The Case of the Mischievous Doll

“We expect to show that in the course of carrying out this conspiracy the private detective, Marvin Billings, found out what was happening. I think it is a reasonable inference which you can draw from the evidence that Billings tried to blackmail the defendant.

“Had it not been that Marvin Billings felt that the remarkable resemblance between these women was due to a common ancestry, had he not felt he could work with Dorrie Ambler to get a share of the Harper Minden estate, this case would never have been brought to trial because then there would have been no murder.

“We hold no brief for the dead man. The evidence will show you he was in effect playing both ends against the middle. But no matter how cunning he may have been, no matter how low he may have been, the law protects him. His life was a human life. His killing was murder.

“So Marvin Billings went to the apartment of Dorrie Ambler, and his arrival was at the moment when Miss Ambler was being spirited down to another apartment on the floor below.

“Billings sounded the chimes. After a moment’s hesitation, the defendant opened the door, trusting to her resemblance to Dorrie Ambler to carry off the scene.

“At first Billings was deceived, but when he kept talking to the defendant he soon realized the impersonation. That was when he tried blackmail, and that was when the defendant shot him with a twenty-two revolver.

“Shortly after the shooting of Billings, the chimes on the apartment door sounded again.

“We expect to show you that the persons then at the door were none other than Perry Mason, the attorney for the defence, and Paul Drake, a private detective.

“The conspirators had to get out of the back door of the apartment. Acting upon the assumption that their callers did not know of this back door, they hurriedly dragged mattresses from the twin beds in the bedroom across the living-room into the kitchenette, and by using a kitchen table and the mattresses, barricaded the door.

“When Mason and Paul Drake entered the apartment, which they did after a few minutes, they found Marvin Billings unconscious and in a dying condition. They found the kitchen door barricaded in such a way that they thought for a while it was being held against their efforts to open it by someone in the kitchen.

“We expect to show that the unfortunate Dorrie Ambler, having been taken to Apartment 805, was given a hypodermic injection of morphia against her will and—”

“Now, just a moment,” Mason said. “Again we are going to interrupt the deputy district attorney and object to any evidence of what may have happened to Dorrie Ambler.”

“It goes to show motive,” Parma said.

“It can’t show motive for the murder of Marvin Billings,” Mason said, “because what the deputy prosecutor is talking about now is something that occurred after the shooting of Marvin Billings.”

“I think that is right,” Judge Flint ruled.

“Very well, if I am going to be limited in my proof I’ll pass this matter on my opening statement, ladies and gentlemen, but we expect to introduce proof and we will have a ruling on the matter as the witnesses come on the stand.

“I am not going to weary you with details. I have told you the general nature of the case so you can understand the evidence you will hear. You will hear the confession of one of the members of this conspiracy and you will hear evidence of admissions made by the defendant herself.

“We are going to ask a verdict of first-degree murder at your hands. However, as far as this trial is concerned, it is only necessary for you to determine just one thing.”

Parma held up his left index finger high above his head. “Just one thing, ladies and gentlemen,” he said, shaking the outstretched finger. “That is, whether or not the evidence in this case proves the defendant guilty of the crime of murder, the killing of Marvin Billings.

“We shall ask a verdict of guilty at your hands, a verdict of first-degree murder.”

Parma turned and walked back to his seat at the prosecutor’s table.

“Do you wish to make an opening statement, Mr. Mason?”

“No,” Mason said, “except that I wish the Court to admonish the jury that the statement of the prosecutor was inaccurate as a matter of law.”

“In what respect?” Judge Flint asked.

Mason arose and extended his left hand above his head, extending the left forefinger. “It isn’t a matter, Your Honour, of proving just one thing: whether the evidence shows the defendant guilty. It is a matter of proving two things.”

And Mason slowly raised his right hand and extended the right index finger. “It is a question of proving the defendant guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. I think the Court should so advise the jury.”

“Well, I think the jury understands that in any criminal case the evidence must prove the defendant guilty beyond all reasonable doubt.”

“Otherwise the defendant is entitled to a verdict of acquittal.”

“The Court will cover that matter in its instructions,” Judge Flint said.

Mason slowly lowered his hands with the extended forefingers and seated himself.