The Case of the Mischievous Doll

Paul Drake, accompanied by Jerry Nelson, hurriedly entered the courtroom, caught Mason’s eye.

The lawyer said, “May I have the indulgence of the Court for a moment, please?” and as Judge Flint nodded, Mason moved over to join the detectives.

Drake said in a low voice, “Nelson has all that’s known on that Santa Maria bank job, Perry. There were three persons on it, two in the bank, one driving the getaway car. Witnesses got a partial licence number and description. It’s the same car as the hit-and-run car and—”

“The driver,” Mason interrupted. “Was it a woman?”

Drake’s face showed surprise. “How did you know? Yes, it was a woman.”

“Any other jobs?” Mason asked.

“Yes, a liquor store stick-up in Bakersfield. It’s probably the same gang again — a light-colored Cadillac and a woman getaway driver.”

“Thanks,” Mason said. “That’s all I need.”

He turned to face Judge Flint. “If the Court please, before the prosecutor calls his next witness I have a question or two in regard to fingerprints which I would like to ask of Lieutenant Tragg on cross-examination. I notice that he is here in court and I ask the Court to be permitted to resume my cross-examination of this witness.”

“Is there any objection?” Judge Flint asked.

“There is, if the Court please,” Hamilton Burger said. “I think defence counsel should cross-examine his witnesses and complete his cross-examination. It is a habit of counsel to conduct piecemeal cross-examinations and—”

“The sequence of proof and all matters of procedure in connection with the examination of a witness are in the exclusive control of the Court,” Judge Flint said. “The Court in this case is particularly anxious to see that the defendant is not foreclosed in any manner from presenting her defence.

“The Court has decided to permit the motion. Lieutenant Tragg will return to the stand for further cross-examination.”

As Tragg stepped forward Mason nodded to Della Street, who opened a leather case, took out a folding tripod, placed it in front of the witness, put a small projector on the tripod, ran an electrical connection to a socket and put up a screen.

“This is to be a demonstration?” Judge Flint asked.

“I simply want to project a fingerprint so that I can get it to an exact size,” Mason said, “and question Lieutenant Tragg concerning points of similarity.”

“Very well, proceed.”

Mason turned on the projector, experimented for a moment with a spot of light on the screen, then said, “Now, Lieutenant, I am going to take a print of the thumb of the defendant on this specially prepared glass slide.”

Mason went over, extended his hand and Minerva Minden put out her thumb. Mason pressed the thumb against the slide for a moment, then said apologetically to the Court, “I may have to repeat this experiment, if the Court please, because I am not an expert in taking fingerprints.”

He went to the projector, put in the slide, focused it for a moment, said, “I am afraid I have smudged this one.”

He took another slide from his pocket, again went to the defendant, again received a thumbprint, then returned to the projector and focused the lens on the screen.

“Ah, yes,” Mason said, “we’re getting it now. I think this thumbprint is clear enough. You can see that, can you, Lieutenant?”

“Very well,” Lt. Tragg said.

“All right, I’ll arrange it so the three prints are as nearly the same size as possible; that is, the print on the left, which is the thumbprint of Dorrie Ambler; the print on the right of that which is the print of the thumb of the dead woman; and over on the right of that again, this print which I am projecting.”

“Now, just a minute,” Hamilton Burger said, getting to his feet. “This is simply a projection, an evanescent bit of evidence which we can’t identify. The other prints are enlarged photographs which can be introduced in evidence.”

“Well,” Mason said, “you can have this slide introduced in evidence, put in an envelope and marked an appropriate exhibit.”

“Very well,” Hamilton Burger said, “if that’s the best we can do. I should prefer a photograph.”

“It depends somewhat on the point counsel is trying to make,” Judge Flint said.

Mason said, “I am trying to test the qualifications of this witness, and to show the fallacy of an identification made from only six points of similarity.”

“Very well,” Judge Flint said, “proceed with your questioning, and when you have finished, this slide can be put in an envelope, marked for identification and then introduced as an exhibit if either side desires.”

“Now then, Lieutenant,” Mason said, “these prints are all about the same size. Now, I am going to call your attention to this projected print and ask you if you can find points of similarity between that and the print of the dead girl.”

“There should be some points of similarity,” Lt. Tragg said, “and there might be several, depending upon certain similarities of design.”

“Well, just approach the exhibits and indicate with a pointer any points of similarity you can find.”