Erle Gardner - The Case of the Phantom Fortune

"I was."

"What happened to thatbullet?"

"I took charge of it."

"Where is it now?"

"I have it."

"Will you give it to me,please?"

Redfield handed over the bullet.

"You are prepared to state thisis the bullet which was removed from the body of Collister Gideon in yourpresence?"

"Yes, sir."

"I ask that it be introduced inevidence," Hamilton Burger said.

Mason said, "May I see it,please?"

He walked over, and stood for sometime studying the bullet, then he said, "No objection, Your Honour. It maybe received in evidence."

"Now, then," HamiltonBurger said, "I will ask you, Mr Redfield, if in your opinion as an experton firearms, this fatal bullet was fired from this weapon which I now hold inmy hand, this Smith and Wesson revolver."

Redfield shifted his positionslightly. "I have carefully examined the fatal bullet and compared it withthe test bullets fired from this weapon. I have found many points ofsimilarity"

"Predicating your answer uponyour experience in the field and your knowledge of the science of ballistics,would you say that this fatal bullet was fired from this gun marked foridentification, People's Exhibit B?"

"I would say that in all humanprobability, considering all the factors, the fatal bullet had been fired fromthat gun."

"Have you been able to find anyindications in your microscopic examination of the fatal bullet which indicateit had not been fired from the gun, People's Exhibit B?"

"No, sir."

"Cross-examine," Burgersaid, triumphantly.

Mason walked up to face Redfield,who again shifted his position slightly

"Mr Redfield," Mason said,"I have the highest regard for your qualifications and your integrity."

"Thank you, sir."

"I have had you as a witness inmany cases, and I have had the opportunity to cross-examine you onoccasion."

"Yes, sir."

"But I have never heard youmake quite those answers," Mason said. "You state that you have notbeen able to find any indication that the fatal bullet was not fired from thegun, People's Exhibit B. You state that you found several marks of similarityand you state that in all human probability in your opinion considering all thefactors, the bullet was fired from that gun."

"Yes, sir."

"Now, those are very peculiaranswers. Somewhat different from the answers you ordinarily make. Have you-carefully rehearsed those answers?"

"Well…" Redfield said,and hesitated.

"Go ahead," Mason said,"you're under oath."

"In all my cases,"Redfield said, "since I am in the employ of the police department, I findit necessary to discuss what my testimony is going to be. That is, I make areport and then I'm usually questioned on that report."

"I understand," Masonsaid. "My question in this case was whether or not your answers had beenvery carefully rehearsed."

"Well, I discussed the matterwith the district attorney and told him what I could swear to and what Icouldn't swear to."

"I'm asking you," Masonsaid, "if those answers were very carefully rehearsed."

"Well, I told the districtattorney what my answers would be."

"And he suggested certain changeswhich you could, in good faith, make?"

"Not changes."

"Changes in the wording?"

"In the wording, yes."

"And wasn't the finalsuggestion made by the district attorney that he would ask you if, consideringall the circumstances, you consider that in all human probability, the fatalbullet had been fired from that gun?"

"Well, yes, he did suggestthat, I believe."

"This fatal bullet," Masonsaid, "is pretty badly flattened?"

"Yes, sir."

"You can see the marks of whatare known as the class characteristics on it?"

"Yes, sir."

"Those class characteristicsrelate to calibre, pitch of the lands and number of the lands?"

"Yes, sir."

"In other words, any bulletfired from a Smith and Wesson revolver made during the year when this gun wasmade would have those same class characteristics?"

"Yes, sir."

"Now the individualcharacteristics, the striations are much more difficult to trace on this fatalbullet than is ordinarily the case?"

"That is right."

"Now, when you state that whenyou consider all the circumstances you consider that in all human probabilitythe fatal bullet was fired from that revolver, Peoples Exhibit B, you aretaking into consideration certain circumstances which are not entirely withinthe province of a ballistics expert."

"Well, that depends on what youmean."

"You are taking intoconsideration certain non-technical factors?"

"Well, I suppose so, yes."

"You are taking intoconsideration the fact that the gun was found in the possession of a man whowas hiding near the scene of the murder?"

"Yes, sir, I am."

"In other words, if this gun,People's Exhibit B, had come to you cold – that is, if it had been picked up ina pawn shop somewhere and the district attorney had said to you, 'Can youpositively swear as a matter of ballistics evidence that this fatal bullet wasfired from this gun?' – what would your answer be?"

Redfield hesitated, fidgeted, lookedat the district attorney, said, "Well, under those circumstances, I wouldhave to state that while it was apparent the bullet had been fired from a gunof the same make, I couldn't swear positively, basing my testimony solely onthe science of ballistics, that the fatal bullet had been fired from thisgun."

"And," Mason said,"now if you leave out certain circumstances which influence your opinionsimply as a layman and predicate your testimony entirely on what you have foundas an expert, you are again forced to admit that you can't tell positively thatthis fatal bullet was fired from this gun."

"That is right, yes, sir."

"That's all," Mason said.

"Now, as I understand it, ifthe Court please, Lieutenant Tragg was on the stand and I am to have anopportunity to cross-examine him."

"If the district attorney isfinished."

"I have no furtherquestions," Burger said.

"I have, however, about concludedmy case. I am now going to ask the Court for an order directed to Mr PerryMason ordering him to appear in person this afternoon to show cause why heshouldn't be found guilty of contempt in tampering with the evidence ofwitnesses."

Judge Saxton said, "It isapproaching the hour of the noon adjournment. If Mr Mason's examination isbrief, I think he can probably finish his cross-examination before noon. Ibelieve that I will at that time make an order ordering Mr Mason to appear incourt at two-thirty this afternoon and show cause, if any he has, why heshouldn't be cited for contempt.

"The Court takes a very graveview of this attempt to influence the witnesses, but, on the other hand, theCourt points out to the district attorney that the action may not be incontempt but may be a criminal action, and, of course, a disciplinary actionbefore the Bar Association."

"Yes, Your Honour, I am awareof that," Hamilton Burger said. "But I think, since this witness wasone who was actually called before this Court, and since it now appears that hehas been influenced, his testimony tampered with, and the witness deceived, theCourt has power to issue a citation for contempt."

"Well argue the matter attwo-thirty" Judge Saxton said.

"The witness wasn'tdeceived," Mason said. "He was interrogated."

"Interrogated in such a mannerthat his mind was made up for him," Hamilton Burger snapped.

"Well go into that attwo-thirty," Judge Saxton said.

"Lieutenant Tragg, will youreturn to the stand, please, for cross-examination by Mr Mason?"

Lt Tragg returned to the witnessstand, seating himself comfortably in the manner of a veteran witness who hasfaced cross-examination many times in his life, is telling the truth and hasnothing to fear.

Mason said, "Lieutenant Tragg,when your men arrived at this storeroom at the corner of Clovina andHendersell, you found a body?"