Blind Spot

With all testimony in, the polyglot Honolulu jury trying Lieut. Thomas Hedges Massie, U. S. N.. his mother-in-law and two naval enlisted men for second-degree murder, was left last week with a split-second blind spot on the actual killing of Joseph Kahahawai Jr., Hawaiian buck. Nowhere in the sworn evidence was an eye-witness account of all that happened that early January morning at Mrs. Granville Roland Fortescue's. Between the time Kahahawai, cowed by a revolver held by Lieut. Massie, allegedly confessed to the ravishment of Mrs. Thalia Fortescue Massie and a bullet, darting from the same revolver, bored fatally into Kahahawai's lungs, the case record was blank.

As the sole defendant to take the witness stand Lieut. Massie at no time testified that he had shot and killed Kahahawai. His story ran only up to the moment when the brown-skinned native blurted: "We done it." After that the young submarine officer swore his mind went blank, he had no recollection of what he did. Prosecutor John C. Kelley openly doubted this version of the Kahahawai killing, indicated that he thought one of the two seamen had really fired the shot. But clever old Clarence Darrow, chief defense counsel, gave his adversary no opportunity to enlarge upon this doubt by putting any of the other eye-witness defendants on the stand. Because the Constitution protects a man from testifying against himself, and because the prosecution had no eye-witness of its own, Mr. Kelley was blocked in his attempt to reconstruct the crime in any other light than as Lieut. Massie had explained it. He might belittle the Massie version to the jury but he had nothing as concrete or as plausible to set up against it.

Lawyer Darrow's whole case was based on the assumption that Lieut. Massie, in a fit of insanity induced by the confession of his wife's ravisher, actually did pull the trigger that resulted in Kahahawai's death. If the young husband who held the gun and did not recall firing it could be cleared by the jury, the case against the other three defendants in no way linked to the shooting would also fall flat.

Insanity v. Sanity filled the final days of the trial. From Los Angeles Drs. Thomas James Orbison and Edward Huntington Williams, frequent participants in Pacific Coast criminal trials, were summoned to testify for the defense. Alienist Orbison swore that Lieut. Massie was suffering from "delirium with ambulatory automatism" at the time of the shooting but that he was quite sane now. Dr. Williams declared that Lieut. Massie's glands were responsible for his unbalanced condition, that he had been temporarily afflicted with "chemical insanity or shock amnesia." Both experts agreed that his troubles had been brought on by intense worry about his wife and that his symptoms could not be simulated.

For two days the trial was delayed while the prosecution rounded up some alienists of its own to swear with equal positiveness that Lieut. Massie was sane when Kahahawai was shot. Lawyer Darrow would not allow Dr. Joseph Catton and Paul Bowers, both also of California, to examine his client. But that did not prevent the pair from testifying after a perusal of the court record.

The grand climax to Mr. Darrow's case came as one of those dramatic and extemporaneous surprises which makes even the smartest criminal lawyer thank his lucky stars. Mrs. Massie, her blonde pallor set off by a black dress, was put on the stand to corroborate her husband's story of her ravishment and its effect upon him. For her it was a harrowing ordeal. Tears streamed down her cheeks. Her low drawling voice frequently broke off into choking sobs. From her Counsel Darrow drew forth many a detail of her husband's affection before turning her over to Prosecutor Kelley. Then the following occurred:

Prosecutor: Was your husband always kind to you? Witness (softly): Yes. Prosecutor: Did you have a psychopathic examination at the University of Hawaii last summer? Witness (bridling): I went to see Dr. Kelly. Prosecutor (handing her a piece of paper): Do you remember writing these answers to a set of questions. . . ? Witness (blazing with anger): Where did you get that? (Snatching the paper.) Do you realize this is a confidential document--a matter between doctor and patient? What right have you to bring this into a public court?* Prosecutor: I'm asking questions, not answering them. Is that your handwriting? Witness (bolt upright with indignation) : I refuse to say whether it is or not.

Defiantly the witness tore the paper to shreds. Spectators, moved by the flashing reality of the scene, broke into loud applause. Mrs. Massie rushed down from the witness stand.

Prosecutor (his neck red with rage) : Thank you, Mrs. Massie, at last you've shown yourself in your true colors.

Judge: That language is objectionable!

Lawyer Darrow (placidly) : The defense rests.

Mrs. Massie (throwing herself hysterically into her husband's arms): Oh Tommy, what right had he to say I don't love you. Everybody knows I love you!

*The document was reported to contain an answer by Mrs. Massie that her husband was "undemonstrative."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.