The Case of the Mischievous Doll

“The defendant was at the Montrose Country Club attending a dance on the night of September sixth. Liquor was served, and the defendant had had several drinks. She had an altercation with her escort, decided to leave him, and left the country club in a fit of anger.

“We expect to show that the defendant is spoiled, impulsive, and somewhat arrogant at times. She found an automobile in the parking place that had the keys in it and the motor running. It was a Cadillac automobile with licence number WHW 694 and it had been stolen from an owner in San Francisco, although the defendant had no means of knowing that at the time. The defendant jumped in this stolen car and drove away, apparently intending to go home.

“At the intersection of Western Avenue and Hollywood Boulevard she went through a stop signal, struck a pedestrian, hesitated a moment, jumped out of the car, started to go to the injured pedestrian, then changed her mind, jumped back in the car and drove rapidly away.

“Now, I wish to impress upon you, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, that any evidence which will be introduced tending to connect the defendant with hit-and-run, or with any other violation of the law, is introduced solely for the purpose of showing the background of the present case and the motivation of the defendant.

“We will show that the defendant concocted a brilliant scheme for absolving herself of liability. She hired a firm of private detectives and placed an ad in the newspaper offering employment to a young woman who had a certain particular physical description.

“She instructed the persons who were screening the applicants for that job to get someone who was as near a physical double as possible.

“Dorrie Ambler answered that ad. As soon as the person in charge of screening the applicants saw her, it was realized that Dorrie Ambler bore a startling resemblance to the defendant; a resemblance so striking that it aroused the defendant’s suspicion that Dorrie Ambler must be related to her and in short must be the illegitimate daughter of her mother’s sister.

“We propose to introduce evidence showing that the scheme hatched by the defendant was to have Dorrie Ambler walk by the witnesses who had seen the defendant at the time of the hit-and-run accident. She hoped that Dorrie Ambler would be identified by those witnesses.

“Once they had made a mistaken identification, the defendant felt that she herself would be immune from subsequent prosecution.

“However, when she saw the manner in which Dorrie Ambler resembled her, the defendant realized that she had set in chain a sequence of events which she couldn’t control. She knew that the newspapers would seize upon that resemblance and would soon find out that the two girls were actually closely related.

“It was at this point that the defendant entered into a conspiracy with one Dunleavey Jasper, who had tracked her down, and as a result of that conspiracy—”

“Now, just a minute,” Mason said. “We dislike interrupting the prosecution’s opening statement, but the prosecution is now bringing in evidence of other crimes with the purpose of prejudicing the jury. We assign the remarks as misconduct and ask the Court to admonish the prosecutor and at the same time to instruct the jury to ignore those remarks.”

“We know exactly what we are doing,” Parma said to Judge Flint. “We will stand on the record. We are entitled to introduce evidence of any crimes as motivation for the murder with which this defendant is being charged.”

Judge Flint said to the jury, “It is the law that a defendant being tried for one crime cannot be presumed guilty because of evidence of other crimes, except where such evidence is for the purpose of showing motivation. In view of the assurance of the prosecutor that that is the case here, I warn you that you are not to pay any attention to any evidence of any other crimes alleged to have been committed by this defendant, or to any evidence indicating the commission of such crimes, except for the purpose of showing motivation for the murder of the decedent, Marvin Billings.

“Proceed, Mr. Deputy, and please be careful to limit your remarks.”

“We know exactly what we are doing, Your Honor,” Parma said. “Our remarks are limited and will be limited. The evidence of other crimes is solely for the purpose of showing motivation.”

“Very well, proceed,” Judge Flint said.

“I am virtually finished, Your Honor.” Parma turned to the jury. “We expect to show that Dunleavey Jasper traced the stolen car to the possession of the defendant, that the defendant learned Dunleavey Jasper had a criminal record and that the car was stolen; that she thereupon conspired with Dunleavey Jasper to abduct Dorrie Ambler so that she could be removed as a possible applicant for a share of the Minden estate, and to discredit Miss Ambler by making it seem Dorrie Ambler had been the hit-and-run driver.