"I don't know."

"You don't know?"

"No."

"You didn't mark the bullets so you could distinguish them?"

"Certainly not. Both bullets came from the body. Both would have been fatal. I mean either would have been fatal. I put them in a test tube, put the code number of the case on it--which was, I believe, C- 122--and personally handed the test tube to Mr. Redfield."

Redfield, who was smiling, got to his feet, started to say something, then changed his mind and sat down.

Mason said, "In other words, Doctor, the gunshot wounds in the body of Nadine Ellis showed that one wound, where the bullet actually penetrated a portion of the heart, was probably almost instantly fatal. The other inflicted a wound which would have been fatal within a few minutes. Now, you can't tell which of these bullets inflicted which wound?"

"I made no attempt to keep the bullets separate. They are both the same caliber, they were both fired from the same gun. I will state, however, that the bullet which we have referred to as bullet number two--the one which hit a portion of the heart--lodged in the spine and was somewhat flattened by the vertebra. I notice that one of these bullets is somewhat flattened, and on the strength of that I would state that in all human probability that bullet is the bullet I referred to as bullet number two--the one that hit the heart."

"Was your autopsy such that you traced each bullet as to its course?" Mason asked. "All the way through the body?"

"I traced one bullet from the point of entrance through the heart and I traced the other bullet from the point of entrance through one of the major blood vessels. I may state, however, that I did not--or perhaps I should say that I was not able--to keep the paths of the bullets completely separate because they started to converge slightly, and the deterioration of the body due to decomposition and putrefaction was such that it was virtually impossible to segregate the course of the bullets all the way through the body."

"And you can't tell which of these bullets was fired first?"

"That's right," Dr. Calvert said. And then suddenly added, in indignation, "And that, Mr. Mason, is because I am a man of medicine and not a medicine man."

"And," Mason went on urbanely, "you don't know for certain that these were the bullets that you took from the body of Mrs. Ellis. You only know that they were two bullets which you recovered in the course of your autopsy work."

"I took these two bullets from the body of Mrs. Ellis and handed them to Alexander Redfield on the evening of the twelfth," Dr. Calvert said.

"Thank you," Mason said. "That's all."

"No further questions," Fraser said. "You may be excused, Doctor. I'll call Alexander Redfield as my next witness."

Redfield, smiling slightly, came to the stand.

"Your name is Alexander Redfield, you are employed by the county as a ballistics expert and scientific investigator?" Fraser asked.

"That's right."

"Are you acquainted with Dr. Andover Calvert, the witness who just testified?"

"I am."

"Did you see him in this county on or about the twelfth of this month?"

"I did."

"Did you have any conversation with Dr. Calvert on that date?"

"I did."

"Did Dr. Calvert give you any objects on that date?"

"He did."

"What objects did he give you?"

"Two bullets."

"And what did you do with those two bullets, Mr. Redfield?"

"I put them in a test tube, sealed the test tube and marked the test tube for identification. Then I locked the test tube in a special compartment in the safe in my office."

"You made no comparison of the bullets with any test bullets?"

"Not at that date."

"When was that done?"

"Later, when I was given a weapon and asked to tesi fire that weapon."

"And what weapon was that?"

"That was a Smith and Wesson revolver with a twoand-a-half-inch barrel."

"Do you know the number of that gun?"

"I do. It was 133347."

"Do you have that gun?"

"I do."

"Will you produce it, please?"

Redfield reached in his brief case and pulled out the gun.

"I ask that this be marked for identification," Fraser said.

"It will be marked People's Exhibit B," Judge Keyser said.

"Now then, you received two bullets from Dr. Calvert. I will ask you if you have those bullets with you?"

"I just gave them to you."

"Here they are. Will you tell us whether or not those are the same bullets which Dr. Calvert gave you?"

"Those are the same bullets."

"How do you know?"

"They have been in my custody since the time Dr. Calvert handed them to me."

"And have remained in that test tube?"

"No, sir. I took them out of the test tube from time to time for the purpose of making comparisons and taking comparison photographs."

"Did the bullets ever leave your possession?"

"No, sir. They were in my possession from the time Dr. Calvert gave them to me until I handed them to you just a minute ago."

"I'll ask the bullets be marked for identification as People's Exhibit C," Fraser said.

"Both bullets as one exhibit?" Mason asked.

"They're in the test tube."

"I suggest that they be identified separately," Mason said. "I notice that one of the bullets is flattened on the nose of the bullet, evidently from hitting some rather solid object. The flattening is on a slant, and the edges of the bullet have been curled over. The other bullet shows little damage. I suggest that the flattened bullet be People's Exhibit C-1 and the other bullet be C-2. I will also state that in order to expedite matters I will stipulate that both the gun and the bullets may be received in evidence, which will obviate the necessity of marking them for identification now and introducing them into evidence later."

"Very well," Fraser said. "The People accept that stipulation. The bullets will go into evidence as People's Exhibit C-1 and People's Exhibit C-2."

Fraser turned to the witness. "Did you test fire this gun, People's Exhibit B?"

"I did."

"And did you compare the test bullets fired from that gun with the bullets, Exhibits C?"

"Yes."

"What did you find?"

"The bullets were fired from that gun," Redfield said. "I have photographs made through a comparison microscope which shows the bullets superimposed one upon the other and the lines of striation."

"Will you produce those photographs, please?"

Redfield produced a photograph.

"I ask that this be received in evidence as People's Exhibit D."

"No objection," Mason said.

"Cross-examine," Fraser said.

Redfield, who had been cross-examined by Mason on many occasions, turned his eyes slowly and appraisingly toward the lawyer and settled himself in the witness chair. His face showed that he intended to weigh each question carefully and not be trapped into any inadvertent admission.

"There is only one photograph," Mason said, "but there are two bullets."

"The one photograph is of bullet Exhibit C-2. Since the other bullet was damaged and it would have been more difficult to have matched the striations, I didn't photograph that bullet."

"And you are completely satisfied that the bullets were fired from this gun which has been introduced in evidence as Exhibit B?"

"Yes . . . . Now, wait a minute. I don't think I made detailed tests of the damaged bullet. I did make detailed tests of the undamaged bullet and I made this photograph of it so there could be no question that it came from the gun, Exhibit B."

"You a.s.sumed that both bullets were fired from the same gun," Mason said.

"That's right."

"But you didn't check it?"

"I didn't check the damaged bullet to the same extent that I did the other."

"You checked it?"

"Well, now, just a moment, Mr. Mason. If you want to be painstakingly accurate about this, I am not in a position to swear that I did check both individual bullets. I know that I checked the undamaged bullet and I checked the damaged bullet to the extent that I determined they were both of the same caliber and weight and had been fired from a Smith and Wesson revolver. That can be told from the angle and pitch of the grooves. But as far as actual striations are concerned, I think I checked only the bullet which has been identified as Exhibit C-2."

"Look here," Judge Keyser said, "let's be realistic about this thing, Mr. Mason. Does this point make any actual difference in the case?"

"It does not, Your Honor," Fraser fairly shouted. "It is simply another one of defense counsel's very adroit moves which he is noted for."

"May I be heard, Your Honor?" Mason asked in a quiet voice.

Judge Keyser nodded. "You may be heard. My question was addressed to you."

"I think it is a very important point, if the Court please," Mason said. "I think I will be in a position to prove that if a bullet from this gun was fired into the body of Nadine Ellis, the bullet must have been fired after Nadine Ellis was dead.

"The defendant in this case is being tried for murder. Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. If a bullet was fired from this gun into the body of Nadine Ellis after she was dead, the defendant certainly isn't guilty of murder. That is, the evidence relied upon to prove her guilty of murder would prove only that she had discharged a bullet into a dead body."

"That's sheer bosh and nonsense," Fraser exclaimed heatedly. "As far as this hearing is concerned, all we need to do is to prove that Nadine Ellis was murdered, that the bullets in her body came from a gun found in the possession of the defendant."

"One of the bullets," Mason said.

"That's only a matter of expediency," Fraser said. "I will admit that the prosecution would have liked it better if the ballistics expert, Alexander Redfield, had taken the time and the trouble to have identified both bullets. But since one bullet was slightly damaged and apparently they both were fired from the same gun, he contented himself with making a positive, definite identification of only one of the bullets.

"Now, since it is only inc.u.mbent upon us to show that a crime has been committed and that there is reasonable ground to believe that the defendant committed the crime, we are quite content to introduce this gun in evidence, to introduce this bullet and rest our case."

"Now, just a minute," Judge Keyser said. "Ordinarily the Court is aware of the fact that the defense doesn't put on testimony in the preliminary hearing, and if the defense does, the Court usually disregards it unless it overwhelmingly establishes the innocence of the defendant. Courts usually feel that conflicts in evidence are to be tried in the Superior Court before a jury and that where the prosecution has made a primafacie case, the Court doesn't need to look any further. However, here we have a situation where a young woman, if bound over, would probably be held in jail for some time before the case came up for trial. Her reputation would be blackened, the experience would leave a psychic scar. This Court has no intention of submitting this young woman to such an ordeal simply because of technicalities.

"If Mr. Mason a.s.sures this Court that he believes he can establish the fact that this bullet could only have been fired from this gun after death had taken place, the Court certainly feels that Mr. Redfield should identify that other bullet as having come from the same gun."

"We have no objection to that," Fraser said, "except that it simply results in a delay and newspaper notoriety, both of which are greatly desired by defense counsel."

"That will do," Judge Keyser said. "There is no occasion for personalities and, after all, if you want to be technical about it, the fault, if any, rests with the prosecution. The defense is ent.i.tled to have the scientific evidence fairly examined and fairly presented. Mr. Redfield, how long will it take you to cla.s.sify that somewhat damaged bullet and show that it either came from this gun, Exhibit B, or that it did not come from that weapon?"

Redfield hesitated and said, "I am working on an emergency matter at the moment. I interrupted my work there to come to court. I can promise to have the information by late this afternoon, but I am not certain that I could have it earlier."

Judge Keyser said, "I will adjourn this matter until three-thirty this afternoon. Try and have the information by that time, Mr. Redfield. If you can't possibly have it, we will continue the case until tomorrow morning. However, I would like to dispose of the case today and I think that the information concerning this bullet is of prime importance-- I take it that the prosecution has evidence that this gun, Exhibit B, was found in the possession of the defendant and there can be no question of that?"

"That is right," Fraser said.

"Well, I'm going to adjourn court until three-thirty this afternoon," Judge Keyser said. "The witness will return at that time, and counsel will be present with the defendant. The defendant is remanded to custody."