Эрл Гарднер - The Case of the Fenced-In Woman

“No,” she said.

Mason walked over to the counsel table and extended his hand to Della Street.

She handed him an envelope which Paul Drake had brought to court with him.

Mason approached the witness, dramatically opened the envelope, whipped open a sheet of paper divided into ten printed squares with an inked fingerprint in each square and said, “I am going to ask you whether these are your fingerprints.”

“Just a moment, just a moment,” Ormsby shouted, jumping to his feet. “I object to this procedure. This is completely irregular. Counsel has no right to make any such insinuation.”

“What insinuation?” Mason asked.

“Insinuating that this young woman has had her fingerprints taken. I object to this.”

“I will assure the Court, Counsel and the jurors,” Mason said, “that there is no intent on my part to insinuate that these fingerprints were taken by any government agency. Quite the contrary. I am simply asking this witness if these are her fingerprints.”

“That calls for a conclusion of the witness,” Ormsby said, “and it is not proper cross-examination.”

“I think it calls for a conclusion of the witness,” Judge Fisk said, frowning at Mason.

“It is perfectly permissible to ask a witness if this is her signature,” Mason said. “I am simply asking the witness if these are her fingerprints.”

“But a witness can appraise a signature simply by looking at it,” Judge Fisk said, “whereas in the matter of fingerprints it is something which calls for a somewhat expert conclusion.”

Mason said, “I’m simply trying to find out. I have no objection whatever to having the witness take her fingerprints, put them on a sheet of paper and then hand both sheets to the clerk of the court to be marked for identification. Then if it turns out these are not the fingerprints of the witness that is all there is to it.”

“But why should we do any such thing as that?” Ormsby asked.

“Because I have a right to ask the witness whether or not certain fingerprints are hers. I can ask her if a certain signature is hers, and I can certainly ask her if certain fingerprints are hers.”

“The matter is unique as far as my experience is concerned,” Judge Fisk said. “However, I am inclined to suggest that before I rule on the question the witness have her fingerprints taken and the two sheets of paper be marked for identification. Then the Court will call in an impartial fingerprint expert to determine the question.”

“That is quite all right with me,” Mason said.

“May I ask the reason for this question?” Judge Fisk asked.

“I am trying to establish something which goes to the bias and credibility of this witness, Your Honor. I cannot explain it at this time because if I did it would be disclosing my plan of attack and the witness would promptly proceed to—”

“Very well, very well,” Judge Fisk interrupted briskly. “After all, gentlemen, the jurors are present and I suggest that we have no more discussion on the subject. The Court will take a ten-minute recess. During that time the witness can have her fingerprints taken and the two pieces of paper can be marked for identification.”

“I certainly see no reason for it,” Ormsby said.

“I think we have gone into that sufficiently,” Judge Fisk said. “I want to give the defense every latitude in the field of cross-examination. Under the circumstances of this case I feel that the defense is entitled to that much consideration. In fact, it is a part of my basic policy that in every case involving a serious accusation of felony I give the defense attorney every possible latitude in cross-examining the important witnesses.

“This witness is a key witness, Mr. Prosecutor, and I intend to let the defense have every opportunity to probe her story by every legitimate means.”

“Very well,” Ormsby said, “we’re perfectly willing. Let Mason try all of his trickery, all of his ingenuity, all of his dramatics and—”

“That will do, Mr. Prosecutor,” Judge Fisk interrupted. “This is no time to argue the case. The Court will take a ten-minute recess. At the end of that time the two documents can be introduced and marked for identification.”

The courtroom was in a hubbub as Judge Fisk left the bench. Newspaper reporters crowded around Perry Mason asking him what he was trying to do, what his strategy was, where the fingerprints came from, how he had secured possession of them, what significance could be attached to them.

Mason parried all questions with a smiling, “No comment.”

When court was reconvened an indignant deputy prosecutor was on his feet. “Your Honor,” he said, “we have had this witness give her fingerprints to an expert from the sheriff’s office, an expert who is abundantly qualified. It now appears that there is not the slightest resemblance between the fingerprints on this card presented by Perry Mason and the fingerprints of the witness, and I submit that Perry Mason must have known that at the time. I submit that he is guilty of misconduct in taking advantage of the procedure of the court and attempting to intimidate the witness and create a false impression with the jurors.”

Mason said urbanely, “If the expert you quote is prepared to go on the stand and swear that these are not the same fingerprints I will be bound by his testimony. I will withdraw my question to the witness as to whether or not they are her fingerprints. I suggest that this cross-examination be interrupted so the expert can go on the stand.”

“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.