Chapter 16 Chapter Sixteen

Chairing the Roger and Carlo Burbank pretrials was Judge Newark.The packed crowd in the courtroom shows that the public attaches great importance to this pre-trial hearing, and they deeply understand its fundamental significance and importance. District Attorney Hamilton Burger himself was present, assisted by Maurice Linton, one of the ablest trial deputies of the younger generation.It can be seen that the District Prosecutor's Office really attaches great importance to this case. Maurice Linton was a lanky, fierce man of quick, tense movements and eloquence.At this point, he stood up and made a short opening remark.

"In court," he said. "While I know it's somewhat unusual to make an opening statement in a pre-trial hearing like this, since most of our evidence is circumstantial; and from the number of witnesses called and the preparation made by the They want to play down the case after the hearing. So, I want the court to understand what we are trying to prove. We want to prove that there was an incident between Roger Burbank and the deceased on the night of the murder. Afterwards, defendant Carlo Burbank gave her father a false alibi by abetting perjury, and at a venue where they claimed to have held a political rally, there were empty bottles on the Covered with the fingerprints of Carlo Burbank and Jason Belting. We also want to prove that the accused Roger Burbank - a strong, early boxer - lured the deceased onto his yacht and then murdered him there."

The judge looked at Mason and asked, "Mr. Mason, do you want to make any statement?" Jackson, who was sitting on Mason's left, leaned forward slightly, and whispered in Mason's ear: "I think he will be affected by what you just said, you'd better say something." Mason shook his head and said, "The court, we have to see how the case develops before we can express our opinion." "Very well, the prosecution calls the first witness." The prosecution subpoenaed Team Leader Trager and presented the evidence that Fred Milfie's body was found, how the body was identified, where the body was buried, and where the yacht was moored, etc. elements of a crime.

"You can cross-examine the witnesses," Linton said. Mason asked deliberately casually, "Did the murder happen on a yacht?" "yes." "Where was the yacht parked?" "I guess, if you're willing to wait a while, lawyer," Berger said. "There will be an answer to your satisfaction—we have witnesses who can produce photographs, maps, and charts." "In that case," Mason said. "I think I should wait to cross-examine this witness until after those exhibits are presented." "No objection," Berger said.

Mason smiled and said, "That's it, team leader." Berger then subpoenaed a marine observer and presented a map of the bay showing where the yacht had anchored; several pictures of the yacht's interior, and a picture of the deck and cabin.Then he said triumphantly, "You can cross-examine." Mason said, "Is the 'X' you marked on the prosecution's Exhibit No. 1 the place where the yacht anchored?" "yes." "What's the depth of the water at that point?" The observer smiled and said, "I don't know. I found out the yacht's position by triangulation, and then marked it on the bay map."

"Interesting. Don't you know how deep the water is?" "No, I'm an observer—not a diver." The audience in the courtroom roared with laughter. Mason didn't even smile at all. He said, "There's no problem." Subsequently, a photographer proposes several pictures.One shows the interior of the stateroom; another shows Fred Milfield's body sprawled on the floor; still another shows the yacht at anchor; The starboard side of the yacht, one is the port side; the next is the image of the bow and stern. "Examine!" said Linton. Mason said very calmly, "How deep is the water at that point?"

There was another chuckle in the courtroom. The photographer quickly replied, "I don't know, I'm a photographer, not a diver." Now the tittering gave way to audible laughter; the judge tapped the gavel and demanded silence. Mason said casually again: "There is no problem." Jackson seemed concerned, leaning forward and whispering to Mason, "I think the audience in the courtroom is laughing at you." "Do you really think so?" Mason whispered, not bothering to turn his head away. Berg summons Lady Delphine Milfield. Mrs. Milfield was dressed in black; her eyes were still slightly swollen, perhaps from crying.She took the witness stand. "Are you the wife of the deceased Fred Milfield?" the district attorney asked sympathetically--the attitude prosecutors always treat widows in murder trials like this one.

"Yes." she replied.But the sound is so small it's almost inaudible. "Mrs. Milfield, do you know Roger Burbank—a defendant in this case?" "know." "How long have you known each other?" "Ten years." "Did you know that on the day of your husband's death, Roger Burbank asked him to meet at a designated place?" "Yes. Mr. Burbank called." "when?" "About half past eleven that morning." "Who answered the phone?" "I took it." "Did you recognize Roger Burbank's voice?"

"I recognized it." "What did Mr. Burbank say?" "When he knew that Fred was not there, he said he was in a hurry to contact him and asked Fred to meet him on his yacht at 5 p.m. The meeting is to talk about very important things." "Are you sure it was Roger Burbank who was speaking to you on the phone?" "yes." "Have you passed this message on to your husband?" "yes." "when?" "About twenty minutes after the call." "How did you convey it?" "My husband called back and said he wasn't home for dinner and wouldn't be back until after midnight."

"And you bring him Roger Burbank's message?" "yes." "Did your husband say anything?" "He said he had spoken to Mr. Burbank on the phone..." "No," Mason objected. "It's not relevant, it doesn't matter, it's not part of the 'accidental situation', so it's just hearsay." "The objection is valid," Judge Newark ruled. "You can cross-examine," Hamilton Berger said. Jackson whispered to Mason again: "The phrase 'I've known him for ten years' is a trap. He wants you to fall into the trap and give her a reason to bring up the old case in court."

Mason nodded and said to the witness, "You said you knew Roger Burbank for ten years, didn't you?" "Yes." She replied in a whisper. "Do you know him well?" "Quite familiar." "Was everyone else in Los Angeles during that time?" "No." "Where was he when you met him?" "In New Orleans. I used to go on occasional yachts, and Mr. Burbank was a passionate yachtsman, and that's how we met. In fact, when we first met, I was paddling to the A yacht went up, and Mr Burbank was in another rowboat, and was about to start racing me." "Have you known him longer than your husband has known him?" "yes." "Did your husband come into contact with Mr. Burbank through you?" "I think so—yes." "You didn't see Mr. Burbank for some years, did you?" "yes." "And then you called him, didn't you?" "yes." "Did you mention your old friendship?" "yes." A look of smug triumph crept across the D.A.'s face. "Mrs. Milfield, what did you say to him?" She gave the D.A. a quick look, who gave her a suggestive look back, before she said, "I'm going to assure him—about the trouble he got into in New Orleans, that he punched me. I will keep silent and never mention anything about someone.” The judge frowned. Mason didn't change his tone, and continued to ask: "Although you promised so much, did you tell your husband later?" "Well... I told Fred." "And did you tell any of your husband's friends in business, too? For example, Harry Van Nuys?" "Yes, I told him too." "Anyone else?" "No, just these two people." "You told them about it so they could go to Burbank and ask for some money..." "No, absolutely not." "Then why are you telling them?" "Because I feel my husband has a right to know about it." "What about Van Nuys? Do you also think he has a right to know about it?" "Your court, this question is off topic," Berg protested. Mason said: "Not at all! The court should have noticed that the witness was eager to talk about Burbank's past, and I was showing her prejudice now; and asked her to elaborate on the answers she was eager to put on the record. one time." "It's only natural that this witness should be biased," Berger said. "After all, this man murdered her husband!" "It should be fair to give me the opportunity to show the extent of that bias," Mason said. "Answer the questions," the judge instructed. "Do you think that man named Harry Van Nuys has a right to know about the trouble Burbank got into earlier?" "Well...he's my husband's business friend." "So he has a right to know?" Mason asked. "In a way, yes." "Is it because you think this information is a valuable bargaining chip in business?" "No, absolutely not." "But it's used as a bargaining chip, isn't it?" "Used by whom?" "Your husband and Harry, Van Nuys." "There is no basis in fact," Berg protested. "Unless the witness's husband had told her personally, the witness would not have known what happened between her husband and Burbank." "The question is whether she knew," the judge said. "I don't know," said Mrs. Milfield. "But your husband hadn't seen Burbank before you spoke to him?" "No." "Haven't you seen Harry Van Nuys, too?" "No." "However, when you told them about Burbank's past, within seven to ten days, they went to see him and arranged for Burbank to provide the funds they needed to expand their business, didn't they?" "I don't think Mr. Van Nuys has seen Burbank." "Is your husband handling the whole fund-raising business all by himself?" "yes." "Therefore, Van Nuys has no reason to see Mr. Burbank?" "um, yes." "So the only reason your husband went to see Burbank was to get money?" "It's for support." "Financial support?" "yes." "In cash?" "yes." "So," Mason said, pointing at the witness. "You persuade your husband to use the information you have given him to blackmail Roger Burbank into lending him money, and then..." "Your court," Berg objected, rising from his seat. "It was inappropriate, irrelevant, and it was privileged communication between husband and wife. What he said was beyond the scope of cross-examination, and because it was inappropriate cross-examination, I specifically objected." "The objection is valid," the judge ruled. Mason said, "Mrs. Milfield, now I want you to recall Saturday, the day the body was found. You were in the flat and I called on you, right?" "yes." "Did you just cry then?" "Objection! Improper cross-examination," said the prosecutor. "This question can reveal bias in a witness," Mason stressed to the judge. "invalid objection." "I'm going to visit you, am I?" Mason asked. "yes." "Have you ever cried before?" "yes." "Head Trager of the homicide squad arrived when I was at your house, didn't he?" "yes." "I told you Chief Trager was from the Homicide Squad and asked you if you knew anyone had been murdered, and you said, 'Probably mine...' and stopped. Right?" "right." "At that time, did you think of your husband?" "yes." "Mrs. Milfield, why do you think the dead man was your husband?" "Because . . . because he didn't come back all night, and I know he's had an affair with Roger Burbank, and Mr. Burbank also claims my husband tampered with his books." "No problem," Mason said. During the re-examination after Mason's counter-examination, Berg appeared confident.He told the witness: "Because Chief Trager just came to your house, he was downstairs, so Mr. Mason suggested that you start peeling onions to hide the real cause of your red and swollen eyes. Did he do that?" "That's exactly what I do," Mason said. "Please answer the questions," Berg told the witness. "yes." "Why did Mason do this?" The judge looked at Mason and said, "Mr. Mason, I think you can object to that, because it is not a proper reexamination, and it requires witnesses to draw conclusions—if you care to object." "I don't care, I don't want to contest it," Mason said. "I'm quite willing to let the court know: I'm giving her a free advice so that she..." "Save face," said Berg in a contemptuous, mocking tone. Mason smiled and said, "Prosecutor, it's not about her face, it's about finding a reasonable explanation for her appearance." There was a burst of laughter in the courtroom. The judge himself was smiling as he tapped his gavel, calling for silence in the courtroom and asking, "Any more questions?" "No more, my lord." "What about counter-interrogation?" "No," Mason replied. "The witness withdrew. Mr. Burger, call the next witness." "The court, the next witness I'm going to call is a bit of a violation of the original procedure, but I think I can show a pattern in it that correlates with the rest of the evidence -- I beseech the court's permission," Berger said. "very good." "J. C. Reising," Berger summoned. Mr. J. C. Reising was a stooped man in his fifties with a dejected appearance.After he sat on the witness stand, he seemed to have deliberately avoided meeting the eyes of the two defendants. "Your name is J. C. Resing, you're an oil contractor, and you live at 6842 Colton LaBrie, California, right?" "correct." "You were in or around Santa Barbara on Saturday when Fred's body was found, weren't you?" "yes." "The day before—Friday night—you rented rooms 13 and 14 at a motel called the Surf and Dim on the boardwalk between Los Angeles and San Francisco, didn't you?" "yes." "Close to Santa Barbara—between Ventura and Santa Barbara?" "yes." "While you were there, did you communicate with anyone?" "Have." "Is it by phone?" "yes." "Who are you calling?" "No!" said Mason. "Inappropriate and irrelevant." "The objection is valid." "Is it to one of the two defendants in court?" "yes." "Then I want to ask you: what is the content of your call?" "No!" said Mason. The judge frowned and said, "If the person on the call is really one of the defendants, Mr. Mason..." "In court, it would be perfectly appropriate for the prosecutor to ask the witness whether he believed that the voice on the phone was that of one of the defendants, and whether one of the defendants identified himself to him on the phone," Mason said. What the witness might have said to the accused is simply an inappropriate question." "I think you have a point," the judge ruled. "But, in court," Berg protested. "I'm going to show the connection; because of that phone call, the defendant knew where the witness was—knowing he was staying at the Surf and Sun motel." "What does that have to do with this case?" "I'll relate it to the next witness." "Hmm..." the judge said hesitantly. "If you change the subject and focus on this specific point, I will allow you to do so." "Very well, court," Berger said. "Mr. Reising, I want to ask you: Did you contact the defendant or his office and tell him you were staying there?" "Well, I've been in touch with his office." "Who are you talking to?" "With Mr. Jason Belting." "Who is Mr. Belting?" "He was Roger Burbank's secretary—sort of the man who ran the business." "You know who he is, don't you?" "yes." "Did you know it yourself?" "yes." "Have you done business with Mr. Burbank through Mr. Belting?" "yes." "At that time, what did you say to Mr. Belting on the phone?" "I asked Mr. Belting if he could get the contracts for those excavations on the Skinner Hill land. I also told him I was at the Surf and Sun Motel and would stay until noon. And told him: If he was going to give Any definite answer from me, contact me. He said to me..." The judge ruled: "I really don't see what you mean by referring to Mr. Bertin's conversation. Prosecutor, I think your argument is that Bertin then gave this information to one or both of the defendants." , and that has something to do with the case, doesn't it?" "Yes, in court." "I'm going to leave it up to the witness to answer on that point, but I don't think there's any apparent connection between the conversation between Belting and this witness." "All right, Your Majesty. Mr. Lessing, I'm going to ask you now: When did you check out of the Surf and Sun Motel?" "Around ten o'clock in the morning." "When was your conversation with Mr. Jason Belting?" "Friday afternoon, about four forty-five; then Saturday too." "Are there any people with you in those two rooms?" "yes." "Who are they?" "My friends—a driller, a geologist I hired myself, a friend who gave me occasional financial support, and another person who was interested in doing business with me." "Have you explored the Skinner Hill Field?" "yes." "How did you know it was an oil field?" "Hmm..." Lei Xin scratched his head and said. "I didn't know it, I found it by accident. I saw Milfield and Burbank bought a lot of land together, and we people in the oil business are more or less aware of people's land that may contain oil. Mass action taken online. They formed a Karaku Wool Company, but that doesn't fool me at all." "So you took a look at the field for yourself, didn't you?" Berger asked. "yes." Berger said, "Mr. Reising, now I want to ask you a question. After you left the hotel, did you mention to the defendant that you stayed at the motel?" Lessing, looking restless, said, "Yes." "Who did you mention?" "Carol Burbank." "what do you say?" "I think the prosecutor should understand -- the question isn't about getting extraneous information, it's about asking for some kind of statement that's relevant to the case," Judge Newark said. "Yes, in court." "Please answer the question." "Hmm..." Lei Xin said. "She asked me if I could -- well, if I could keep silent and never mention the names of the people who were with me in the motel; I'd just act as if I was hiding something -- not to reveal who the members were .” "Then how do you answer?" "Well... I told her it's okay, I'll do it." At this moment, Mason said contemptuously: "Are you going to claim that she abetted you to commit perjury for this reason?" "Yes," Berger said loudly. "She didn't ask him to commit any perjury," Mason said with a smile. "I think she has," Berger said. "The two parties are asked to stop discussing," the judge ruled. "Mr. Berger! Please keep asking." "No problem." "Mr. Mason, are there any other counter-interrogations?" Mason smiled and said, "Yes, sir. Mr. Reising, did Carlo Burbank ever ask you to give false testimony?" "Um...no." "Did she ever ask you to make any false statements?" "Well...she just told me to keep quiet." "It's true that she asked you to remain silent, but she didn't tell you not to make a truthful statement during the testimony, did she?" "um, yes." "Just keep silent, don't you?" "yes." "Don't give out the names of the people who were in the hotel room with you, will you?" "good." "Did she expressly ask you to let the outside world know that her father is not there?" "Oh no!" "However, in your opinion, her father should be among those people, right?" "Oh, I see what you mean. Well...she asked me to refuse to identify anyone who was there—to keep the whole thing as secret as possible." "You're going to refuse to say her father was there, are you?" "Refused to name anyone who was present." "Don't say her father is there, do you?" "Well . . . if you're going to say that - I'll have to refuse to name any names - not a single one." "It's just that you are determined not to say that her father was there at that time, is it?" "yes." "No problem. Thank you, Mr. Reising." Mason looked at the prosecutor with a triumphant smile, and said, "If that's called instigating others to give false testimony, I can only accept it." J. C. Reising leaves the witness stand. "This is clearly an attempt by defendant Carlo Burbank to create some sort of fictitious alibi for her father," the prosecutor exclaimed. "The witness didn't say that Carlo asked him to claim that her father was there. You can't prove an alibi to be false unless you swear that someone was there. She just asked him to refuse to say that her father was there." "Well... even so, her purpose is to make us assume that her father was there at the time." "It doesn't matter what assumptions a person wants the D.A. to have," Mason said. "That's a purely personal matter, and it's nothing like soliciting perjury." "I don't want to argue with you," Berger said. "I'll prove it to you. Now, I'm going to summon Team Leader Cui Ge to testify in court again, and ask the court for approval; I just used his testimony to prove the establishment of the criminal facts." "Okay." The judge ruled. Trager returned to the witness stand. Berger asked, "Saturday—the day Fred's body was found—did you speak to Carlo Burbank?" "yes." "Where did you talk about it?" "At a restaurant between Los Angeles and Calabasas called 'Dobo Shack.'" "Who else was there?" "One of the defendants—Roger, Mr. Burbank, and George Amon of the Los Angeles Police Department." "At that time, what did you say?" "Defendant Carlo Burbank stated that her father attended a political gathering; adding that under the circumstances he should no longer try to conceal the meeting but should have told us where he was and what happened What's up." "Did she say the meeting was held at the Surf and Sun Motel?" "Well..." Trager said. "She hinted." "Can you recall what she said then?" "Sorry, I can't remember. I was more concerned about Roger Burbank at the time." "So, did Roger Burbank say anything about the above?" "He put his hands in his pockets and took out a key. It was the key to Room Fourteen of the Surf and Sun Motel." "Did he tell you that he was there?" "Well... he did imply that he had been there." Mason declared: "That statement was the conclusion of the witness; therefore, it should be deleted." "I think so too," the judge ruled. "This witness is a police officer and should be able to clearly identify what the accused said." "Well..." Trager said with a smile. "He reached into his pocket, took out a key to Room 14 in that motel, and handed that key to me." "Did Roger Burbank, the defendant, later accompany you to the Surf and Sun Motel, where he identified a razor that belonged to him?" "yes." "Did Carlo Burbank tell you that her father's razor can be found in Room 14 of the Surf and Sun motel?" "yes." "You're ready for a counter-examination," Berger said. Mason said with a gentle smile, "Did Carlo Burbank tell you where her father's razor was?" "yes." "Did she tell you that her father had been there?" "Well... I don't remember her saying that. She didn't say that much, she just inferred the situation." "You mean, you deduce from the fact that his razor was there that he should have been there. Don't you?" "Well... in a way, yes - if you will." Mason smiled and said, "I'll just put it this way: She told you her father's razor was there, didn't she?" "yes." "Did the defendant, Roger Burbank, tell you where his razor was left?" "Yes, he told me afterwards." "And point it out to you on the spot?" "yes." "Recognized as his own razor too?" "yes." "Is that really his razor?" Trager looked uncomfortable. "I have no idea." "Not bad," said Mason dryly. "He told you that his razor was there; his daughter told you that his razor was there, and you yourself found it there; but you did nothing to prove that. The razor isn't his, is it?" "The razor was put there on purpose." "Don't publish your theories, Captain. Have you taken any steps to ascertain whether or not it was the razor of defendant Roger Burbank?" "Um... no, I'm assuming that's his razor." Mason smiled. "So, Carlo Burbank tells you that her father's razor was in that motel, and Roger Burbank admits that his razor might be there, and you take him to the scene— — found out that his razor was actually there. So you try to bully him into admitting he's been there, and he denies it, don't you?" "He denied it casually, not aggressively, so I thought he was lying; I wasn't trying to intimidate him." "However, he denied it." "True, but he denied it casually." "Whatever inattentive, hesitant, or half-hearted; he's in denial anyway, isn't he?" "yes." "Your court," Mason said. "The adjectives mentioned in his testimony just now are the subjective conclusions of a prejudiced witness. Only what Roger Burbank himself said at the time can be regarded as facts." Judge Newark nodded, eyes twinkling, and said, "Mr. Mason, please proceed. This court will give due consideration." Mason turned around and asked Team Leader Trager. "Defendant Roger Burbank said to you that if you asked him in public whether he had stayed at the Surf and Sun the night before, he would have to deny it. Right?" "Yes, but when he said that, I thought he was admitting that he had been there." "I see," Mason said. "That's just your personal interpretation of what he said, isn't it?" "That's all I know of what he said." "Leader, fortunately, we are judging this case based on what he said, not what you know." "His daughter, Carlo, also said in the restaurant that he had been there." "Sorry," Mason said. "I was there. Carlo just hinted that there might have been a political rally the night before at the Surf and Sun motel. She also told her father that it was time to tell the truth and tell you exactly Go somewhere, stop trying to preserve the political careers of those Sacramento dignitaries. Then the defendant reaches into his coat pocket and pulls out a key, puts it on the table; you grab that key, Turned out it was the key to Room Fourteen at the Surf and Sun Motel. Is that so?" "um, yes." "Defendant Roger Burbank didn't say he was there, did he?" "Well, but he did produce the key." "He took out the keys, looked at you, and said, if you asked him if he was at the Surf and Sun the night before, he'd deny it. Right?" "Well... I don't remember what the actual situation was." "Carol Burbank ever said 'But, Dad! Your razor's on that shelf over there!' or something like that?" "um, yes." "So you're thinking: By saying that, Carlo Burbank is acknowledging that her father was there. Right?" "Well... because his razor is there," Trager blurted out. "Indeed," said Mason. "His razor was there. But Captain, it's not against the law for a man to put his own razor anywhere he likes. I suppose you'll agree with me?" "Well... from all the surrounding circumstances," Trager said. "Such inferences are obvious." "You can make that inference yourself if you like," Mason said. "However, I think the jury will choose to try the case on the facts. And, if you're going to claim that someone committed perjury, you have to prove that a statement was false, untrue, not like in this case— —The accused made a true statement which the police found false. What a person actually said counts; and it must be under oath before it could be perjury." "It's perjury they're asking Raycin to testify," Trager said. Mason frowned and said, "Oh, does anyone want him to swear to tell a lie?" "We've been arguing about it," Trager said. "Isn't it?" Mason said with a smile. "Captain Trager, let me ask you again. When the body was found on Saturday morning, you were notified to go to Roger Burbank's yacht, right?" "yes." "Just did some investigative work there?" "yes." "Did you find a bloodstained shoe print on one of the stairwells on the stairway leading to the cabin?" "I'm going to call in another witness to make that point," Berg interrupted hastily. "I'm going to talk about that right now," Mason said. "Actually, I'm already doing it. Team leader, can you answer my question just now?" "of course can." "Did you indeed find a bloody shoe print on the stair-step?" "yes." "Are you sure..." "Your court," Berg interrupted. "This is not a proper cross-examination. Personally, I will approach this in a step-by-step manner. I will present a shoe of defendant Carlo Burbank as evidence, then point out the blood on the shoe; then highlight the stair-slabs. The fact that there is blood on it." "However, if Mr Mason were to question witnesses on this point during cross-examination, I do not think it necessary for him to do so in the way you do," the judge ruled. "This witness is a police officer, and the defense lawyers of course have the right to question him in detail. Moreover, you should ask him everything he knows now, rather than piece together fragments." "In court, I want to prove the footprint with the help of another witness." "But the point now is -- did this witness know anything about that footprint?" "He seems to know." "In that case, let him tell what he knows," said the judge. "This court will continue to hear the case and not allow the prosecution to delay in some details to create a dramatic climax. The witness is a police officer, so the defense lawyer has the greatest room for questioning during cross-examination. Therefore, this court believes that the objection Invalid, witnesses to answer questions." "Yes." Trager said defiantly. "This shoe print was left on the stair slab, and I just got the shoe with that print on it." "Okay," Mason said. "Now, let's take a look at this photo—the prosecution's Exhibit No. 5. Please pay attention to a candle in that photo, see?" "I know, there's a candle there." "Well, look at this picture, please," said Mason. "Study that candle more carefully." "Yes, I see it." "Does the appearance of that candle strike you as unusual?" "No, it was just a candle fixed on a table in the cabin of the yacht where the body was found." "How much of that candle has burned?" "About an inch, maybe a little less." "Have you done any experiments to determine how long it would take to light a candle like this to consume about an inch of length under conditions like those observed in the cabins of this yacht? " "No, I didn't. I don't think it's necessary." "why?" "Because that candle means nothing." "Chairman, can I ask why it doesn't make any sense?" "Because we know when and how Mr. Milfield died. Besides, he died long before dark, so that candle is of no help to the case at all." Mason said, "Captain, have you noticed that this candle is a little off the vertical line, and is in a slightly slanted state?" "Yes, I noticed." “你有用量角器量一下倾斜的角度吗？” "No." “事实上，它与垂直线呈十八度的夹角，对吗？” “嗯……老实说，我不知道。” “在你看来，它似乎是偏离了垂直线十八度，对不对？” “是啊，可能吧。” “你曾经试图找出这根蜡烛倾斜的原因吗？” 崔格微笑着说：“如果凶手匆匆忙忙地把蜡烛插在桌面上，以便藉着烛光进行谋杀工作，那他一定慌张得来不及把蜡烛摆直。” “你没有其他理论了吗？” “还会有什么样的理论呢？” 梅森微笑着说：“组长，没有问题了。” 伯格对着梅森皱眉头说：“那根倾斜的蜡烛与本案有何关联？” 梅森说：“那就是我要辩护的地方。” “你要辩护的地方？” "yes." 伯格犹豫了一会儿，然后意兴阑珊似地说道：“嗯……就我所持的理论来看，那根本是经不起验证的。” 法庭上起了一阵骚动。平静之后，梅森很快地说：“检察官，你听说过用烛光检视鸡蛋的故事吗？嗯，我现在就在检视你的供词——我发现它已经烂掉了。” 法官用力敲着小木槌，说道：“请两造避免这些人身攻击，或是对不相干的事情发表评论。伯格先生，传唤下一个证人。” “阿萨·克莱尔。”伯格说。 那个人将近五十岁，面带微笑，泰然自若。他走到证人席，举起一只手宣誓。 戴拉低声告诉梅森说：“跟我们一起搭乘计程车的男子就是他——一再提起旧金山如何如何的那个人。你要提防一下这个人，他很狡猾。” 梅森点头示意。 阿萨·克莱尔坐上证人席，说明自己是洛杉矶警察局的一名便衣刑警，然后专注而礼貌地看着检察官，等着回答下一个问题。 “你认识被告卡洛·柏班克吗？” "Yes, sir." “佛瑞得·弥儿菲的尸体被发现后的隔天——也就是星期日——你见过她吗？” “是的，我见过。” "where?" “不只一个地方。”他带着微笑说道。 "how do I say this?" “我奉派暗中尾随她，我从她的住处一直跟踪她到几个不同的地方去。” “到过联合终站吗？”伯格问。 “是的，先生。最后她到了联合终站，再从那里出发前往伍德瑞基旅馆。” “当她在联合终站的时候，你有没有看到任何人跟她会合？”伯格问。 "Yes, sir." "Who?" “戴拉·史翠特小姐，佩利·梅森的秘书。” “啊哈！”汉密顿·伯格得意似地叫着，他的语气蕴含了猫儿逮到老鼠般的愉快与满足。“戴拉·史翠特小姐和卡洛·柏班克小姐会合后，发生了什么事？” “她们进了一部计程车，前往伍德瑞基旅馆。” “她们在计程车中时，你在哪里呢？” 阿萨露齿微笑，说道：“我就和她们一同坐在那部计程车里。” “那你听到她们的对话了吗？” "yes." “她们打算干什么？” “她们要到伍德瑞基旅馆去。” “到了旅馆之后呢？” “史翠特小姐说，她知道梅森先生已打电话为她们订了房间，服务生回答说的确如此。她就为自己和柏班克小姐登记，只使用柏班克小姐的名字字首，而不写出她的全名，也没有小姐或女士的称谓。” "and then?" “然后，史翠特小姐从皮包里取出一张信封，上面注明是要交给佩利·梅森先生的。她将信封递给服务生，并说梅森先生会来领取它。” "and then?" “然后我就跨步向前，对他们说：地方检察官要见她们，她们必须到警察总局去一趟，或类似那样的话。” "What next?" “接着，我就拿了她们的信封。” “然后，你怎么处理它？” “我打开信封。” “里面装了什么东西？” “一张包裹提领卡，是洛杉矶联合终站的行李存放处发出的。” “你有没有试着记下那张提领卡，以便下回再见到它时，你还能够认得出来？” "Have." "How do you do it?" “我把自己的名字写在上面。” “你是说，你在提领卡的背面签了名？” "yes." 汉密顿·伯格带着有点炫耀的口气说道：“我现在给你看一张洛杉矶联合终站包裹存放处所开出的卡片，背面还用钢笔写了'阿萨·克莱尔'这个名字。我问你：这是不是你的签名？” "Yes, sir." “原先装在信封里的就是这张提领卡吗？” "yes." “戴拉·史翠特当时留在伍德瑞基旅馆，并交代说梅森会去拿的，就是这张提领卡吗？” "Yes, sir." “这张卡片是放在一个外面写着'佩利·梅森先生'这个名字的信封里吗？” "Yes, sir." “我现在给你看个信封，上面用钢笔写了'佩利·梅森先生'几个字。那张提领卡就是在这个信封里找到的吗？” "yes." “当时戴拉·史翠特小姐交给伍德瑞基旅馆服务生的，就是这个信封吗？” “她刚要递给他；可是服务生还没拿到手，我就抢先一步把它拿了过来。” “然后，你就带着那张提领卡到洛杉矶联合终站去了，是吗？” "Yes, sir." “你是否把提领卡呈递给包裹存放单位？” "Yes, sir." “你领取到什么东西？” “一份包裹。” “你把它打开来看了吗？” “没有立即打开。我把它带到警察总局去，包裹是在那里拆封的。” “包裹被打开时，你在场吗？” "yes." “里面是什么东西？” “一双鞋子。” “如果再看到那双鞋子的话，你能认得出来吗？” “是的，我能。” “是这双鞋子吗？”伯格呈了一双鞋子，问道。 证人仔细地观察了一下，然后说：“是的，先生。” “当时，你有没有对这双鞋子进行任何检验，以确定鞋子上头有无异物呢？” "Yes, sir." “那你发现到什么？” “我在鞋底与鞋身之间发现到看似乾血迹的红色污点。” “你不确定那些污点就是乾掉的血迹吗？” 证人说：“当实验室的专家完成检验时，我也在场；他表示……” “好了，没关系。”伯格以公正无私的口吻说道。“梅森先生一定会提出异议，说这是传闻证据，不足采信。我们要按照传统的方式和法律程序来进行，我会传唤实验室里的专业人员，让他就自己所发现的提供证词。目前，你只能就你所知道的作证。” "yes." “你所知道的就是这些吗？” "yes." “辩方可进行反讯问了。”伯格以胜利者的口气说道。 梅森仔细地打量了阿萨·克莱尔一会儿。证人转头面对辩方律师，神情显得非常和蔼亲切，好像对于梅森将要问的问题颇感兴趣，因此很专注似地看着他。 “先前你一直在跟踪卡洛·柏班克吗？”梅森问。 “是的，没错。” “只有你一个人单独做这件事吗？” 证人犹豫了一下，然后说：“还有另外一个人跟我一起行动。”此时，他的声音已经不像刚才那么有把握了。 "who's that person?" “一名警探。” “是凶案组的人吗？” “是便衣单位的探员。” "What is your name?" 证人看了汉密顿·伯格一眼，伯格立刻说：“庭上，我反对，这不是合宜的反讯问。” “反对无效！”法官说。 “那个人叫什么名字？”梅森问道。 “哈维·提约斯。” “那天，你们两人一起跟踪被告卡洛·柏班克吗？”梅森又问。 "Yes, sir." “你们俩一起到了联合终站吗？” "yes." “他现在人在哪里？” “哦，我不知道。” “你上一次见到他是在什么时候？” “我记不得了。” “当你说你不知道提约斯先生在哪里的时候，你的意思是什么呢？” “就是我所说的话——我不知道他在哪里。” “真的吗？你是说：此刻，你确实不知道他在哪里，是不是？” “嗯……嗯，是的。” “你知道提约斯是否仍然任职于警察局吗？” “嗯……我想是吧。” “那你知道这个事实吗？” “就我的了解，我实在不能确定。” “事实上，”梅森说。“提约斯先生去渡假，他也告诉你这件事了，而且还让你知道他要去哪里，对不对？” 克莱尔在证人席上不安似地移动着身体。“嗯……我对任何人告诉我的事情都一概不知，我只能就我自己所知道的事提供证词。” “然而，这毕竟是个事实，对不对？” “反对，不适当的问话。”毛利斯·林顿说。“证人说得没错，辩方律师无权要求非直接的证词。” 纽华克法官有点生气似地说：“你反对得太迟了。如果你在证人表示自己不知道提约斯先生的下落之前就提出反对的话，可能还有道理；但是，证人既然已经明确地说他不知道了，辩方律师当然有权诠释其答覆的含意，以及证人得知此事的可能管道。而且，这也可能显示出证人所持的成见。” “我看不出原因何在。”林顿反对说。 “这显示出证人那种刻意规避问题的企图。”法官说。“证人告诉辩方律师，说他不知道提约斯的下落，但他却知道提约斯去渡假了，可见证人避重就轻地敷衍回答。虽然我不了解这个反讯问的目的是什么，但是在这种情形之下，辩方律师就必须追问证人这方面的讯息了。他无须根据一个相关的事实来进行问话，也不必间接向警方打听。” “你知道提约斯为什么要去渡假吗？”梅森又问。 “他要暂时抛开日常例行工作的烦扰，跟一般人渡假的理由一样。” “这时候去渡假，不是很不寻常吗？” “这我就不清楚了。” “星期日当提约斯先生跟你在办这件案子的时候，你知道他有渡假的计划吗？” "No, I do not know." “他没向你提起过这件事吗？” "No." “后来他就突然决定要去渡假了，你知道为什么吗？” “我所知道的，都已经告诉你了。” “事实上，”梅森说。“因为提约斯先生当时拾起我们在讨论的那张提领卡，又把它交给了史翠特小姐，所以他就决定去渡假。对不对？” "I have no idea." “但是，提约斯确实拾起一张提领卡，又将它递给了史翠特小姐。这一点你知道吧？” “嗯……我不能确切地告诉你我知道。” "Why not?" “我没有看到那张提领卡——距离不够近，所以无法辨认出来。” 梅森说：“我这样问你好了，你们在联合终站时还一直跟踪着卡洛·柏班克·对吗？” "yes." “你看到她和史翠特小姐走向计程车招呼处吗？” "yes." “你也看到柏班克小姐打开皮包，然后从中掉出了一张卡片，对不对？” “嗯……是的。” “接着，你又看到提约斯先生拾起那张卡片，递给史翠特小姐，是吗？” “她伸手去捡。” “但是，提约斯捷足先登，拾起卡片然后递给她，对不对？” "yes." “但你现在说，你不知道那张卡片就是我所拿的这张提领卡，你所持的理由是：当时距离太远，以致你看不到上面的号码，对吗？” “嗯……除非我确定它就是当天我看到的那张提领卡，否则我也不能随便说是，对不对？” “那张卡片的大小跟这张差不多吧？” "yes." “外形也类似吗？” "yes." “一边打了像这样的一排接缝孔吗？” “嗯……是的。” “上面印了一个大大的数字吗？” "yes." “当提约斯拾起那张卡片时，你离他多逮？” “八到十英尺。” “提约斯有没有告诉你，他把那张提领卡交给了史翠特小姐？” “反对！不适当的问话，而且辩方律师所要求的是第三者的、非直接的证词。”林顿大声抗议。“提约斯先生现在并没有在接受审问，他对这名证人所做的任何陈述，于本案都不具有任何效力。证人只能就他亲眼所见的提供证词。” 纽华克法官说：“反对成立。控方是否知道提约斯先生为何在此敏感时刻刚好去渡假？” “我只晓得他有为期两周的休假。” “你知道他何时决定要去渡假吗？” “不，庭上，我不知道。”林顿说。 “还有任何问题吗？”纽华克法官问梅森。 “没有了，庭上。” 纽华克法官对着证人皱眉蹙额，彷佛要开口说话，然后又改变主意，对检察官说：“好！传唤下一个证人，克莱尔先生，你可以下去了。” “寇费斯，纽伯恩医生。”林顿传唤。 纽伯恩医生个子高高的，一副很有自信的样子。他坐上证人席，对法庭报告员道出自己的全名、地址和职业；神色平静自若，充满了专业气息。 “依照反讯问的权利，我要求检方说明这位医师的专家资格。”梅森说。 “很好，”林顿说。“医生，你在验尸官的办公室工作吗？” "yes." “我现在给你看张相片，请问：你是否认得这张相片呢？” “认得。相片中的遗体就是我进行过勘验工作的那具尸体。” “医生，你第一次见到这具尸体是在什么时候？” “当警方登上游艇，看到尸体躺在船舱的地板上时，我也在现场。” “之后，你在何时又看到这具尸体？” “星期天早上——当时我在进行验尸的工作。” “医生，请问死因是什么？” “死者的头部后方受到重击，头盖骨破裂，大量出血。我这是用浅显的话来说的，好让一般人都能听得懂。” “很好，医生，现在再多告诉我们一些有关死亡原因及死亡时间的事。” “在我看来，”纽伯恩医生说。“由于重击之下立即造成昏迷，被害者再也没有恢复过意识；而且，从出血的范围和死者脑部的状况来判断，我可以肯定地说，被害者在遭到袭击后的五分钟之内就死亡了。” “依你之见，死者的身体在遭遇重击后就没有再移动过了，是吗？” "good." “医生，现在请你看一下这张相片。当你第一次看到尸体时，它躺在什么位置呢？” “在这里，”医生指着相片上某一处说道。“就在船的右手边，也就是航海术语中的右舷。这张相片是朝着船尾的方向拍摄的；因此，尸体被发现时的位置应该就在这张相片的左手边。” “现在我再给你看一张相片——检方呈堂证物，编号C。当你第一次看到这具尸体时，它是不是大约躺在这个位置？” “是的，我第一次看到尸体的时候，它就是躺在那个位置。” “在尸体被发现的时候，你有没有对这些前提做过任何检验呢？” “刚发现尸体时，我并没有马上做检验。”医生带着微笑更正说。“在警方抵达现场后，我才做的。” “总之，你的确做了检验吧？” "yes." "what have you found?" 纽伯恩医生说：“我发现尸体躺在这个位置，在游艇的右舷，脸部朝上。我注意到头部下方有一滩血，可见死者的头部曾经大量出血过；我也在船舱的某个地方发现到：地毯有一部分已经被血浸透了。你要我指出来吗？” “是的，请。” “大约在这个地方。” 梅森站起来，走到证人背后，以看清楚证人在相片上指出的那个位置，然后说道：“庭上，为了方便列入记录，我来说明一下——医生现在在检方编号C的证物上所指出的位置是：游艇的右上角，就在进入后舱的门口前面。对不对？医生。” “是的。”医生说。 “谢谢你。”梅森说完后又回到座位上去。 “你注意到那里有一滩血吗？”林顿继续问。 “是的，而且这两个地点之间也有一些小血迹。” “那你有没有对主舱和后舱之间的门槛做任何检验呢？” “是的，我做了。” "What did you discover?" “我发现那个门槛大约有三英寸高，跟一般游艇这方面的结构一样。门槛的材质是铜制的，上面有红色污点，我把它们刮下来检验，确定那就是人类的血迹。验明血型后，我发现它与那具躺在地板上的尸体血型是一样的。” “尸体被发现的地点离门槛若干英尺，对吗？” "yes." “尸体有没有可能曾经从一个地点——我们暂且称之为第一地点，移动到另一个地点——姑且称之为第二地点呢？” "some." “移动的原因呢？” “由于地心引力的关系，尸体可能移动过了。”纽伯恩医生微笑着说。 “你能解释一下吗？” “我们登上游艇时，差不多将近退潮了，游艇倾向一边，以致我们很难站立得稳。而且，船的右舷下沉；从医学证据来判断，显然前一天晚上潮汐就退了，因此尸体就滚到右舷——就是我们后来发现它的那个位置。” “在没有被任何人挪动过的情况下，尸体本身就会有移开原位的可能吗？” “在我看来，假使尸体僵硬之前，潮汐就已经退了，那它就可能在不被搬动的情况下自己移了位。如果当初尸体的四肢伸直了，而退潮之前尸体就已经僵硬；这样，尸体就可能不会离开原来的位置太远。然而，若是在尸体僵硬之前潮汐就已退了，那尸体自然就会滚到船舱较低的一侧。” “尸体是何时僵硬的？” “一般来说，死亡后约十小时之内，全身就会僵硬了。明确地说，应该是平均十到十二小时之间。” “你看到尸体时，它已经僵硬了吗？” "Oh yes." “那是什么时候呢？” “星期六早上十一点十七分。”