The Case of the Fenced-In Woman (23 page)

"Very well," Ormsby said, seething with anger. "You may step down, Mrs. Palmer, and I'll call Hervey Lavar."

"Mr. Lavar is a fingerprint expert in the office of the district attorney?" Mason asked.

"In the sheriff's office."

"Very well," Mason said, "I will stipulate to Mr. Lavar's qualifications, and you may proceed with the interrogation."

"I hand you two pieces of paper bearing fingerprints," Ormsby said. "One of them is marked Number F – A, and one of them is marked for identification Number F – B."

"Yes, sir."

"I will ask you what the document F – B is, first."

"That is a set of fingerprints made from the fingers of the witness who was just on the stand, Mrs. Nadine Palmer."

"And what is F – A?"

"That is a set of fingerprints which was shown to the witness by Mr. Mason, asking her if those were her fingerprints."

"Is there any similarity between any of the fingerprints on the card F – A and any of the fingerprints on the card F – B?"

"There is not."

"Were those fingerprints made by the same person?"

"They were not."

"Were any of those fingerprints on the card F – A the fingerprints of the person whose fingers made the prints on F – B?"

"No, sir."

"Did the witness, Nadine Palmer, make any of the fingerprints on the card F – A, or did any of those fingerprints come from her fingers?"

"No, sir."

"I have no further questions," Ormsby said.

"I will waive cross – examination at this time," Mason said. "I ask that both of the documents be marked as exhibits."

"The prosecution doesn't want them as exhibits in its case," Ormsby snapped.

"Then enter them as exhibits in the defendants' case," Mason said, waving his hand in a gesture of generosity, indicating his utter fairness in the matter. "Put them in as defendants' exhibit one and two."

"Very well," Judge Fisk said. "They may go in evidence as defendants' exhibit one and two. Now you will return to the stand, Mrs. Palmer, for further cross – examination."

"I have no further cross – examination," Mason said.

"Any redirect?" Judge Fisk asked.

"None."

"Very well, Mrs. Palmer, you are excused."

"That's the People's case," Ormsby said.

"Does the defense wish a recess?" Judge Fisk asked.

"The defense does not," Mason said. "The defense will call as its first and only witness Estelle Rankin."

"As your only witness?" Ormsby asked in surprise.

"As my only witness," Mason said. "I don't think I'll need any more."

Judge Fisk said, "Just a moment, gentlemen. There will be no asides, please. Miss Rankin, will you take the stand, please?"

Estelle Rankin, a tall, well – formed redhead with large brown eyes, took the stand, crossed her knees, glanced at the jurors, then turned toward Perry Mason.

"Where do you live, Miss Rankin?"

"Las Vegas, Nevada."

"Did you live there on the fifteenth of March of this year?"

"I did."

"What was your occupation?"

"I worked evenings running a gift shop."

"Can you tell us something of the merchandise handled by that gift shop?"

"Ornate leather goods, curios, a small line of toilet accessories, postcards of various sorts, souvenirs of Las Vegas, and a line of magazines and cigars and cigarettes. Also a certain amount of luggage."

"On the evening of March fifteenth did you receive an order from a bellboy for a briefcase?"

"From the bell captain, yes, sir."

"What time was that?"

"It was nine forty – five in the evening."

"Would you know that briefcase if you saw it again?"

"Yes."

Mason said, "I call your attention to the People's Exhibit 26 – A and ask you if you have ever seen that briefcase before."

The witness took the briefcase, turned it over in her hands and said, "Yes. That is the briefcase that I sold at that time."

"And up to the hour of nine forty – five on the evening of March fifteenth that briefcase had been in the stock of the curio shop and general store where you were working?"

"Yes, sir."

"You're positive."

"Positive."

"That's all," Mason said. "Cross – examine."

Ormsby arose with something of a sneer. "As far as you know, Miss Rankin, this briefcase, People's Exhibit 26 – A, could have been ordered by Mr. Mason that night simply for the purpose of confusing the police. The negotiable instruments which were found in it by the police could well have been taken by Mr. Mason from another briefcase."

"Objected to," Mason said, "on the ground it calls for a conclusion of the witness. The prosecution purported to show that this particular briefcase with negotiable securities was brought by me from Los Angeles. I have a right to show where it came from."

"But that evidence doesn't mean a thing," Ormsby said. "It was merely an assumption by a witness."

"I suggest," Mason said, "Counsel can argue the case to the jury, and I submit that it does mean a great deal because I was being shadowed while I was in Las Vegas by a member of the Las Vegas Police Department."

"There's nothing in the evidence to show that," Ormsby said. "And anyway the point is immaterial."

"Well, then I'd like to recall Lieutenant Tragg for further cross – examination and establish that I was under constant surveillance," Mason said.

"My case is closed. You can't reopen it to cross – examine a witness now," Ormsby protested.

"Very well," Mason said affably. "I have such complete confidence in the integrity of Lieutenant Tragg I'll call him as my witness."

Lieutenant Tragg came forward, puzzled.

Mason said, "Referring you to People's Exhibit 26 – A, Lieutenant Tragg, the briefcase which was found in my room. Who found that briefcase?"

"I did."

"Did you notice any other briefcase in the room?"

"No, sir, I didn't. But there was a suitcase in the room."

"I'm talking about a briefcase," Mason said. "Was there any other briefcase in the room?"

"Not in plain sight."

"Well, you went in there for a purpose, didn't you, Lieutenant?"

"Yes, sir."

"You were accompanied by Sergeant Elias Camp of the Las Vegas Police force?"

"Yes, sir."

"And, to your knowledge, was I being shadowed at the time?"

"There was a plainclothes officer detailed to keep a watch on you."

"And you had threatened to get a search warrant to search my room?"

"Yes, sir."

"For what purpose?"

"To look for a briefcase containing securities."

"And you found a briefcase containing securities?"

"I did."

"And was there any other briefcase in that room, either containing securities or from which securities could have been transferred to this briefcase?"

"I… I confess that I don't know," Lieutenant Tragg said.

"Why don't you know?"

"Because I went there to find a briefcase containing securities and when I found what I was looking for I discontinued any further search."

"Therefore," Mason said, "as far as you know, and to the best of your knowledge, this briefcase, Exhibit 26 – A, was the only briefcase in the room."

"Yes, sir."

"Did you," Mason asked, "make any attempt to develop latent fingerprints on this briefcase, Exhibit 26 – A?"

"We did. Yes, sir."

"Did you find any latent fingerprints?"

"Yes. We found some of yours and some of a person who could not be identified at the moment. I assume now they may have been the fingerprints of Miss Estelle Rankin, who just left the stand."

"Do you have those photographs of the latent fingerprints with you?" Mason asked.

"I have them in my briefcase."

"Will you produce them, please?"

Tragg produced the photographs.

"I wish to introduce these photographs as defendants' exhibits three and four," Mason said, "and I have no further questions of this witness."

"No questions," Ormsby said.

"You're excused," Mason said, and turned to the startled prosecutor. "That constitutes the defendants' case, if the Court please. We have no further witnesses."

Judge Fisk was as surprised as Ormsby. "You wish to argue the matter now?"

"We're ready to proceed with argument right now," Ormsby said defiantly.

"So am I," Mason said.

"Very well," Judge Fisk said. "Proceed with the argument."

Ormsby walked forward to address the jurors.

"If it please the Court, and you, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, this is a peculiar case-an unusual case. It is a case involving deliberate, cold – blooded murder.

"The decedent may not have been the most perfect man on earth, but he was, nevertheless, entitled to his life. He was entitled to the protection of the law.

"The defendant Vivian Carson, finding her affection for him wearing thin, proceeded to divorce him. She felt that her husband had withheld certain securities, and it is quite possible that he had done so; in fact, the evidence would so indicate. I would be underestimating your intelligence if I tried to argue otherwise.

"That, in part, furnished the motive for the murder; that, and apparently a sudden infatuation between the two defendants. I was tempted to submit this case without argument, but I felt that I should point out certain facts to you members of the jury so that you will not be confused by any dramatic last – minute argument. I have a closing argument which will follow the defendants' argument, so I simply want to point out at this time that despite the attack which will doubtless be made on the credibility of the witness, Nadine Palmer, she has comported herself throughout in an admirable manner. She told you frankly that while she is sure in her own mind the woman she saw jumping into the swimming pool was Vivian Carson, she is not going to make a positive identification. I think that is perhaps the best barometer of fairness that you could have in this witness.

"I submit that in view of the manner and demeanor of this witness anything that defense counsel may say, any attempt to smear this witness will be a boomerang which will damn the defendants.

"The defendants left their fingerprints on that hinged tile which covered the hidden receptacle. Those damning fingerprints, silent evidence that both of these defendants touched the inside surface of that tile.

"The testimony that their fingerprints were there is uncontradicted. You can see those fingerprints for yourselves. The photographs are in evidence. Just look at those enlarged photographs and reach your own conclusions. You don't have to qualify as an expert to tell when fingerprints such as these match. All you need is good eyesight and good judgment.

"The defendants had their hands on the inside of that tile, on the inside of that steel – lined receptacle.

"Why?

"Ask yourselves that question. No one has attempted to give you any reasonable explanation. There can be only one logical explanation. They murdered Loring Carson and took his hidden securities. They kept the cash. They wanted to transfer the securities. Their attorney, Perry Mason, had those stolen securities with him in Las Vegas.

"Was this a coincidence?

"Don't be naive.

"Don't let Counsel pull the wool over your eyes.