moment. In view of this last redirect,” Mason said, “I have a few more questions of the witness. Mr. Folsom, you couldn’t see either one of the defendant’s hands?”
“I’ve said so several times.”
“I just wanted to have it clear in the record. But you did see her left arm come up, raising the lid of the garbage can?”
“Yes, sir.”
“From which you assumed that her left hand was holding the handle of the lid?”
“Naturally.”
“Now then, did you see her right arm move?”
“I’ve tried to explain that her body screened whatever her right hand was doing.”
“I’m not talking about her hand—I’m talking about her arm. Did you see her arm move?”
“No, sir.”
“Her right shoulder move?”
“Well, now, wait a minute, Mr. Mason. I am not entirely sure, but—thinking back to it—I believe there was some slight motion of the elbow and shoulder, the sort one would make in gently tossing some object into a receptacle.”