Эрл Гарднер - The Case of the Careless Kitten

Burger said, “That’s right, Mason. We’ll thrash it out in a courtroom. And, if you ask me, your last word didn’t amount to much.”

Mason paused in the doorway, his face hard with anger. “I haven’t had that last word yet,” he said. “I’ll have it in court.”

And he slammed the door behind him.

Judge Lankershim came to the bench amidst a swish of whispers from the crowded courtroom, which subsided as a bailiff pounded a gavel.

“The People of the State of California versus Della Street,” Judge Lankershim called.

Mason got to his feet. “The defendant is in court and on bail. Let the records show that she has surrendered for the purpose of trial.”

“The record will so show,” Judge Lankershim said. “She will remain on the same bail during the trial. I understand this action has been brought on for immediate trial pursuant to stipulation of counsel.”

“That is right,” Hamilton Burger said.

“I would like to hear from the prosecution as to the nature of the case.”

Burger said, “Your Honor, I will make a brief preliminary statement. It is the contention of the prosecution that while the police officers were investigating a felony, to wit, an assault with a deadly weapon with intent to commit murder, committed by persons unknown upon one Jerry Templar, the defendant in this case willfully spirited away a certain witness, one Franklin Shore, who had information which, if communicated to the police, would have materially aided the police in the solution of the crime. Specifically, it is charged that the defendant in this case, fully aware of the full significance of the facts which this witness knew, concealed him from the police and continues to so conceal him.”

“And the defendant has pleaded not guilty?” Judge Lankershim asked.

“The defendant has pleaded not guilty, and asked for a trial by jury,” Mason said. “And to prove our good faith in the matter, we will accept, without examination, the first twelve names which are called to the jury box as jurymen to try this case.”

Judge Lankershim looked over his glasses at Perry Mason. “You are, however, insisting upon a trial by jury?”

“Exactly,” Mason said. “Trial by jury is guaranteed by the constitution to the citizens of the state. We have lost too many of our constitutional guarantees by not insisting upon them. Upon behalf of this defendant, I insist upon a jury trial more as a gesture than otherwise. I would be perfectly willing to submit the matter to Your Honor’s discretion otherwise.”

“Do you wish to accept Mr. Mason’s stipulation that the first twelve names called to the jury box may constitute a jury, Mr. District Attorney?”

Hamilton Burger, who had personally embarked upon the trial of the case, relegating his assistants to subordinate positions at the far corners of the counsel table, got to his feet.

“No, Your Honor, we will examine the jurors in the regular way.”

Mason settled back in his chair. “I have no questions to ask of any juror,” he announced with a smile. “I waive my challenges for cause. I waive my peremptory challenges. I am satisfied that any twelve American citizens who file into that jury box will give the defendant the benefit of a square deal when the evidence is in — and that’s all the defendant wants.”

“The Court will observe,” Burger said acidly, “that counsel is using the excuse of waiving his rights as a peg upon which to hang a dramatic statement intended to impress the jurors in advance with...”

“The Court understands the situation,” Judge Lankershim interrupted promptly. “The jurors will pay no attention to the extraneous comments of either counsel. Let’s get on with this case. Under the circumstances, Mr. Burger, it devolves upon you to examine the jurymen on their voir dire.”

And examine them Burger did, with the painstaking, mathematical, searching questions which a man might have expected a prosecutor to use in a murder case, while Mason tilted back in his chair, an amused smile on his face, his bearing indicating that he was paying no attention either to questions or answers. And, somehow, the more Burger examined the jurymen, the more he made it appear that he was suspicious of their probity, of their impartiality, an attitude which contrasted unfavorably with that of counsel for the defense. Twice his associates tried to warn him of this, but Burger paid no attention to their warnings. He went doggedly ahead with his questions.

When he had finished, Judge Lankershim said, “Under the law, the Court is called upon to examine the jurors for prejudice. It has never been the policy of this Court, however, to restrict the questions of counsel. Therefore, the Court has always permitted counsel to interrogate the jurors in the usual manner. But, under the circumstances of this case, the Court feels that it is incumbent upon it to see that no member of the jury is prejudiced for or against either side.”

Whereupon, the judge asked a few searching, but impartial questions, and said to Hamilton Burger, “The defendant has waived both challenges for cause and peremptory challenges. Do you have any challenges?”

Burger shook his head.

Mason turned to smile at the jury. Gradually it dawned on the courtroom that the ultimate effect of the entire procedure had been to accomplish what Mason had proposed in the first instance, namely, that the first twelve persons called should sit as jurors.

The jury smiled back at Mason.

Hamilton Burger made a brief statement to the jury, outlining simply what he expected to prove, followed that up by saying, “I will call as my first witness Helen Kendal.”

Helen Kendal, obviously conscious of the eyes of the spectators in the crowded courtroom, came forward and was sworn. She gave her name and address to the clerk, looked at Hamilton Burger expectantly for questions.

“You have occasion to remember the thirteenth of this month?”

“I do.”

“I will call your attention to the evening of that day and ask if anything unusual happened.”

“Yes, sir.”

“What?”

“In the first place, my kitten was seized with spasms, and I rushed it to a veterinary, who said it was...”

Burger held up his hand. “Never mind what the veterinary said. That’s hearsay. Just state what you know of your own knowledge.”

“Yes, sir.”

“Now, at about the time the kitten became ill, did anything else unusual happen?”

“Yes. I received a telephone call — from my uncle.”

“What?”

“I received a telephone call.”

“From whom?”

“From my uncle.”

“You have two uncles?”

“Yes, sir. This call came from Uncle Franklin.”

“And by the words Uncle Franklin, you refer to Franklin B. Shore?”

“Yes, sir.”

“When had you last seen Franklin B. Shore?”

“Some ten years ago, shortly prior to his disappearance.”

“Your uncle, Franklin Shore, had disappeared mysteriously some ten years earlier?”

“Yes, sir.”

Hamilton Burger said to the Court, “I am asking leading questions on some of these points which are not disputed, but which I want to get before the jury.”

“No objection,” Mason said.

“What did your uncle say to you over the telephone?”

“Objected to,” Mason said, “as hearsay. Incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial.”

“If the Court please,” Burger announced, “I am not seeking to adduce any facts which will bind the defendant as to this conversation, but only as to show the condition which existed there that night, and as to that only to the extent that it will be considered a part of the res gestae, explaining the moves of the various parties on that night.”