Rain of Bullets: The True Story of Ernest Ingenito's Bloody Family Massacre

by Patricia A. Martinelli

  While he was still living at home and working at D'Augustine's, Ernie said he gave Pearl his weekly paycheck, from which she deducted board, payment toward the money she had loaned him to buy a car, and any other expenses before returning the remainder to him. The Vineland Times Journal reported that Ernie testified, "More than once it seemed like I was dreaming," when he thought about the shootings while in jail. During the trial, some spectators noticed that Ernie never seemed repentant. While he did behave himself in court, his conduct apparently was the result of repeated warnings from his lawyer that the court wouldn't be impressed by any ranting on his part.

  Ernie was on the witness stand for about five hours on Monday, and during his testimony, he disagreed with some of the previous statements made by the lawyers who had testified during the trial. Opening a window on his true personality, the defendant said that he had visited Howard English after he separated from Tessie on October 8, not September 14, as the attorney claimed. Ernie said that he told Fred Gravino to proceed with a court action to allow him to see his children, while Gravino had claimed that Ernie was not prepared to proceed when they last talked. Ernie denied that he had told William Gallner that he had dismissed Gravino prior to meeting with the attorney at his Bridgeton office. The need to be right, as so often in the past, would mark Ernie's future interaction with the court and the attorneys who represented him, as well as his personal relationships.

  Returning once more to his client's past, Sahl said that Ernie was unconscious after he fell from the tree and was taken to the Presbyterian Hospital at 39th and Powelton avenues, where the doctors diagnosed a possible concussion. They said that Ernie would be all right, but afterward, he apparently began to have trouble in school. Sahl dramatically described Ernie's feelings to the court: "He created within his inner self a feeling of frustration. People were making fun of him. He could not do what he wanted or was supposed to do; he could not do the same as other boys and girls did. So, he could not learn in school and he decided he would not go in there and be made fun of by the children or the teacher and he indulged in truancy and one truancy led to another and another to another, and it soon became a pretty easy matter for him to be out of school when he was supposed to be in school."

  After describing Ernie's brushes with the law, Sahl said, "This boy had not done anything. The only thing he had done was to be unfortunate, in fact, to be born not of equal mentality perhaps with the rest of the children." According to his attorney, Ernie's stays in different reformatories did nothing to improve his mental or emotional state. He said that Ernie probably felt "if I can't get it mentally, perhaps I will have to get it physically" and "from that time on, his life was a series of fights, one after another." Sahl readily admitted his client would fight at the slightest provocation. While that indicated, to him, a sign of Ernie's immaturity, did it necessarily mean that the defendant did not understand the consequences of his actions?

  Sahl told the court that a decade earlier, psychiatrists in Philadelphia had recognized that Ernie was not normal, and the doctors who examined him while he was in jail virtually confirmed that diagnosis: "The boy is of the same caliber, the same mentality, that he is not normal." Sahl said that Ernie was bitter, disappointed, and hurt when he discovered that Doris had left him for another man. He said that his client was very much infatuated with his first wife; he was very fond of her, and he never mistreated her.

  On January 18, Dr. J. B. Spradley, one of the psychiatrists who had examined Ernie immediately after his arrest, took the stand. Spradley, the recently retired superintendent of the Trenton State Hospital, was the first rebuttal witness called by the state to refute the case presented by Sahl. The defense had rested at eleven o'clock that morning without calling medical witnesses.

  Dr. Spradley testified about the two-hour interview that he and Dr. Robert Garber had conducted with Ernie on November 18 at the Gloucester County Jail. According to the psychiatrist, Ernie was so upset by his mother-in-law's alleged abuse that by the time he arrived at the Mazzoli farm the night before, he said he was going to "blow his top." Despite the fact that Sahl had tried to portray Ernie as mentally unsound because he fell from a tree as a boy, Garber noted that during their interview the inmate denied he had ever been knocked unconscious or that he had ever blacked out at any point in his life.

  "If it pleases the Court, I understand now we are going to have the entire statement that was made on that Saturday," Sahl said. "As I understand the law they cannot pick out parts-everything must go in."

  "To the extent of their recollection, it should be in," Judge Wick agreed.

  When Dr. Garber was sworn in, he testified that Ernie had provided an outline of his personal history to the psychiatrists from childhood to his time in the Army. The defendant had told him that he had been taken from "the hole" (solitary confinement) and assaulted by two officers, which had resulted in his discharge from the service. Ernie's statement directly contradicted the fact that he was listed by the Army as a Class A prisoner (for good behavior), and that he was brought in from the grounds-not solitary confinement-when he was interrogated by the officers.

  Garber continued: "He met Theresa Mazzoli about eight months or more prior to their marriage in 1947. He had considerable difficulty in persuading his wife's parents to permit the marriage and stated that the only occasion that he ever knew his father-in-law to vigorously assert himself to his mother-in law was at the time that Mr. Mazzoli insisted that his daughter and the prisoner be permitted to marry. Ingenito stated that he and his wife lived continuously with the Mazzolis from the time of their marriage and that for the first year of their marriage he was literally forced to remain at home and work on his in-law's farm for which he received nothing but room and board." Once again, Ernie had made an attempt to rewrite his personal history. Tessie had previously informed the newspapers that she and her new husband had briefly lived in Philadelphia after they married. The defendant himself had testified that Mike Mazzoli had paid him for his work, and that Ernie was supposed to receive more money once the crops were harvested.

  The doctor related Ernie's version of the turmoil surrounding the Ingenitos' marriage, including his alleged efforts to reconcile with his wife. Garber told the court that Ernie made the following statement to him and Spradley regarding his activities just prior to the shooting:

  "I last worked on Thursday, November 16, 1950, until about nine o'clock P.M. and told my boss that I was going to stay home yesterday, Friday, in order to wait for my wife's uncle, Henry Coia, to come and tell me whether he had been successful in persuading my in-laws or my wife to allow me to see the children that day. I guess he came about three o'clock and said my mother and father-in-law had said `no,' that I couldn't come, and I asked what my wife said, and he told me she said nothing. When he left, I went to see Mr. D'Augustine to tell him that I would be in to work tomorrow morning, and then I called on a Mr. Rudolph, who works for Elmer Wene, because I wanted him to see my wife's lawyer, Mr. Lipman, to see if I couldn't see the kids. This fellow, Rudolph, said, `Maybe it might help to call Mr. Gallner, who was Mr. Lipman's partner in the Carter case, maybe Mr. Gallner might be successful.' After that had been fixed, I went over to Henry Coia's place again. This was about after supper. I didn't eat anything because I wasn't hungry. I was so upset. Didn't stay long, went back to where I lived, I guess this was about 7 o'clock. Then I got my guns and put them in the car. I had two of these guns for a couple of years. The other two I bought about a month ago and bought the ammunition for them about two weeks ago. I decided then to go see my in-laws and scare them into letting me see the kids.

  "My mother-in-law has always been impossible. She is the one who wore the pants in the family, usually laid in bed until 11 o'clock, and after giving her orders to her husband and the workers on the farm, spent the rest of the day lying on the couch, eating and resting. Whatever she said had to be done. She was the brain and ran the family all the time. She was the one who didn't want me to take he
r daughter away; kept telling my wife that I didn't make enough money, that I was no good, and that is why I had a criminal record. I didn't have so much trouble with the rest of the family, but whatever my mother-in-law told them, started them all thinking and working against you. We actually hadn't talked for the last six months because every time we got to talking we got to fighting. I know she was responsible for making my wife's aunt turn the kids against me. Once when they came in the store where I was, she scolded them for talking to me right in front of my face. This was the same aunt that kept telling my wife and other people that I was always getting drunk and that I was running around with other women.

  "Then too, my mother-in-law tried to get my boss's wife (who was her sister-in-law) to fire me. She was always mad because I left her farm to go to work. On the way over to my mother-in-law's, I kept thinking over all these things that she had done to me and I kept thinking how in the last month at the store I had been walking around in circles. I had worked straight through ... hardly eating anything at all, my insides just burning up. I felt as though I was going to blow my top and jump out of a window. I got there between 8 and 9 o'clock determined to see the kids."

  Although he had previously stated that he had no memory of what happened after he entered the Mazzoli bungalow, Ernie freely admitted to Garber and Spradley that he shot Mike and Tessie, and then followed Pearl across the street where further carnage erupted. According to Garber, Ernie said that after he shot John Pioppi, "I went over and got in my car because I figured then I might as well get Hilda Mazzoli. She is my father-in-law's sister-in-law and she was the one who was spreading all the gossip about me getting drunk, beating up the kids, and running around with other women. She not only told a lot of people that, she even told her own brother Bruno Patella, who came right in the store one day and told me to my face, so I decided to go over there and clean them out. When I got there, she was in the kitchen and when her husband came running in, I shot at him so he would stay away, then I shot Hilda."

  When asked what happened next, Ernie said, "Got in my car, started to drive around. After I drove around for a long time I decided I might as well end it all. That is when I took an old razor blade and tried to cut my wrist. When that didn't seem to work, I decided to go down to the police barracks and turn myself in. That is when the cops met me coming on the other side. When they forced me off the road is when I surrendered and told them to go on and shoot me and get it over with. All this wouldn't have happened if my lawyer had arranged for me to see the kids."

  According to the Vineland Times Journal, Garber said that Ernie told him, "he had not given the police a written confession because he was afraid that they would release it to the newspapers and he was afraid that they would make him look bad." Garber told the court that he and Dr. Spradley had received the prisoner's written account on November 18, 1950. In it, Ernie expressed remorse and concern over his wife's shooting. He showed little regret, however, over the fate of his mother-in-law and other relatives, with the exception of Mike and Jeannie. He readily admitted to them that the entire incident was an extremely unfortunate one; since it was wrong to commit such acts, he would handle things differently if he had the chance to do it all over again. Garber noted that Ernie never mentioned a fall as a child, which defense counsel repeatedly claimed was the source of his client's limited mental capabilities. But was Ernie actually sorry that he had shot his in-laws or, like so many other inmates, just sorry that he had been caught and was on trial for his crimes?

  During cross-examination, Sahl tried to discredit the psychiatrists' testimony, pointing out that they were receiving $100 a day for their court appearances. Newspaper articles later noted that many spectators and members of the jury agreed that the fee tainted the doctors' credibility. At a time when the average salary was about $50 for a forty-hour week, that figure impressed the jury and the spectators as a substantial sum and cast doubt on the reliability of the doctors' testimony.

  The headline of the Vineland Times Journal on Friday, January 19, 1951, undoubtedly caught the eye of every reader after the paper was tossed onto doorsteps late that evening: "Attorney Sobs in Appeal to Jury for Clemency as Ingenito Trial Nears End." In this instance, the reporter who covered the case wasn't trying to be dramatic-Frank Sahl had literally cried as he gave his closing statement to the jury that day. He charged that the psychiatrists who had testified for the prosecution had not acted as doctors, but as an arm of law enforcement who had sold their testimony to the highest bidder.

  For more than two hours, Sahl paced in front of the jury, tearfully describing Ernie's state of mind as he attempted to see his children on that fateful night. Addressing each juror by name, the defense counsel, according to the paper, said the members of the panel should not "burn this boy like an ordinary thief or rapist." After describing in graphic detail the sights and sounds that occurred during an execution, Sahl said that if the jurors sent Ernie to the electric chair, they "would be accountable in God's world for this boy's life and not to the Prosecutor." Although he did tell the jurors, "This boy should be punished," Sahl said that he had not heard any evidence of malice or premeditation proved during the trial. As a result, the attorney argued, his client did not deserve to die. Clutching a Bible, Sahl cried as he asked the jury to return a verdict of second-degree murder or manslaughter. He quoted biblical text so effectively that he drew tears from both jurors and spectators during his speech. Court recessed for lunch at 12:35 P.M., after Sahl had finished his statement.

  When Hannold stood up to address the jury, he took a hard look at the defendant's actions and charged Ernie with having "no more backbone than a snake." The accused had always sought to avoid facing his problems, the prosecutor said. The excuse that his actions were motivated by love of his children was a poor one, at best, for what he had done. When Ernie's younger son was born, Hannold said that the defendant was probably at the Thunderbolt Inn instead of with Tessie. Calling Ernie a "clever actor," the prosecutor said he had no doubt that the accused was capable of planning the murders he committed that night.

  Hannold charged Ernie with lying under oath when he attempted to refute the testimony of the attorneys he had previously consulted. The prosecutor said that the accused was always determined to do things his own way, which proved he knew what would happen when he went to the Mazzoli home that night. Hannold noted that the defense never presented their medical experts because Sahl knew their testimony would not work to the defendant's advantage. In closing, he asked for a verdict of first-degree murder without any recommendations from the jury.

  It was late afternoon before the jury retired to consider their verdict. After almost five hours of deliberation, they returned later that evening at about 9:30. About three hundred people were in the courtroom when the verdict was announced by Emma Lafferty, who had taken over the role of foreperson. The panel had voted five times before deciding on a life sentence with the recommendation of mercy. Although they agreed that Ernie was guilty of murder in the first degree, the jurors had apparently been so affected by Sahl's closing arguments that they opted to be generous. Ernie was not going to the electric chair. He was instead given a life sentence that same evening by Judge Wick, which meant the defendant could look forward to being a free man again some day.

  Criminal court judges in New Jersey have the authority to set aside a jury's decision if they feel it is not appropriate. Such authority is rarely used, and Wick chose not to set aside the verdict and hand down a harsher punishment. Even without the other murders and assaults, the shooting of Pearl Mazzoli, according to the legal standards of the day, would have merited such a decision.

  Ernie's conviction came exactly nine weeks after the murders were committed at almost the same hour. While the defendant's face was flushed when he heard the news, he did not change his stoic expression. The following day, he was taken to the New Jersey State Prison at Trenton and placed in quarantine with other new inmates. At the time, prisoners were evaluated for t
hirty days by personnel before they were assigned to the general prison population. Since he had four additional charges pending against him, Ernie was initially not permitted to work on the prison farm or spend time in the courtyard. But with good behavior and hard work, Prisoner Number 29141, as he was listed, could be paroled in about fourteen years.

  n the weeks that followed Ernie's trial, the Ingenito case remained a topic of sometimes angry debate throughout the 1950s, especially in South Jersey. Some in the community said afterward that Pearl's murder had been justified. They argued that she had pushed Ernie to the point where he had no other option than to do what he did that night. A few of them were of the mindset that a woman who didn't know her "place" deserved whatever punishment she received. All too often, they conveniently swept the other four murders and the four assaults under a mental carpet, preferring a simple explanation for an otherwise unexplainable act. Others believed that Ernie, in fact, had gone temporarily insane, because why else would he attack so many people?

  Many other people were horrified by the jury's verdict that Ernie deserved mercy for his actions and were vocal about their outrage. Among them was popular New Jersey governor Alfred E. Driscoll, who received a number of letters from people demanding that he investigate the jury's decision. Lewis Worthington Colfelt, an attorney from Philadelphia, felt that Ernie should have been given the death penalty for both the murders and the assaults. In a letter to the governor, dated February 2, 1951, he wrote, "The state should not be put to the expense of support for such a worthless fiend." Driscoll also heard from Alice Freeman of Bloomfield. She wrote on February 2 that the death penalty was a useful deterrent: "It has gotten so that anyone could commit murder if he wished, secure in the knowledge that murderers are usually either freed entirely or given a sentence which is laughably light in view of the enormity of their crime." On February 7, a former Vineland resident, Adeline C. Hickman, then living in Burlington, Vermont, agreed that Ernie should be prosecuted on the remaining charges. She wrote: "It will certainly be a black eye for New Jersey if such a ruthless act is allowed to be condoned in such fashion, `Life with a recommendation of mercy."'