The detective said, "I've got men working on every angle of the case, Perry, but I can't find out a damn thing that's going to help us any. I've traced Mallory from the time he left the steamship in San Francisco until he arrived in Los Angeles. He stayed at the Palace Hotel in San Francisco, went directly there from the ship, and as nearly as the hotel employees in San Francisco can tell, the bishop who checked out was the same bishop who checked in."
"That bishop," Mason said, drumming with his fingertips on the edge of the table cloth, "in some way is the key to the whole business. Why did he call on me? Why did he disappear? If he's the real goods, why did he take a runout powder? If he's an impostor, why didn't he pull a more convincing fade-out… telephone me he had to leave on a secret mission and ask me to carry on? There were plenty of ways he could have kept up the pretense, yet eased himself out of the picture. The darn case is driving me nuts because I can't get a toe-hold. I'm clawing at a blank wall. And why does Julia Branner act the way she does? Why won't she talk to me? Can't she see she's sending herself to the gallows and putting me in an impossible position?"
"Perhaps she won't talk because she's guilty," Della Street suggested.
"I'm not so certain she's guilty," Mason remarked. "The theory of the crime the Prosecution has worked out doesn't sound any too logical. She may be protecting someone else and may be innocent, herself."
Drake said, "Forget it, Perry. How in hell could anyone have framed this crime on her? She wrote the note to Brownley. When they find his body they'll find the note in his pocket. It will be in her handwriting. It will crucify her. She lured him down to that place near the waterfront. There's no possibility of doubt on that score. She wanted him killed, both for her daughter's sake, and because she hated him. How could anyone have taken her gun without her knowing it, have gone to the very place where she instructed Brownley to be, dressed in exactly the same clothes, and driving the same make of car? Remember, Julia Branner didn't write that note until after you'd telephoned her and told her what was in the wind. Therefore, her whole scheme of luring Brownley to the waterfront was hatched after that time; and anyone who wanted to frame her must necessarily have started from scratch after that note was written. I tell you, it's impossible."
Mason looked at his watch and said, "Well, we'll go back to court and see what develops. We're not licked yet by a long ways."
"If Pete Sacks ever takes the stand and swears you framed him and stole that key from him, it doesn't make much difference what happens after that. Public sentiment will have turned definitely against you," Drake said. "You've got to keep him from telling his story, either by this corpus delicti defense or in some other way."
Mason shrugged his shoulders.
Della Street said, softly, "Listen, Chief, you put me on the stand and let me tell my story. Do it just as soon as you can after Sacks tells his story. I'll fix him. I'll tell what he tried to do to me, and, after that, people will want to lynch him. And if Shoemaker wants to try to rattle me on cross-examination I'll do plenty to him."
Mason squeezed her hand and said, "Good girl. I know I can depend on you."
As they left the restaurant, Drake said to Mason in a low tone, "You can't let her do that, Perry. It'll look as though you two trapped Sacks, that Della led him on by luring him to her apartment. It looks too damned much like a badger game. It'll put Della in a hell of a position before the public."
Mason said gloomily in the same low, growling tone of voice, "Do you think you're telling me anything? But don't let her know. I'm not even going to put her on the stand."
Della Street said, "What are you two getting your heads together about? You sound as though you were hatching up some deviltry. Come on or you'll be late for court."
Chapter 15
Shoemaker put witnesses on the stand in rapid succession, after the manner of a prize fighter who is facing a groggy opponent and is anxious to press the advantage. A ballistics expert testified the bullets found in the car had been fired from the.32 automatic found on the floor of the car. A hardware dealer from Salt Lake produced records showing that Julia Branner had purchased the automatic from him. An officer on the Salt Lake police force showed that Julia Branner's permit to carry a weapon described the same automatic and gave the number which appeared on the gun. A fingerprint expert testified that after the car had been pulled from the water it had been dried and an attempt made to develop latent fingerprints; that on the upper edge of the glass on the left-hand door, a fingerprint had been discovered which coincided with the middle finger on the left hand of the defendant.
Shoemaker rose to his feet, said dramatically, "Call Peter Sacks to the stand."
Sacks, his nose and cheeks completely concealed by a smear of bandages and strips of adhesive tape, came forward and was sworn.
"Do you know the defendant, Julia Branner?" Shoemaker asked, after Sacks had testified to his name, age, and address.
"Yes," Sacks said in a thick voice.
"Did you ever have any conversation with her in which she mentioned Renwold Brownley?"
"Yes."
"Do you know Perry Mason, the attorney who is representing her?"
"Yes."
"When you had your conversation with Julia Branner who was present?"
"Victor Stockton."
"Anyone else?"
"No."
"Where did the conversation take place?"
"At the United Airport at Burbank."
"What's your occupation?"
"I'm a private detective."
"Had you had any previous correspondence with the defendant in this case?"
"Yes, sir."
"During that conversation, had you posed as being a certain type of person?"
"Yes, sir. I'd posed as a mobster and boasted of the murders I'd committed for money."
"What was the date of the conversation you are testifying about, at which Mr. Stockton was present?"
"On the fourth day of this month."
"At what hour?"
"About ten o'clock in the morning."
"Now what was said, and by whom was it said?"
Mason got to his feet and said, "Your Honor, it now appears that the Prosecution are seeking to link the defendant with the crime of murder, yet the Prosecution have failed to establish any murder. I object to the question on the ground that it is incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial; that no proper foundation has been laid; that it is not part of the Res Gestae, and no part of the corpus delicti; that the Prosecution, to date, have signally failed to prove the corpus delicti."
"We don't have to prove it as we would in a Superior Court," Shoemaker interposed. "This is only a preliminary. We only have to prove that a crime has been committed and that there's reasonable cause to believe the defendant committed it."
"Nevertheless," Mason said, "you can't prove murder in any court without proving the corpus delicti. Now, according to the Prosecution's own theory, someone, other than the defendant, must have driven Renwold C. Brownley's automobile from the place where the shooting occurred, to the wharf. The defendant had gone, if we are to believe the testimony of Mr. Bixler. Now, what is more reasonable than to suppose that Mr. Brownley, himself, recovered consciousness, started to drive the car, became confused in the rain, and drove it off the end of the wharf? In that event, he would have met his death by drowning, and not from gunshot wounds. And, in order to prove murder, the Prosecution must prove death as a direct result of the act of the defendant."
"Not at all," Shoemaker argued vehemently. "If, your Honor, Counselor's contention is correct and Mr. Brownley did die of drowning, the drowning would have been caused by the unlawful acts of the defendant, to wit, the shooting which incapacitated him from driving his car intelligently."