Jean v. Nelson Slip Opinion
Public Court Documents
June 26, 1985
Cite this item
-
Brief Collection, LDF Court Filings. Lankford v. Schmidt Transcript of Proceedings Vol. 4, 1965. b52a9b54-ba9a-ee11-be36-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/75ae5ded-fea2-44e3-a95c-475a3df755ad/lankford-v-schmidt-transcript-of-proceedings-vol-4. Accessed August 19, 2025.
Copied!
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
SAMUEL JAMES LANKFORD, et al. :
vs. : Civil No. I6U80
BERNARD j, SCHMIDT, 59commissioner
of Police of Baltimore City.
January 20, 1965
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
Volume 4
(Page 3 8 2 to page 578 )
Francis T. Owens
Official Reporter
514 Post Office Bldg.
Baltimore 2, Maryland
382
I N D E X
Witness Direct Cross Redirect Recross
Lt. Anton T. Glover 385 428 467 467
William S. Tucker 468 471
Lt. Carlton H. Manuel 479 509 544 545
Dect. Oliver Walker 547 552 575
E X H I B I T S
Defendant's No. Page
1 479
2 484
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
1.4
14
ir>
1<>
17
IS
10
20
21
22
24
24
25
383
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
SAMUEL JAMES LANKFORD, et al.
vs. Civil No. 16080
BERNARD J. SCHMIDT, as COMMISSIONER
of POLICE of BALTIMORE CITY
Baltimore, Maryland
Wednesday, January 20, 1965
The above-entitled matter was resumed for
hearing before His Honor, Roszei C. Thomsen, Chief Judge,
at ten o'clock a.m.
A P P E A R A N C E S
(As heretofore noted.)
1
•)
:{
4
5
<i
7
S
!)
10
n
12
1.!
14
lo
1«
17
IS
1!)
20
21
•>2
2'i
24
25
384
PROCEEDINGS
THE COURT: Hr. Bowen, who acted as chairman
of the group of Special Masters called me up a short while ago
and told me that they had completed their review of the record
that were turned over to them by Mr. Murphy. They completed
it about eleven o'clock last night.
Mr. Bowen said that he sat up all night and he
said he had prepared a draft of the report which he is now
circulating to the others who worked with him. He told me
that as soon as he has it written up he will bring the
and
tentative draft over/as soon as he gets approval from the
others he will be in a position to make his report, and I, of
course, will make it available to both sides as soon as
possible.
The further thing is that we have gotten the
opinion in the Chapel case in the District of Columbia last
week and we are having photostatic copies made of it, and we
will have that available for both sides shortly, very shortly.
It doesn't add very much to what is already known to be the
law in the District of Columbia.
Now, let me speak to counsel for a moment.
(Conference at the bench.)
MR. MURPHY: Lieutenant Glover.
1
■>
:t
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
1.4
14
15
l(i
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
24
25
385
Thereupon
LIEUTENANT ANTON T. GLOVER
was called as a witness for and on behalf of the defendant and,
having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as
follows:
THE CLERK: State your full name for the record.
THE WITNESS: Lieutenant Anton T. Glover,
Baltimore City Police Department, Homicide Squad.
THE COURT: What's that?
THE WITNESS: Baltimore City Police Department,
Homicide Squad.
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Lieutenant, how long have you been a member of
the Baltimore City Police Department?
A Eighteen years.
Q And you started as a patrolman, I presume, and
you are now a lieutenant?
A Yes, sir, that's correct.
Q And you are assigned to the Homicide Squad; is
that correct?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, directing your attention to December 24,
1964 did you on that date have occasion to participate in an
investigation of certain incidents that took place on
1
• )
:{
4
5
li
7
S
«)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1(>
17
18
lit
20
21
22
20
24
25
386
Greenmount Avenue in Baltimore City?
A I did, sir.
Q Now, Lieutenant, I think the Court would want
me to explain to you that we would like you to avoid your
mentioning any specific names in so far as it is reasonably
possible in order that any one not involved in this case will
have their rights protected.
Now, on the 24th did you go to the scene of thee
alleged offenses on Greenmount Avenue?
A No, sir, I responded to the Northern District
where I met Lieutenant James Cadden.
Q Lieutenant Cadden?
A Yes, sir.
Q Lieutenant Cadden is assigned to the Homicide
Squad with you; is that correct?
A Yes, sir.
Q And you received information from Lieutenant
Cadden with regard to these offenses, alleged offenses; is
that correct?
A That's correct, sir.
Q What were these offenses that were reported to
you?
A There had been the assault and shooting of
Police Lieutenant Joseph Maskell, and also there had been a
holdup of Lusty's liquor store, package goods store in the
1
•»
:(
4
r>
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
l.'i
14
1o
1 (i
17
18
lit
20
21
22
22
24
25
387
2000 block of Greenmount Avenue, and also that they had in
custody at that time suspects.
Q Did the Lieutenant tell you that they had
received certain information as to the identity of the persons
wanted in connection with those two crimes in this bar?
A I found that out for myself when I was with
Lieutenant Cadden and spoke to the suspect in custody.
Q Without naming the persons did you know the
names and did you have a description of the people who were
wanted in connection with those two crimes?
A I did, sir.
Q Now, following your receipt of that information
would you tell His Honor, again without mentioning any
specific names in so far as it is reasonably possible, would
you tell His Honor what you did?
A Approximately three a.m. on the morning of
December 25th accompanied by Detective DePaolo, Detective
Bosack, and Sergeant Baxter we proceeded to turn up several
homes which were the homes of the two wanted subjects.
We had visited three homes in the area of Kirk
Avenue, Addison Street, Montpelier Street.
As we were leaving approximately 3:45 a.m.,
4:45 a.m. to return to our district to find out what had
transpired at the district relevant to the two suspects we
heard a call come over the radio directing us that a police
1
•)
4
4
7
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
1.4
14
ir»
1(4
17
IS
1!)
20
21
•)•>
24
24
2.7
388
had been shot.
It was repeated that a police had been shot in
the area of Kennedy Avenue and Carswell Street.
THE COURT: Where is that?
THE WITNESS: That would be in Northeastern
District, sir, around kirk Avenue, the Coca-Cola Company and
Harford Road.
THE COURT: You spoke of the area where the
suspects lived. Would you ceil me what area that is?
THE WITNESS: This would be the 2600 block of
Kirk Avenue, the 1500 block Montpelier Street, the 1500 block
Addison Street.
Having known that we had just left several
officers in this location that had accompanied us for the
turnup because upon our arrival at these homes we requested
district men to respond, that we were turning up.
Upon going back to the scene of Kennedy Avenue
it was ascertained that Sergeant Jack Cooper had been shot
and transported to Union Memorial Hospital.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Now, Lieutenant, you indicated that some distric
officers had been working with you earlier that evening.
Was Sergeant Cooper one of chose?
A Yes, he was.
Q And Sergean*. Cooper was engaged with you in
:
:{
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
i:S
14
15
Ki
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
389
locating these suspects; is that correct?
A That's correct, sir.
Q And how long wrs it after you left Sergeant
y
Cooper that you received this call that Sergeant Cooper was
\\
killed?
A Approximately eight minutes, eight to ten minute
Q Now, would you tell the Court, did you arrive at
the scene where Sergeant Cooper's body was, while his body was
still there?
A Well, we got immediately, we received informatio
over the radio dispatch that the subject wanted for the
shooting of Sergeant Cooper had proceeded to Clifton Park.
We responded to Clifton Park along with numerous other police
cruisers and plain-clothes cars; and we subsequently arrived
at the shooting scene about two hours later.
Q And the body had been removed, of course, by the
time you got there; is that correct?
A That's correct, sir.
Q Where was the body found, if you know?
A The scene was pointed out to us where it was
found on Kennedy Avenue in an alleyway between Carswell, and
if I'm not mistaken, it's Montpelier Street lying on the
pavement in the middle of an alley.
Q In the middle of an alley?
A Yes, sir.
1
• )
2
4
5
(i
7
S
«)
10
11
12
i:i
14
15
1()
17
18
1!>
20
21
22
22
24
25
390
Q Sergeant Cooper was working in a radio car,
marked Radio Car?
A
A
Q
clothes?
A
the car?
He was in a marked police cruiser.
A marked police cruiser?
Yes, sir.
And was Sergeant Cooper in uniform or plain-
Uniform, sir.
THE COURT: Was he shot in the car or out of
THE WITNESS: The indications are he was still
seated in his automobile, Your Honor.
BY HR. SAUSE:
Q Lieutenant, in so far as it is necessary for
you to proceed in connection with police work as to the
apprehension and arrest, were you able to establish any
connection between the suspects for whom you and Sergeant
Cooper had been searching earlier in the evening and the
killing of Sergeant Cooper?
A We were, sir.
MR. SAUSE: If Your Honor please, with Your
Honor's permission, I believe that this is as far as we can
go with regard to this background, and I would like to go
ahead further.
THE COURT: Is that agreeable?
1
• >
:t
4
5
(i
7
S
!(
10
11
12
1.4
14
15
1<>
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
24
24
25
391
MR. NABRIT: I have no questions about the
background.
THE COURT: All right.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Now, following this on December 25th you and
members of the police force nought to obtain warrants from a
Judge in the Northern District; is that correct?
A We did, sir.
Q And following that, these warrants directed you
and other members of the police force to apprehend the persons
named in the warrant; is that correct?
A They did, sir.
Q Now, did you have any knowledge, first of all,
of the past history of these persons named in the warrants
first of all with regard to any offenses that they might have
committed in the past?
A We did, sir.
Q And that information was kept in your files at
the Police Department; is that correct?
A That's correct, sir.
Q And before serving the warrants is it your
normal practice to check these records?
A Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Before serving the warrants or
obtaining them?
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
lit
14
IT)
l(i
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
392
MR. SAUSE: Before serving the warrants.
Now, I'll ask for the purpose.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q For what purpose do you check these warrants or
prior offenses before serving warrants of that type?
A Well, we like to know the person we're going
after. We like to see some background, and also any previous
addresses, addresses of friends, anyone they may have been
apprehended with on various occasions, particularly their
status as to the type of person we're seeking relative to
their reputation as far as violence is concerned.
Q Noxv’, did you In this particular case, did you
search the Police Department records for previous connections
with the Folice Department by these suspects?
A Yes, sir, we did, sir.
Q And you indicated before that they had—
Til?. COURT: I don't think you need to go into
any previous convictions.
MR. SAUSE: No, sir.
THE COURT: I think the two important things
are that they did check to find out addresses and friends on
one srde and likelihood of violence on the other.
MR. SAUSE: Yes, sir.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Now, one prior question on that, did you find
3 93
in these records crimes of which you would characterize as
serious crimes?
A Yes, sir.
Q And did you draw any conclusion from these
records as to the likelihood of dangerousness of these suspects
from the records, confining yourself just to the records?
A Yes, I'd say so, yes.
Q Now, following this did you have any other
information as to whether or not these men would be considered
dangerous, independent of your own written records, did you
have any other information whether these men were armed or
unarmed or what?
A We had information that they were armed, sir.
Q And without mentioning any names, where generally
did you get this information?
THE COURT: Well, that's not being questioned,
as I understand this case. The plaintiffs are conceding that.
MR. SAUSE: That they were armed with weapons?
THE COURT: Yes, and they had reasonable grounds
to believe that.
MR.
on that.
THE
That is not being
NABRIT: We have no knowledge of the facts
COURT: There’s no use going into that,
contested.
MR. NABRIT: We have no plans to contest it.
1
•)
:t
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
! 1
12
1M
14
15
10
17
18
1 !)
20
21
22
22
24
25
394
BY MR. SAl'SE:
Q Now, Lieutenant, you indicated that you
participated in the investigation for some persons suspected
of having a connection with certain offenses that took place
on Christmas Eve and obtained warrants for those people on
Christmas Day and the killing of Sergeant Cooper. Now,
following this did you continue to investigate any and all of
these crimes in any way?
A We did, sir.
Q Now, Lieutenant, I am not interested in— well,
let *s say this, you were one of the leaders in this investiga
tion; is tnat not correct?
A That is correct, sir.
Q And the Commissioner, who is the head of the
entire police force in Baltimore City designated Captain
Mahrer as the over-a11 commander of this investigation; is
that correct?
A That's correct, sir.
Q And you however, as I understand it, and
Lieutenant Cadden were the line officers, subject, of course,
to the over-all command of Captain Mahrer, but you and
Lieutenant Cadden were the field linemen; is that correct?
A That's correct, sir.
q Now, His Honor is interested in what was the
nature of your participation, the formation of any special
<85
395
14
4
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
13
14
IT)
l(i
17
18
1!)
20
21
24
24
25
groups, and how you went about your investigation, and your
reasons for doing it, your modus operandi in conducting your
investigation and anything else ..hat you might feel is
pertinent to explain to the Court the scope and the extent of
any investigation you made?
A After the investigation was initially conducted
on the crime scene tne letter part of Christmas morning we
convened at the Northeastern District, with the information
we had pertaining to friends, relatives of the two subjects
sought, we detailed what we call a squad.
We then went out, we had the emergency crew
whrch we were instructed to take on all turn-ups with this--
we aad the men who had worked--
THE COURT: Would you tell me what the word
"turn-up" means?
THE WITNESS: Turn-up, Your Honor, if we have
an address which is a relative or friend of the two persons
that we were seeking we would go to their home; we would then
make request, in the instance of a relative, we would knock
on the door, we went in, we searched for the subjects.
In the matter of friends, we went to their home;
we knocked; if we had a response we told them what our purpose
was, our reasons for being there; we were admitted to the
home; the homes were searched, just the premises and nothing
on the premises, looking for the two subjects.
< 8 6
1
•)
:{
4
r>
(i
7
S
it
10
11
12
i:t
14
IT)
Hi
17
18
lit
20
21
22
22
24
2.7
MR. NABRIT: I object.
THE COURT: Does "turn-up" mean search?
THE WITNESS: Yes, it would be search, inspec
t s ?tions, search.
MR. NABRIT: Your Honor, I object.
THE COURT: The word "turn-up" includes,
implies something more than knocking at the door and speaking
to someone at the door. It means some search of the house.
THE WITNESS: That's correct.
MR. NABRIT: The witness' prior answer I don't
think was responsive wnen he described as to the modus
operandi for relatives and friends.
THE COURT: Well, he went, suppose we just
strike out that part, and I just asked for the definition.
He was telling what they did. Now, it came in, and Mr.
Nabrit, ordinarily the Court does not strike out evidence
because it is unresponsive except at the request of the party
who asks the question.
The test as to the other is its admissibility
on other grounds, that is, relevancy, materiality, and
competency, and since you may want to have sqme possibleVobjection as to relevancy, materiality, and competency I will
strike it out so that it can come in as part of the regular
396
course that Mr. Sause was intending to pursue. \
So I will strike out everything except his\\
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!»
10
11
12
1.5
14
15
l(i
17
IS
10
20
21
•)■>
24
24
25
397
definition of "turn-up" as meaning an inspection or a search
of a house, something more than merely knocking at the door
and asking a question.
Is that a fair statement?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
BY HR. SAUSE:
Q Now, Lieutenant, we're still talking about turn
up, and as I understand it this is a word of art in the Police
Department that you must understand is incomprehensible to
lawyers perhaps not the same: as it would be to you, but is it
ever possible to participate in what might be called a turn-u]
without going actually, going inside the house such as after
you arrive at the house, the premises that you want to turn-u
A Well, yes if we would arrive, if we had the
house under surveillance, we looked it over, sometimes would
necessitate that we wouldn't go, but we were interested in
finding if it was possible the two subjects could be at a
certain destination.
Q But you, it's still possible to refer to that
as a turn-up?
A That's correct, sir.
THE COURT: You mean that "turn-up" does not
necessarily include inspection and search?
THE WITNESS: No, sir. The way we use it,
Your Honor, if it's just a surveillance we may say turn-up
1
')
:{
4
5
(>
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i:t
14
15
Hi
17
18
lit
20
21
■>2
22
24
25
398
and go out and the crew would arrive and keep a home under
surveillance or to find out if there was any activity there.
MR. SAUSE: Your Honor, Mr. Murphy and I took
it, as counsel did yesterday, that a turn-up implies a search,
at least a search is in prospect, but it is nevertheless still
a turn-up even though it is not carried through to its logical
conclusion, that the aim is to go to a house looking for some
one and impliciting includes a search; but it is still a turn
up even if che officer goes there and determines for whatever
reason that it is not necessary to search, that is still a
turn-up, and we questioned several officers with respect to
that, and they accept it.
THE WITNESS: That's correct. That's the
interpretation as we use it.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Now, Lieutenant, you were indicating that
following the obtaining of these warrants you mentioned that
you went to the Northeastern District and there was a squad
established.
Now, I dislike interrupting you, but just so we
have the background here, this squad, was this made up of
officers from the Homicide Squad,of the Northeastern District
or from where?
A The Homicide Squad, Detective Bureau, officers
of the Northeastern District, officers from the Northern
1
•>
:i
4
5
<>
7
S
!»
10
11
12
12
14
15
10
17
IS
l i t
20
21
22
22
24
25
399
District along with the emergency crew.
y Q Now, this emergency crew, was this an emergency
in this particular situation or is this an emergency crew that
\\
operates all year round?
A They operate all year round throughout the City.
Q Witty do they call that an emergency crew?
A They’re equipped to handle such an emergency as
someone trapped in a building. They also carry the Police
Department's arsenal, their rescue unit. In this particular
instance we were using them to transport our arsenal for us.
Q Your arsenal?
A Yes.
Q Lieutenant, what firearms are issued to police
men as a general rule?
A As a general rule you're issued your police
positive .38.
Q And chat's all?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, in this case what, when you referred to
the Police Department arsenal, is it true that the Police
Department does not allow any other weapon except under
special designation by the Commissioner?
A That's correct, sir.
Q --to use other weapons?
THE COURT: Does the use of any weapon except
1
•)
4
f>
<;
7
s
!)
10
11
12
i : t
14
ir>
1<)
17
1H
1*1
0̂
21
•)•>
24
24
24
the .38 depe id upon the authority from the Commissioner?
THE WITNESS: Not necessarily the Commissioner
the officer in charge of the arsenal or the police service,
whenever anytime we may have to call the arsenal out we have
trained specialized men that use these, sir, designated by
the officer in charge of the emergency unit.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q But using any other weapons from the arsenal,
firearms in particular from the arsenal other than the servic
revolver always depends upon special training; is that correc
A That's correct, sir.
Q Now, is it true that these officers that have
this special training, isn't that true that they are issued
a different kind of identification card, a pink card rather
than a regular police identification card?
A Yes, we're issued a Riot Squad card.
Q A Riot Squad card which indicates that the
persons who have that card are specially trained in handling
heavy firearms; is that correct?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, in this case what heavy firearms did the
emergency vehicle carry?
A The shotguns, Rising submachine gun.
THE COURT: Rising?
400
THE WITNESS: Rising submachine gun and tear
<*88
1
•>
:{
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
i:i
14
ir>
1(1
17
18
1!)
20
21
•>•_>
24
24
25
401
gas.
THE COURT: Rising? How do you spell that?
THE WITNESS: R-i-s-i-n-g.
THE COURT: Rising submachine gun.
• THE WITNESS: Rising submachine gun, and the
tear gas guns or the tear gas bombs.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Now, this emergency, the persons who handle thii
equipment during this particular investigation were these
people known to you to be persons especially trained in how t<
handle this equipment?
A This was one of the reasons that we have the
squad there, sir, so the persons who were issued weapons were
specially trained personnel.
Q Were specially trained personnel?
A Yes, sir, that's correct, sir.
Q Was there ever any time when anyone was ever
issued any firearms other than service revolvers other than
these specially trained personnel?
A No, sir. Several times we refused the weapons
to persons which did not hold a particular card.
Q And at whose direction was it that the emergenc;
vehicle participated in the investigation?
A It was, I was verbally instructed by the
Commissioner at the hospital that we were not to seek any
<89
1
•)
2
4
5
d
7
s
!*
10
11
12
12
14
ir,
Id
17
18
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
402
turn-ups unless we carried the emergency squad with us, and
subsequently at a later hour a Teletype was issued by
Lieutenant German instructing all districts and divisions that
they should not proceed unless tney had the emergen^ squad.
Q You mean Inspector German?
\ A Yes, sir.
THE COURT: How many are there? Is there only
one emergency vehicle?
THE WITNESS: There are two emergency vehicles,
Your Honor. It's divided up into sections of the City, north
and south.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q And are those emergency vehicles designated from
time to time as CP 11 and CP 12 or what?
A That's their truck unit, sir, CP 11 and CP 12.
THE COURT: CP II and CP 12.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q And the CP 10 is the cruising patrol?
A Yes, sir.
Q And these are regular cruisers, patrol vehicles
which are like panel trucks; is that correct?
A These are like a moving van, sir, a large moving
van.
Q Well, they're bigger than the regular cruising
patrol, are they?
403
22
«)
10
n
12
12
14
15
1(1
17
18
19
20
21
22
22
24
A Yes, sir.
Q So that these emergency vehicles carry special
equipment and specially trained personnel?
A Yes, sir, that's correct, sir.
Q Now, do they contain other than firearms, do
they contain other protective equipment, such as you indicated
tear gas?
A Yes, sir, each truck had the bulletproof vests
on.
Q Bulletproof vests?
A Yes, sir.
Q And ordinarily hov; many people would be in theses
emergency vehicles?
A Two.
Q Two.
Now, you indicated that you went to the North
eastern District avid under orders from the Commissioner and
later followed up by Teletype instructions from the Inspector
you were directed to have the emergency vehicles, one or the
other of them, participate in each one of these turn-ups in
this squad; is that correct?
A That' s correcL, sir.
Q Now, you indicated that there were members on
this special squad from the Homicide Squad and from the
Northeastern District and--
1
•>
:i
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i:s
14
15
IK
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
20
24
25
404
A
District..
' : Q
District.
And from the Detective Bureau and the Northern
From the Detective Bureau and the Northern
Now, would you explain to His Honor what this
squad did and what was its method of operation as it went out
and made the investigation in this case?
A Well, the early hours of Christmas morning and
Christmas Day, the 26th and 27th we were interested in turning
up homes of relatives or known friends or associates of the
brothers, and with this in mind having all the information
that we received from various persons thac we talked to in the
homes of the relatives, we would go to each home and turn-up,
trying to ascertain the whereaDouts of the two persons we were
seeking.
Then in the latter part of the investigation
when we had sort of subsided on relatives and friends, then
we began getting information channeled to us through the
police radio and also telephone calls.
When this information was obtained we sent out
what we call a surveillance crew. This crew would proceed
us to a destination; they would look thxs situation over such
as exits, entrances, how many homes, look for any activity,
and then after it was ascertained the way of means in and out,
that we had an advance crew which wore bulletproof vests.
w ?
405
192This crew--
THE COURT: Now, let's stop there for a minute.
Just a minute because I think I've gotten the
report from the Masters or is it the preliminary report?
Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
THE COURT: Shall we wait?
MR. NABRIT: Whatever Your Honor desires.
THE COURT: Well, counsel can look it over.
It's very brief. It's not final. Shall we go ahead with
this? Let's wait for the recess and we'll have a final
report.
We won't do anything until then and you won't
have to cross-examine until then. You won't have to cross-
examine until then.
Go ahead.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Lieutenant, you indicated that when you
received this information you sent out an advance car?
A That^s correct, sir.
Q Was this done in most instances or all instance^
or how often would you say? , How frequently would you do it?
A As I say, after the investigation subsided as
to friends and relatives we began to receive phone calls and
from information over the radio and this is when our surveil
1
•)
:t
4
7>
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i : t
14
17)
l(i
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
2o
406
lance crews began.
THE COURT: You say information from the radio?
THE WITNESS: From the radio, the radio
dispatcher telephone desk, Your Honor, to tell us they had
received certain information, and this is when we sent our
surveillance crews out to look over homes and the land.\
THE COURT: There is one thing that I ought to
say at this time that the Master told me yesterday that they
did not have the records of the radio dispatcher.
Are there any such records?
THE WITNESS: That was taken up with Captain
Dyer and they are all monitored phone calls and Captain Dyer
said to go over them, and that would entail about 144 days
because it's a whole eight hour shift for the days from the
25th in until the 3th of January, which is a constant twenty-
four hour monitor.
THE COURT: And they have not been transcribed?
THE WITNESS: Up to this point, no, sir.
MR. SAUSE: If Your Honor please, I would like
to develop this a little bit.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q This is every call that comes into the
Communications Bureau, it’s monitored on tape; is that correct
A That's correct, sir.
Q So that in this case you would have every other
1
■ )
2
4
5
<i
7
S
!)
10
n
12
12
14
15
10
17
18
19
20
21
22
22
24
25
407
thing that happened during that period that the tape was
turned on on that case, on the tape, and you would have to
cull out each one on this case?
A That's correct, sir.
THE COURT: And you simply multiply the number
of days by the number of--
THE WITNESS: Hours. In other words, from
the 25th, it's a twenty-four hour day up till the 8th, which
would be a twenty-four hour day, and that would be 192 hours.
THE COURT: Well, it's only one, it's 192
hours.
THE WITNESS: Yes, but we don’t know how many
calls comes within that hour.
THE COURT: Yes, but do I understand that ther
was one radio monitoring place or more than one?
THE WITNESS: The Central District. The
communication service is the only one that has the monitoring
service.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q In addition to that, just to clarify this for
His Honor, Lieutenant, in addition to the calls coming to
this, I think it's called the Communications Center, they are
referred by the operator to the District who may have a moniti
A No, sir, if they came direct to the switchboard
they would be directly to the District and there is no
27*
14
15
lfi
17
18
lit
20
21
22
28
24
25
monitor.
Q
A
Q
408
There would be no monitor on that?
No.
So that in each case if you went to the tapes it
V
would be impossible to get all of the calls that came in with
regard to this case?
A That's correct, sir.
THE COURT: And the ones that are monitored,
come to the radio where?
THE WITNESS: Bureau of Communications, radio
dispatcher.
THE COURT: Bureau of Communications.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Now, Lieutenant, when you talk about this
surveillance car, the surveillance car was sent out, and the
purpose was, I think you' testified to survey the areas where
the officers would have to be employed?
A That's correct, sir.
Q And were they to get some general idea of the
house, or what were they to do?
A Well, they were to look the premises over which
we were going to inspect or turn-up, and they would find out
what activities, if any, were present and also try to ascertain
the persons that resided there.
And another reason this was done was so that if
409
28
i
4
<;
i
s
!)
10
11
12
HI
14
If)
1(1
17
18
1!)
20
21
2.1
24
2.)
it necessitated our going in we like to have everything
covered for the protection of the citizens that may arrive.
In other words, if it's going to be a large
area we want to have the necessary amount of cars to block
the streets off so the citizens would not wander down.
Q Well, when the squad arrived at a particular
location would they consult with the advance crew?
A Well, we would have word from the advance group
prior to our arrival. Someone wo\ild talk to them, and then
we would lay out our plan of how many cars would be in each
designated spot.
Q How would they talk to them? By radio?
A Oh, no, sir, the supervisor would go or
Liexitenant Cadden would go up or I may go up, and Captain
Mahrer would be there, and we would confer.
Q Did it ever happen that the main body of the
squad arrived at the scene and nad a consultation with the
advance crew, the surveillance crew and determine that it was
unnecessary to complete the turn-up?
A Yes, sir. there were several occasions.
Q Now, after you arrived, you say that someone
would go and talk to the advance crew about what was necessary
at the particular location; is that correct?
A That's correct, sir.
Q All right. Now, what do you mean by what was
dB4
410
29
i
:t
4
.)
(i
7
M
!)
10
11
12
12
14
ir>
i(j
17
IK
1!>
20
21
22
24
23
necessary? What did the advance crew or what did you all
take into account as to what was necessary or what factors
indicated what was necessary?
A Well, as I say, we would determine the number,
the amount of automobiles that would be stationed at whatever
egress may be present, the alleyways, or the fronts; also if
it was determined that we would have to have a traffic cruiser
to block the streets or if it was a large turn-up area such as
in the northern section of town, this is taken into considera
tion, or if it was just a home which was pretty well to itself,
then we just use the, the members from the departmental cars
instead of using vehicles to block everything off.
Q Now, when the main body of the squad arrived at
the scene, at the location where would the men normally be
employed?
A Well, you would have what we call a back alley
crew. These men would immediately proceed down to the rear
of the building. They would station themself under cover in
the rear of the buildings so no one could exit from the back.
You would have your advance crew which would be
the four men that wore the bulletproof vests. You would have
your supervisor who would follow your main crew and go in and
speak to the persons in the home, and your other uniformed
officers would be deep, wide outside under cover, which was tc
cover any windows or rooftops or any basements where you coulc
1
•>
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i;t
14
15
lfi
17
18
1!)
20
21
■>2
28
24
25
-dS6
411
THE COURT: Off the record a minute.
(Discussion off the record.)
THE COURT: Did you say supervisor to talk to
expect trouble.
\
THE WITNESS: To talk to the person, in other
words, when the four men went up, they rapped on the door, and
when the door was open for entrance, you had a supervisor
speak to the person of the house.
THE COURT: It isn't to talk to the men?
THE WITNESS: No, sir.
THE COURT: It's to talk to the--
THE WITNESS: Persons of the home.
THE COURT: In the house?
THE WITNESS: To tell them, to explain the
purpose of our being there.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Lieutenant, these men that were in the alleys,
were they armed?
A Yes, they were, sir.
Q And did you ever have any occasion to make a
search at night?
\
A Yes, sir.
Q And at that time did you use lights?
A Yes, sir, we did, sir.
1
•>
:{
4
f>
(i
7
S
9
10
11
12
i : t
14
15
1<>
17
18
19
20
21
22
22
24
22
412
And let me ask you this, why did you use lights?
A So we could see our way around. If we were
going to an unlit area like where we were proceeding and also
if anyone was at the home we would like to search and see who
was possibly hiding.
Q Now, this advance crew that you indicated that
had on the bulletproof vests which you said consisted of the
four men and the supervisor, would you explain to His Honor
in detail how that worked?
A The four men wearing the vests would approach
the door; they would rap on the door, and when someone came
to the door they, the first man would step inside because he
had protective covering.
Then the supervisor would go to the person they
were talking to and explain your reason for being there, that
ypu were seeking two subjects. You had photographs availably
ask if they knew them; you would show the photographs, and
they would say that: they were there or they weren't there.
Then you'd ask permission if we could look the premises over.
Permission being granted, one of the four men that wore the
bulletproof vests would go upstairs and look in the rooms
upstairs, under beds.
One would take the basement, and one would also
go out in the kitchen. Prior to this you would ascertain
whether there was any children or women in the home. If yov
297
1
■J
2
4
.1
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1(1
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
413
found out that there were children and female occupants, these
would be taken into one separate room in the event that you
had anything to arise that they would not be in the line of
trouble.
Q Now, these men with the bulletproof vests, were
they armed?
A They were, sir.
Q And with what were they armed?
A Possibly a shotgun or a Rising machine gun.
Q Now, were these men in the bulletproof vests
specially trained?
A They were, sir.
Q Now, who was it that acted as the supervisor or
ultimately described as a public relations man?
A In most instances it would be Lieutenant Cadden
or myself or when a shift was under the supervision of a
sergeant, the sergeant acted as your supervisor.
Q Now, would the supervisor be wearing a bullet
proof vest or would it depend upon who was acting as the
supervisor?
A It depended. Lieutenant Cadden or myself never
wore vests, but the supervisor on the four to twelve shift did
wear a vest.
Q Now, were you ever armed with anything in
addition to your service revolver?
^98
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
l.'l
14
15
l(i
17
IS
1!»
20
21
■>2
24
24
25
414
A I was, sir.
Q And what were you armed with?
A Rising machine gun.
Q Now, when you made these inspections in homes
was there any instances in which you failed to follow the
procedure in asking a person or in explaining the purpose for
your visit?
A The homes that I was in charge of, I asked each
person, each occupant.
Q And did you tell why you were there?
A We did, sir.
Q And when you were inspecting these homes did you
meet with any opposition to your entry?
A No, sir, after ascertaining our reason for being
there they were more than willing to let us search for them
because each one said that they weren't hiding them, that they
didn't want them in their homes and that we were free to look
these premises over.
MR. NABR1T: May it please Your Honor, I move
to strike that out with respect to a state of mind.
THE COURT: He is saying what they told them.
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: You can strike out the part, the
part of saying that they were willing unless it is what they
said.
433
1
*»
:t
4
5
(i
7
S
!1
10
11
12
i:t
14
15
l(i
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
24
24
25
Strike out the answer and let the witness
answer it again stating, you may say what they told you, not
what you thought they said.
THE WITNESS: As I say, in each instance where
I was, they told us that the brothers weren't there and we
were willing to look the premises over because they did not
want to have them in their homes, and we looked the premises
over, the second floor, first floor, and the basement.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Now, Lieutenant, there were--
THE CLERK: Can you talk louder. The Reporter
cannot hear you.
MR. SAUSE: I'm sorry. I'm doing the best I
can. I have a cold.
THE COURT: Would you like to come closer.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Now, Lieutenant, you were, when you were engaged
in these inspections were these done at any particular time of
the day or night or was any time of the day or night chosen tc
do these or how would you determine when they were to be done?
A No, sir. As I stated at the beginning on the
25th, 26th, and 27th it was just a matter of going to relative
and friends, but we began to get the calls, we would send a
crew out, and in a matter of forty-five minutes to an hour
would elapse before we would go to these homes because we
415
3 0 0
1
•)
:s
4
.’)
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
1.4
14
If)
1<>
17
1H
1!)
20
21
22
24
24
24
416
wanted to make certain where we were going.
Q Did you only do these in the nighttime or what?
A No, sir, all hours of the day and night.
Q All hours of the day and night?
A Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Was there any effort to do them in
the middle of the night?
THE WITNESS: No, sir, Your Honor. If they
came in at a particular, in particular, at a noon hour we woul
go at noon, and if they came in in the evening hours we would
go in the evening. It wasn't just any designated time.
THE COURT: I understand that there were some
times when you did select-™
THE WITNESS: There were certain cases, but
cases of this magnitude necessitated any hour of the day, but
in several cases it would be more advisable to turn-up in the
wee hours of the morning. 3 0 1
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Now, Lieutenant, just for the purposes of
completing the record, would this procedure be followed in
taking an extreme situation where you have a warrant for a
person who is charged with a very minor misdemeanor, disturbin
the peace or disorderly conduct?
A No, sir, we wouldn’t use this, we wouldn't use
the emergency crew. We would just go out with the men from
\
1
•)
:{
4
li
7
s
!)
10
11
12
i:s
14
IT)
1<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
•»2
22
24
2')
417
the office and call for a district man to meet us.
\ Q Now, when you inspected these homes did anyone
voice any complaint to you about what was being done or make
any complaint to you about the conduct of any of the officers
under your command?
A No, sir, it was just the opposite; most of them
were hoping that we came up with the two men that we were
seeking.
Q And you have indicated that in every instance
you explained the purpose of your being there?
A In every instance where I was, yes, sir.
Q Now, during these searches, what was the nature
and extent of the search? Did your officers inspect bureau
drawers and things of that type, or where would, what would
they, or what places would they search and how would they go
about their search?
A Our search was confined to any large place where
a person may conceal himself such as closet doors, under the
bed, into the basement, anything which was large enough to
conceal a person.
At no time did anyone go rifling any drawers or
any small areas.
Q Did you or anyone in your presence break down
any interior doors in any home or break any locks on any
interior doors in any homes?
1
2
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
IM
14
IT)
1<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
20
21
25
418
A Not in my presence, no, sir.
\Q Now, Lieutenant, during the course of your
receiving information and making these inspections, did you
inspect btlly homes or did you inspect other premises as well?
A No, sir, we inspected a church rectory, tavern*
poolroom, dance, I imagine that would be a dance recreation
area, rear alleys, cemetery. it wasn’t just confined to
individual homes.
Q Now, Lieutenant, this information that you
received other than the information about the friends and
relatives of the suspects, would you tell us, did you receive
any of this information directly or did any of this informatL
come directly to you about these other places?
A Yes, we set up our operations in Northeastern
District, and we used the Sergeant's room as our headquarters
Any phone call that was channeled in came eithe:
to Lieutenant Cadden or to myself, and several times came ini
Captain Mahrer on his private phone.
Q Now, would you tell His Honor how you personal:
would evaluate the information that came in and what you do
with regard to, and what, we'd like you to give examples of
what instances you would follow up this information and what
instances you rejected and be as specific with His Honor as
possible?
A If we received a call, the person would say,
O '
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
l.'i
14
15
IK
17
18
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
419
“The two boys you are seeking are in such and such an
address," and hang up, we would just call this more or less
as an anonymous call with nothing to back it up.
But if we could hold a person in conversation
we would ask them what was the reason for thinking that the
two suspects would be in such a home, they would say, "We've
seen them entering at such and such a time, the two boys whose
picture we saw in the newspaper, they very much resemble the
boys," and we would then ask the person if they would care to
give their name and identify themselves.
Nine out of ten they would say, "We don't wish
to reveal our identity due to the fact that if it comes out
it will be in the newspapers and everyone will be looking for
us.ii
Then we would evaluate it. If it sounded like
the person was sincere and wasn't just a crank or someone
calling in to get even, these were then given to the advance
crew to go out.
There were several calls we received, for
instance, "You proceed to the intersection of Washington
Boulevard and Fremont. Look in the grocery store. The boy
come in every day."
"There's an automobile going down Pulaski
Highway, and these two men resemble the two boys you are
looking for." 303
1
•)
2
4
<i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
ir>
10
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
420
These were disregarded, but if it sounded like
the caller was authentic and they weren't very much fast
talking and it sounded like they'd like to talk to you we woui
call these authentic calls and we would then, we went out and
checked them.
Q Now, Lieutenant, you indicated, I think, you
had been on the police force for--
A Eighteen years.
Q Eighteen years.
Now, during the course of your police work in
eighteen years did you take any case during that period of
time or any serious case, is it unusual for you to receive
information of this type with reference to a case that you
are investigating?
A No, sir, it isn't.
Q And from time to time during your eighteen
years have you been called upon to evaluate this type of
information?
A We have, sir.
Q And does that happen frequently or not?
A Well, the majority of times we get a case of
any magnitude we get these calls, and we evaluate them, and
we try to run each and everyone out.
Q Now, perhaps it goes without saying but in
order to complete the record, do these sort of calls vary in
304
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
1]
12
12
14
15
10
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
421
intensity with the amount of publicity and the seriousness of
the case?
A Normally they do but it's surprising in this
case that after a certain data they sort of fell off.
Q They fell off?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, you have indicated to His Honor that in
this police work you have been called upon to evaluate these
telephone calls. Did you use any other different standard
of evaluation in this case than you have in the other eighte
years that you have been in police work?
A I wouldn't say so, no, sir.
Q Was there anything unusual or anything differen
about the pattern of telephone calls in this case or the
information that you received or anything that stands out in
your mind?
A No, sir, other than the fact that the photograp
of the two subjects we were seeking were printed in the
paper, which is unusual, and this led to people calling
saying they saw someone resembling boys going into a certain
place because normally the photographs are not printed in the
paper.
Q Lieutenant, as I understand it, this informatio
would come in sometime to you, to you and Lieutenant Cadden
in which instances would not be recorded?
305
1
• )
:i
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
1.5
14
If)
Ki
17
Itf
1!)
20
21
22
20
24
25
422
A That's correct, sir.
Q And sometime it would go downtown to Comraunica-
tions?
A Yes, sir.
Q In whjLch event it probably would be recorded?
A That's correct, sir.
Q After this evaluation would be made and in some
cases would be referred to the squad; is that correct?
A Tiiat's correct, sir.
Q In cases where it was referred to the squad the
advance crew or the surveillance group would be sent out; is
that correct?
A That'3 correct.
Q And there would be consultations by the supervis
of the persons connected with the main body of the squad,
between him and this surveillance crew, and then a determii
another determination would be made as to whether to enter
any particular premises; is chat correct?
A That's correct, sir.
Q Lieutenant, would you suggest to His Honor the
approximate number, and possibly exactly, of how many of
these inspections of premises were made?
A I myself I riguie I participated in fifty-two.
Q Fifty-two.
And in each or these cases did you as supervisot
3( >6
423
42
4
4
(i
i
s
!(
10
11
12
1.4
14
IT)
10
17
15
1!)
20
21
24
24
25
that is, did you follow in the vanguard of the four?
A In approximately thirty I was accompanied by
Lieutenant Cadden, and in either one of the cases Lieutenant
Cadden would proceed or 1 would go up and supervise.
Q In each of the cases in which you participated
did you identify yourself?
A In this particular case all officers in civilian
clothes were made to wear their badge pinned to the left
breast of the outermost garment. This was so that you could
be identified by anyone in the home plu6 you were identified
by anyone of your own squad that you were working with.
All officers wore their badges on the outer
garment.
Q So that even though an officer might have been
in plain-clothes he had on a police badge; is that correct?
A That's correct, sir.
Q Now, when the door was opened by someone in the
home, would you or someone else always identify yourself
verbally?
A Yes, we would say who we were.
Q Was there any instance in which you did not
identify yourself orally? In other words, any in which you
did not identify the purpose of your visit?
A To my knowledge, no, sir.
Q Now, Lieutenant, you are under oath and you are
307
1
• )
2
4
<;
7
S
!)
10
11
12
1.1
14
ir»
i<;
17
18
1!»
20
21
22
22
24
27
424
expected to be as candid as possible, in your opinion was the
use of the heavy firearms and the equipment that was used in
this case, was this necessary on the basis of your experience
in your police department practice?
A Yes, sir.
Q Lieutenant, you've been involved in this from
the beginning. Would you explain to His Honor now in genera
over-all view, apparently the intensity of the activities of
this special squad, that is, starting off on Christmas Day,
and it gained in intensity and reached its peak and went on,
and just explain that?
A It was very intense on the morning of the 25th,
26th, and 27th. It leveled off about the 29th, and on the
31st of December we went into two working squads, which would
be a day squad consisting of eight men or men from the
Northeastern District who stayed over, and also the three to
eleven squad, which consisted of eight men.
After eleven o'clock or twelve o'clock if the
men weren't out it was left in the hands of the commanding
officer in charge of the division.
It was also times that the districts, various
districts had received calls after twelve midnight. When
these calls were received they would contact the commander
of the Northeastern District, and then they would go with the
emergency squad to make their turn-up or inspection.
308
1
• )
:t
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i:i
14
15
l(i
17
IS
10
20
21
•>2
20
24
25
425
As far as the intense search for the Veneys,
for the brothers, it's still being carried on but just that
the unit isn't moving, that's tae whole unit, which is sort of
City-wide, and no one at this present time will move unless
they have the emergency crew with them.
Q That rule of the Commissioner which went into
force right after all this began is still in effect?
A It's still in effect, yes.
Q And there must be the emergency crew with all
special equipment?
A At ail times.
Q For the protection of the police?
A And the public.
Q Now, with regard to your receipt of information,
if you could give His Honor some idea of the volume of inform;!
tion, this same sort of thing, the amount of it coming in,
when in reached the peak, when there was the intensity of the
information received, and what it is today and so on?
A I think that the peak of the information which
was forwarded from outside of the Bureau of Communications
was between the 31st and the 4th of January. Since then
we've been getting câ -is that have been transferred to our
office, and after we would evaluate it, we would transfer it
to the district.
At the present time it's just very minute, one
309
1
•)
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
10
14
15
1<>
17
18
10
20
21
22
20
24
25
426
or two calls we may have received.
I think there's only been about two inspections
or two turn-ups since the 13th or 14th of January.
Q Well, Lieutenant, in applying your experience,
your eighteen years of experience on the force, is there any
difference in the quality of the calls that you received a
month after an incident or the one that is received the day
of the incident? I mean, does the quality vary in differenc
or what?
A We regard each call the same, from the very
first day to the very apprehension of the person, each call i
the same quality. We carry out on each one as though it was
something which may be important; we never know. We treat
each one as a call the^^Hue as we do the first day as the las
day.
--- - Q Well, you indicated that you would treat each
call the same, but going back during the height of this you
indicated that you had received information but do you recall
whether you received any information which indicated that
there was any immediate danger in this situation to any
citizens or members of the general public?
A I myself, I'd say no, sit, I have no knowledge;
but what the other officers received I hate no way of knowing
THE COURT: What was that? Read that.
(The last questio . was read by the Reporter.)
\
1
•>
:i
4
5
<i
7
,s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1<>
17
IS
111
20
21
•>2
22
24
25
427\
THE COURT: Well, I did not understand.
BY MR. SAUSE:
q\ Well, did you receive any phone calls which
indicated that suspects were holding members of the general
public as hostages?
A Well, not holding members of the general public
but we received such a call as the brothers were at a public
establishment, that they were in the bathroom armed, and we
proceeded there with the Laought in mind that the patrons may
be injured if anything happened.
MR. SAUSE: That was the effect of the questioi
You may cross-examine.
THE COURT: You referred to receiving some
calls where you felt that the material did not warrant going
further. Did you make any record of such telephone calls of
tips which were not followed up at all?
THE WITNESS; No, sir, Your Honor, we just
discarded them.
Your Honor.
MR. NABRIT: If we might have a few minutes,
THE COURT: Yes.
\MR. SAUSE: Can I ask a question, Your Honor?
THE COURT: Yes.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Generally such practice in cases, in other case
\\\
\
\\
1
•>
4
.j
<i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
To
lfr
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
2o
during your past eighteen years or of tips or leads which you
i't follow up, what do you do with them when you don't
follow\them up?
A v Wo just discard them because otherwise we have
voluminous fi>J.es o: scraps of paper and we just discard them.
Mlfc>SAUSE: I have no further questions.
THE OQUK.T: Would you like to take a recess at
this time before going further?
MR. IIABRIT: I would appreciate that, Your Hone
THE COURT: We'll take our morning recess at
this time. You don't want a long one, just the usual one.
MR. NABRIT: All right, Y<?ur Honor.
(Thereupon, there was a short recess taken,
after which the following occurred:)
MR. NABRIT: May I proceea, Your Honor?
THE COURT: Yes.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Lieutenant, would you agree that the use of the
phrase or the word 'turn-up'' usually means search?
A Search or inspection or a surveillance, true.
Q I believe thet you indicated that you obtained
on the morning of Dec&Bheat^25th; you obtained a warrant, a
search warrant from the Judge?
The warrant was obtained on the 25th at
428
A
1
■>
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!»
10
11
12
12
14
15
1<>
17
1H
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
42i*
approximately nine a.m.
\ Q Would you indicate to me how you and Lieutenant
Cadden in charge of the group out there, how you divided your
shifts?
A In respect to what particular day or time are
you talking^
Q Well, first 1*11 ask you about your regular
working shift and then talk about the emergency?
A The District's regular working shift would be
eight to four, four to twelve, or twelve to eight. The
Homicide's regular working shift would consist of anywhere
from eight to twelve to fourteen hours, to fourteen, fifteen
hours a day.
Q Well, during the period from December 26th to
January 2nd roughly, do you recall what hours of the day you
worked, at what hours the Lieutenant worked?
A From the 26th until the 31st the hours that
Lieutenant Caddea and members of our squad worked would be
after arriving home on Sunday morning at seven, we were callei
back at seven-forty-five, and we worked until then, I'd say
roughly, forty, forty-five hours.
Q How much time--
A These are times--
THE COURT: Was one of you on duty first?
THE WITNESS: No, sir.
1
• >
:{
4
5
(i
7
M
!)
10
11
12
i:i
14
ir>
IK
17
18
1!)
20
21
■>2
28
24
25
430
THE COURT: One charged with one eight hour
period and one the next eight hour period?
THE WITNESS: No, sir, Your Honor. We worked
\double shifts or whatever necessitated our being there.
BY MR. ^iABRIT:\
Q\ What's the longest number of hours that you
worked in a single day? As much as twenty- four hours?
A Twenty-three.
Q Twenty-three?
A Yes.
Q And did Lieutenant Cadden do the same thing?
A The Lieutenant and I worked with one another.
Q Twenty-three straight hours?
A Oh, yes, sir.
Q And how about--what was the Sergeant's name
who was in charge?
A Sergeant Hughes.
Q Sergeant Hughes?
A Yes. From the 25th up until the 31st Sergeant
Hughes worked the same hours that we did. He put in a
twenty-three hour day, an eighteen hour day, and it was only
after December 31st that we decided that we would make it a
two man squad or two squads.
But we made a squad from nine in the morning,
which would be the five in the evening people overlap and
1
•>
:i
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
10
14
15
K)
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
20
24
25
431
work until seven or eight, and the same thing with Sergeant
Hughes. He'd maybe come in at three and work until the wee
hours in the morning.
Q You say that Sergeant Hughes was the four to
eleven shift?
A Three to eleven.
Q Three to eleven? Three in the afternoon until
eleven at night?
A This is specified on paper, three to eleven,
but as I say, three until.
THE COURT: What?
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Three p.m.?
A Three p.m. until eleven p.m.
Q Now, when you were, during this period when you
were receiving a large number of phone calls about this
investigation did you take all the phone calls when you were
in the office?
A No, sir, they may have been channeled through
or they may have called for Lieutenant Cadden or possibly
called for Captain Mahrer.
Q And were any calls taken by detectives from
the Homicide Squad?
A When we were in the office, no, sir. They
were always given to us.
51 Q
1
:{
4
;>
(i
i
s
!)
10
11
12
i:l
14
1 r,
in
17
is
1!)
20
21
22
24
25
When you were, were calls received at a time
when you were out in your automobiles going to investigate
homes, presumably at least?
A If there were they were given to us when we
arrived back. I mean they weren't answered by anyone, and
if your switchboard operator in the Northeast District
received a call, upon our return to the building he would give
us the call that he had received for such an address.
In other words, a person wouldn’t leave their
name or left an address, this was given to us for our discre
tion as to where and what to do with it.
THE COURT: Well, the question is, I suppose,
if you were out on an investigation which took three-quarters-
of-an-hour or* a half-hour to complete your search or whatever
you were doing in a house, and if a call came in and they ask
you if you left, which looked like an important call, who
would take it?
THE WITNESS: As I say, your switchboard
operator at the Northeastern District kept this until we
returned, and he would tell us that he received a call for a
certain address. This was all given to us, Your Honor.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q The switchboard operator would take whatever
message there was personally?
A If we weren't there, yes, sir, who in turn
3 1 £
432
1
•>
:i
4
i)
li
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
1'»
l(i
17
1H
10
20
21
22
22
24
2o
433
turned it over to us.
Q In other words--
A If we weren't there.
Q In other words, if somebody called during that
period that you were out and would say, "I think I saw the
brothers at such and such a place, " the switchboard operator
would write that down?
A That's correct, sir.
Q And he would give you a slip of paper when you
got back?
A When we returned he would tell us that he
received a call for such and such an address, and then we
would evaluate this.
Q And you would evaluate what the switchboard
operator told you, what he had written down?
A Well, he would maybe just put down an address,
1217 so-and-so street, and we would find, when we'd get to
gether, find out if we’d been there previously. If not then
we would send out our surveillance crew to look this over.
If we hadn't talked to the person and we wanted to go down
we would look the situation over.
THE COURT: What would the surveillance crew
tell you except how many entrances there were and things like
that? Did they make inquiries in the neighborhood?
THE WITNESS: No, sir, Your Honor. One of th
M 3
1
•)
2
4
5
(i
7
S
•)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1<>
17
IS
1!)
20
21
•>2
22
24
25
A3A
things was, the neighborhood in general, if it was, say, a
well residential district where the homes appeared to be nice
and responsible persons, this was looked into.
In fact, a lot of the homes we went into were
run-down, opened to anyone, in which the transients would be
in and out, and they were the things that we looked for, any
unnecessary or any movement that may have participated while
we were sitting there.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q You indicated that the surveillance, the advanc
surveillance group went on, went to the area of some address
that the switchboard operator gave you, were there any of
those addresses where an actual entry was subsequently made?
A I imagine so, yes, sir.
THE COURT: On the information you had gotten
without any further information except what you got from the
switchboard operator?
THE WITNESS: Your Honor, we couldn't evaluate
it if weluadn't talked to the person so there is no chance of
overlooking anything we went down, after looking it over, we
decided amongst ourself if we should talk to the persons in
the home, which we did.
BY MR. NABRIT:
q Would it be fair to say that your operating
premise was that if there was--that you had to check out all
314
1
•>
2
4
.’)
(i
7
S
«)
10
11
12
12
14
IT)
10
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
22
435
such places where you thought you might turn up something?
A Any place where there was a possibility that th<
brothers were we were going to turn-up.
Q And did you always do this as soon as you were
able to get co-ordinated to do this?
A As I say, after the crew went ahead and looked i
situation over, and then when they had reported to us what
they found, then we made our plan of operation, then we would
go ahead, yes, sir.
Q Well, the thing that you waited for was just
what I call the logistical problems, getting the men there
and the surveillance people go out there and then report back
to you?
A That's correct, sir.
Q Were there any cases during this investigation
where you made tactical decisions in the area such as to wait
for people getting off the street or during the early morning
hours when persons may not be on their guard?
A As I stated before, for early morning hours, we
never waited; as far as for the safety of the public this was
arranged for by having certain cars rope off the area by
placing their cars with respect to not allowing traffic to
proceed; when we went to go to the home certain personnel woul
tell the individuals to get off the street or go back inside.
As you know when a large crew turns out you hav
3 1 5
1
• >
■■{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
1.4
14
To
1(1
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
24
24
25
436
people, you have people likely to come running out the doors
and look, and you have men telling these people, "Kindly get
back inside, remain inside until such time as we tell you you
may come out and it's clear."
This was done, yes, sir.
Q Were there any occasions when you received a
tip in the middle of the night and delayed it until daylight
hours? Were there occasions like that?
A To my knowledge, no, sir. We received it
after going out, we went to the premises.
Q Just as fast as you could get you would go out?
A Not just as fast. I mean, there would be a
lapse of time to find out v/hat the situation was. It wasn't
get a call and run in. It was get a call, go down, and look
it over, and if it necessitated half-an-hour or forty minutes
twenty minutes, it wasn't a spur of the moment thing to rap
on the door and go in.
Q In your testimony you indicate then that it
was generally say something like approximately forty-five
minutes; is that true on the average?
A I didn't look at a watch but I'd say a-half-
hour or forty-five minutes; we didn't time our stay.
THE COURT: You mean before?
THE WITNESS: Before.
THE COURT: Before you would stop and go over?
316
1
•)
:{
4
r>
<>
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1(5
17
1H
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
437
THE WITNESS: Yes, we make a note of where we
are going, Your Honor, where we are going to inspect.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q And during this half-hour or forty-five minute
period your primary reliance to get other information was on
the advance surveillance group?
A Tills— also, wc took our time to deploy our men.
We wanted to make sure that the men were in a strategic point
to keep anyone from getting hurt. If it was in the day hour!
we didn’t want the public hurt, and the wee hours of the
morning we didn't want our men hurt.
Q You didn't understand my question. What I
wanted to ask was, was the main group, you got a phone call,
you got a message from the switchboard operator, and then I
suppose the next step would be to notify your surveillance
group?
A They were right with us; they were in the offid
Q And they would go?
A That would be our four men advance group that
would go on the surveillance.
Q And they were the ones you relied on to get you
the information to determine whether to go ahead with the
raid, or not, I don't mean the word "raid", but to go ahead
with the investigation, or perhaps not to go?
A The majority of times we relied on their judgme
31?
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
ir>
l(i
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
438
That's why they were designated to be the men to go ahead
because of their judgment.
Q What, was there a particular, what were their
ranks? Were they detectives?
A They would be two sergeants and detectives, yes
and at no times were they uniformed men other than the
uniformed sergeant and the detail with us, but the man in
charge was in all probability a detective sergeant or a detai
3 1 Ssergeant specifically picked for this.
THE COURT: You mean everybody in your advance
grovup was a sergeant or higher?
THE WITNESS: No, sir, they would either have
been a detective or sergeant; there was no uniformed men.\
\ THE COURT: No uniformed personnel?
THE WITNESS: No uniformed personnel, no, sir.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Now, in terms of the procedure that you
described for the Court pertaining to such things as deploy
ment of your men around the premises and the alleys and who
went to the door first and what was said, is it my correct
understanding that what you say is how you are supposed to do
it by the book?
A No, sir, not by the book. This was our inves
tigation in that we worked it according to the way we saw it,
how it should be worked. There's nothing in the book to
1
•)
:i
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
10
14
1.7
1<>
17
18
1!»
20
21
22
20
24
20
439
tell us how these four men or how to work. Each situation
is different, and we work it according to the situation.
Q Vie 11, what were you describing? Were you
describing what happened on the occasions when you were
present personally or were you describing what you had
expected the men to do when you weren't there?
A This was to be carried out at all times. I
mean, when you arrive at a certain strategic point, it's what
you must take. I mean, after all, if we were successful in
finding the brothers you don't want to have a chance for them
getting away or anyone getting hurt.
Q Well, let's take the matter of the four men witl
the bulletproof vests going to the door first followed by the
supervisor. Now, you said that that is what was done, and
you described it generally?
A That was our procedure throughout this investigi
tion for the brothers, yes, sir,
Q Now, did I correctly understand you to say that
the four men with the bulletproof vests were the first ones
to enter?
A They were the first to go to the door; they
knocked for a response. After yo\ir response one of those
men stepped inside with whoever answered the door. They
Vwent with the person.
Then your supervisor went up and discussed your
\
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
Hi
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
\
mission with the person.
Q The supervisor discussed the mission?
A Yes.
Q And after at least one went inside?
A Not completely; after the door was opened and
whoever the resident was came to the door. No one at any
time pushed past a resident to the door and run into a house.
I mean, once the door was opened.
Q You mean on the occasions when you were there
this is what happened?
A On fifty-two occasions I had a chance to turn
up for inspections.
Q And on any of those occasions could you see the
door open?
A Could I see the door? Yes, sir. I was behin
or Lieutenant Cadden was behind or whoever of the others was
behind your advance crew.
o Well. when Lieutenant Cadden went up you weren'
there?
A Thirty-one times I was with Lieutenant Cadden
and Lieutenant Cadden was in my presence.
Q Just tell us what you know?
THE COURT: Well, let me get this. I don't
understand. I'm just trying to get the arithmetic. You
440
say you went out on fifty--
1
•)
2
4
r>
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i:?
14
ir»
111
17
18
10
20
21
•)•>
22
24
2.7
4-̂ 7
THE WITNESS: Fifty-two inspections.
THE COURT: Fifty-two inspections.
THE WITNESS: Turn-ups.
THE COURT: Turn-ups.
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT:
with Lieutenant Cadden?
And thirty-one of those were jointl
THE WITNESS: Yes, in other words, we were
working the same time and the same shift and we went out, and
both supervisors were present.
THE COURT: Well, how many altogether were
there when you and your whole squad went out or the whole
group go out? \
THE WITNESS: You mean the over-all squad?
THE COURT: Well, how many times did you or
Lieutenant Cadden or the sergeant go out with the emergency
crew?
THE WITNESS: Our count of the emergency squad
plus the squad that turned out, two hundred and thirty turn-
ups.
THE COURT: How many?
THE WITNESS: Two hundred and thirty.
THE COURT: Two hundred and thirty. And you
were on fifty, fifty-two you say?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
1
■ )
:{
4
f>
<;
7
s
!)
10
11
12
10
14
ir,
i(j
17
18
1!)
20
21
■>2
20
24
25
THE COURT: And Lieutenant Cadden was along on
thirty-one?
THE WITNESS: Sergeant Cadden may have been on
fifty.
THE COURT: I mean Lieutenant Cadden.
THE WITNESS: Lieutenant Cadden may have been
on fifty some, Your Honor, but on particular times, on
thirty-one of these inspections we were on, we were together.
THE COURT: Well, I was just trying to add it
up. Who was in charge most of the time? Would he go on
more than you did or what?
THE WITNESS: Well, there would have been
times there after January 4th of 5th where something may have
come in and Lieutenant Cadden may have went out and I may
have remained back in the building for whatever came in.
THE COURT: Well, did the sergeant go out on
most of them then? Is the two hundred and thirty, that you
went out on fifty-two of which Lieutenant Cadden went on
thirty-one? Did he go on many more than you did?
THE WITNESS: I would say not many more, no,
sir.
THE COURT: Well, you went out about fifty,
that leaves well over a hundred that he went out with some
body else?
442
This is, as I say, after JanuaryTHE WITNESS:
1
•)
:i
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
1.4
14
1.')
l(i
17
18
1!)
20
21
■)•>
24
24
25
^ ^ n d or 3rd you had districts which were going out with your
\emergency units. Also, after December 31st we had going int
a three shift program which meant from the 31st on to the 8th
after three o'clock or five o'clock you had another group
which was supervised by sergeants that may go out, make calls
that we weren't on.
THE COURT: All right. I just wanted to get
an idea because 1 had gotten the impression that one of the
three were on all of the calls and I didn't see how you could
possibly do it with as many as there were.
MR. MURPHY: Lieutenant Cadden will testify
that there were other lieutenants that had a role similar to
that of Lieutenant Glover, but he will also be here to
testify.
THE COURT: All right. I see. I must have
misunderstood you because I thought it was just these three
people that were in on all of them, but it must have been
somebody else.
THE WITNESS: Up until the 31st, Your Honor,
we went into a two shift program.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q In the advanced party, the men in the advance
party and the supervisor, they wore the bulletproof vests; is
that correct?
A That's correct, sir.
443
319
1
■ )
:{
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
1.')
1<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
Q And the men with the bulletproof vests they had
heavy weapons?
A That's correct, sir.
Q And did I understand you correctly to say that
when the door was opened the first man's job was to step
inside?
A To step, as soon as the door was opened, to
3 2 0stand in next to whoever opened the door.
q And I assume it was dependent upon his ability
" w it depended upon the physical arrangement of the entryway
as to what he would do, and sometimes he would go by?
A No, sir, as soon as he would step-up immediatel;
next to the person, the supervisor could talk over the
person's shoulder. You don't have to be face to face with
the individual.
THE COURT: I think what you want, I gather
what this witness is saying that in practice, practically
when the door was opened, before they announced themselves,
the front man stepped in and was in a position, whether he
ever had to do it or not, was in a position to keep the door
open, and then did all four go in before the supervisor?
THE WITNESS: No, sir, once the supervisor—
THE COURT: The front man went in and then the
supervisor came up behind the one man that was in.
\
1
•)
:{
4
r>
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
ir>
ltt
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
28
24
25
445
Q And then the other three followed?
A They remained right there in the position so
that they could look at the doorway or look at the windows,
and then after the supervisor explained their mission and tolc
them, the people said you’re willing to look the premises ovex
and then the ocher four went in and designated, either went
upstairs or to the basement, ana then as I told you before,
all persons, children or females were taken to one room in
case something would come up.
Q Well, sometimes you couldn't tell whether the
females or children were on the upper floor until you went up'
A Well, in this case when the children were on
the upper floor, when we got up on the upper floor and they
were up there they had the precautions there where the childre
were in the room, and they just didn't burst into a bedroom
where children were lying. You would ask once you were in,
"Who's upstairs?"
Q Well, I gather, Lieutenant, that you are telling
us what you would do, but you don't know what others did?
A I'm telling you what happened in ray presence.
Q You said on direct examination, you said some
thing about the procedure that would be used in a tuxm-up for
a disorderly conduct case. You don't investigate such cases
with the Homicide Squad, do you?
BY MR. NABRIT:
1
*)
:t
4
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i:l
14
lo
l(i
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
20
24
25
446
A We handle serious assaults, rapes, or warrants
given to us that are issued to serve and we will serve them,
we will serve it. We'll serve whatever warrants are given
to us.
cases?
A
serve it.
Q
Well., I'm asking you about disorderly conduct
We 'll handle it. If it's given to us we'll
Is that the job of the Homicide Squad?
MR. SAUSE: Oh, if Your Honor please, I object
THE COURT: You're the one who asked the ques
tion that I thought was with respect to serious, and you
asked him what the procedure was in a disorderly conduct case
and counsel is picking it up, and there are a good many thing
in the middle between disorderly conduct cases and murder.
MR. MURPHY: The Lieutenant wasn't always in
Homicide.
THE COURT; But I take it it depends upon the
nature of the offense, the nature of the offense, the nature
of the character of the suspect so far as they can understan<
are factors for them to consider; but the disorderly conduct
part arose from the question on direct.
MR. NABRIT: Will the Reporter read the ques
tion?
(The last question was read by the Reporter.)
447
66
l
:{
4
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i:l
14
15
l<i
17
IS
19
20
21
22
2.4
24
25
THE WITNESS: As I say, in the position of a
\
police officer I would serve whatever summonses or warrants
A
are given to me. If it necessitates a disorderly conduct
warrant, I'd serve it.
BY HR. NABRIT:
Q Did you have occasion to make an investigation
based on a report that persons resembling the Veneys, brothers
who were seen at a particular premises?
A Yes, sir.
Q Reports which did not purport to come from
people who claimed knowledge to know the Veney brothers
personally?
A Yes, I would say that--
Q In any cases?
A I would say that phone calls would be that, "We
seen someone resembling the picture of the brothers we seen
in the papers."
These were turaed-up. I mean that everyone
that called weren't personal acquaintances of the brothers.
Q I assume that in your investigative work you
frequently asked the witnesses, people to try to investigate
or to try to pick up photographs of the people you are
investigating, don't you?
A We will, yes, sir.
Q And some people have difficulty doing that and
1
•)
:t
4
5
(i
7
S
!(
10
11
12
l.'i
14
15
l«
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
2.1
24
25
448
others do it fairly well?
A In what respect have difficulty doing it? I
mean is it difficulty that they have seen the person or just
difficulty with the photographs?
Q Well, some people have difficulty?
A If the person knew them or had been there to
witness what had taken place and had seen the individuals,
I don't think there would be any difficulty, but just to hand
a person at random a photograph and say, "Identify it," I
imagine it is very hard for someone who hadn't seen their
picture, but the picture of the brothers had been published
for seven days, several days.
Q Had been what?
A Had been published for several days.
Q Were there any occasions when you received
information while you were out in the street or in a vehicle
and went directly to the premises to turn it up?
A Yes.
Q Would this be on orders of the superior or are
you just including cases when you had been in contact with
the radio dispatcher?
A We always received our orders from the radio
dispatcher. If he would call for our unit to contact the
radio dispatcher by phone we would do so, and if we would get
information over the phone that necessitated our immediate
1
')
:s
4
.">
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
1.7
1(1
17
18
10
20
21
22
22
24
2o
449
going we went, and we would so proceed.
Q You testified that these plain-clothes officers
were instructed to pin their badges outside their coats.
Well, there were some occasions during this investigation
when officers did not do that?
A Every police officer working under our instruc
tions wore their badge on the outermost garment where it coul<
be seen. It was for their protection as well as for their
identity.
Q You don't recall any occasions, any instances
where officers for one reason or another didn't have their
badge or didn't wear them?
A Under my supervision they had their badge
properly displayed.
Q Were any weapons actually fired on any occasion
during this investigation?
A No weapons were discharged whatsoever.
Q The persons who are being sought were not found
in any of these establishments during this investigation,
Lieutenant?
A Up to this point, no, sir.
Q You mentioned a poolroom that was investigated
or turned-up. What, where was that located?
A Walbrook Junction, Walbrook Junction, if I am
not mistaken, its at Clifton Avenue, and if it isn't Walbroo
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
n
12
i-i
14
15
1<»
17
18
1!»
20
21
22
28
24
25
450
Junction it's at Garrison.
Q Were you present there?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you enter the poolroom, the building?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you use the same general plan of having foul
men and a supervisor?
A In this particular place, no, sir. When we
arrived the first car went in due to the fact that it was a
public establishment and the information we received we
thought it desirable for the first crew to arrive to
immediately go in.
Q Was it true that in that--how many patrons were
in the establiailment?
A I drdn't count them, but roughly I'd say it was
approximately forty, thirty-five, forty.
Q And is it true that all or most of them were
searched in that establishment?
MEL. SAUSE: If Your Honor please, the premise
of this case directs itself to the search of homes, and I
don't know what this is, what significance counsel expects to
draw from this with respect to the scope of the complaint.
MR. NABRIT: A reference to the complaint,
Your Honor, Paragraph 2(d). No, I'm sorry.
THE COURT: Where is it?
1
•>
:t
4
5
(i
7
s
l)
10
11
12
1:1
14
15
Hi
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
28
24
25
451
MR. NABRIT:
THE COURT:
MR. NABRIT:
the plaintiffs.
THE COURT:
Paragraph 5(a).
5(a) you say?
That refers to a search of one of
That’s the Rayner, isn't it?
MR. NABRIT: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: And the prayers is Prayer No. 1
and refers to the search of the homes of persons. I'll be
glad to hear you. What is the purpose of the question and
then we'll see what is to be answered and not just answer in
vacuo.
What is the purpose of the question?
MR. NABRIT: I anticipate that the witness wilL
answer or would answer that the persons or patrons in this
establishment were searched.
THE COURT: All right. There is evidence
already that that is so. There is evidence already that tha|t
is so. Is it denied by the defendant? Is it disputed?
MR. MURPHY: No, sir.
THE COURT: If it is not disputed then I see
no reason for the evidence coming in. As has already been
said, this Court is not using this for the purpose of
discovery for possible damage suits.
If the fact is not disputed it need not be
reproved. If the question is that either side wants to put
1
■>
:?
4
r>
(>
7
s
!>
1()
11
12
!•'!
14
If)
1<>
17
IS
1!»
20
21
22
22
24
2.7
452
on justification for it or lack of justification for it of
\course, that is another matter.
\ The State has not yet offered any justification
for the search. I don't know whether they intend to offer
it in this case or not. They are not required to, and all I
rule is that this present question need not be answered in
view of the concession by Mr. Murphy.
MR. NABRIT: My notes didn't indicate such a
question, but apparently that particular evidence was given
by Captain Mahrer, and that's the reason for it.
THE COURT: In view of the concession you did
not need any further question along that line and you do not
need the question to be answered and that's as far as I rule.
You do not need the question you asked. Go ahead.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Lieutenant, about how many phone calls of people
giving information about this case did you personally take?
A No recollection.
Q No recollection?
A No, sir.
THE COURT: No recollection?
answers.)
(The Reporter read: "No recollection.")
(The Reporter read che last two questions and
1
■>
:t
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
i:i
14
15
Ki
17
18
10
20
21
22
20
24
25
453
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Did you keep any records of calls that you
answered?
A No, sir.
Q Would it be fair to say that you kept no records
of the substance of what was said to you in the telephone call
either whether you discarded it or acted upon it?
A We have an official police document which could
verify our runs. Now, as to what actual record we kept for
ourselves of phone calls we have not; but after receiving a
phone call which necessitated our running or making a turn-up
before we move we have an official police record which would
indicate the amount of runs or turn-ups that we made.
THE COURT: They are the ones—
MR. MURPHY: We supplied them.
THE COURT: They are the papers that were
turned over to these Masters.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q These reports indicate places you went to?
A Yes, if we were going to go it would either be
from a phone call or a relative and therefore if we made the
run, that would be a phone call, and our reports so indicate
that these were houses turned-up due to a phone call or
relative, family or friend.
Q But if I suggest to you that some of those
321
1
•)
:{
4
r>
<;
7
<s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
1T>
1(i
17
18
10
20
21
22
28
24
2f>
454
reports don't indicate, would you be surprised?
MR. MURPHY: I object.
THE COURT: Well, the reports show, as I under
stand it, that there is no dispute, as Mr. Murphy called
attention to yesterday morning, that some of the records
simply showed the places that had been turned-up and the namei
of the people in charge of the group or squad that turned therp
up— is that a fair statement— and the date? Is that correct"
MR. MURPHY: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Showing three to ten a day in
certain cases.
Is that a fair statement?
MR. MURPHY: That's correct.
THE COURT: Would they be the only records the
police would have?
THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honor, other than the
fact of the emergencies crew run, this is police records,
official police records, every time they made runs.
This would correspond with runs that we had,
and as far as the ones on which my name appears I can answer
for those, and if I don’t appear on the run I'm not able to
answer.
THE COURT: And they would show where the run
was made?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, that's right.
3 2 2
455
THE COURT: But they would not show the inform,!
tion upon which any decision was made to go?
THE WITNESS: No, sir.
THE COURT: Is that your understanding?
MR. MURPHY: That's correct.
THE COURT: That's what counsel was, I thought,
leading up to or trying to get.
MR. NABRIT: Thank you, Your Honor.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Now, do I understand your testimony correctly
that when you would take a phone call you would form your
judgment based on the sound of a person's voice whether or
not he seemed, in your hearing credible and reasonable, some
body that was not an obvious drunk or crank?
A Sincere, if he was willing to talk other than
give his name, I would say this would be evaluated for a
good call, but if a person just would call and say, "Go to
such and such a place and find somebody," and he'd hang the
phone up, this is a call that you wouldn't answer, but if
you're willing to discuss with me without telling me who you
are the reason for your believing that they are there I woulc
evaluate this as a good call and we'll make a turn-up or a
surveillance.
Q Would you indicate that you operated on that
policy long before and subsequent to this investigation?
323
1
•)
2
4
.”)
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
ir>
10
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
22
A Long before? No, sir, I think you'll find out
our proceeding dated the 25th, 26th, 27th, and 28th, and most
of our turn-ups would be friends, relatives or acquaintances
of the orothers.
Q I mean during this investigation?
THE COURT: Well, was it different, I suppose
is the question, from the regular police practice, was it in
accordance with the regular police practice in the Baltimore
Police Department or did the practice in this case differ in
any way from the regular police practice?
THE WITNESS: This is the practice.
THE COURT: And if so how? Is there any
objection to that?
MR. MURPHY: No, sir.
THE COURT: I take it that's the broad questio
that you’re trying to get?
THE WITNESS: This is the practice that we're
following in any case that we're working. If someone calls
and tells us something we'll run it out. I mean, but first
of all it's going to revert back if the message is going to
be a crank, but if someone sounds authentic or sincere we'll
follow this up.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Is it the practice of the Department to give
commendations or to indicate medals for officers who solve
456
457
76
:i
4
;>
(i
i
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
ir>
IK
17
15
If)
20
21
■>\>
22
24
25
difficult cases?
MR. SAUSE: If Your Honor please, I just don't
know what this means. I do not know what it means or what
it is intended to be leading up to, and I object to that ques
tion.
THE COURT: Is it the practice of the
Department to give commendations for solving difficult cases.
Well, I don't know whether the Lieutenant can answer the ques
tion. He may or he may not know.
MR. NABRIT: Yes.
THE COURT: And the Commissioner may know
whether there is a practice for giving commendations for
certain things, and it may be that if there are regulations
on it he shouldn't testify to it but we ought to see what the
regulations are.
MR. MURPHY: I'm going to offer in evidence
now--
THE COURT: What's that?
MR. MURPHY: To offer in evidence the Police
Manxxa 1, to introduce in evidence the regulations from the
Manual, and there is a section in the Manual setting forth
what the commendations are as to the procedure with respect
to how commendations are given.
THE COURT: Well, the question it seems to me
would be whether they are followed or whether exceptions are
77
10
n
12
l.'l
14
ir>
i<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
20
24
made in unusual cases. I think we ought to know what the
practice is and what it says in the manual, and then the ques
tion wduld be with respect to the witness' knowledge of it and
V
then also the question of whether there are any special
commendations for any special type of cases which are not
covered by the manual.
Can you find the place in that, the regulations
in the manual? Maybe you can do that.
THE WITNESS: It's in the back about commenda
tions .
THE COURT: Maybe you can find it or perhaps
somebody else who is more familiar with it.
Let me speak to counsel for a minute, one on
one side and one on the other.
(Counsel at the bench.)
BY MR. NABRIT:
q Lieutenant, I don't know whether the Court
heard what you said. Would you repeat what you said.
A Manual of Procedure, Rules and Regulations,
Baltimore City Police Department,
THE COURT: These are the rules and regulations
dealing with the commendations and so forth. Now, if you
want to ask him whether they are followed or ignored or varidd,
V
you may do so.
458
25
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
10
17
18
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
459
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Lieutenant, am I correct that you have been in
the courtroom throughout this trial while the witnesses were
on the stand?
A With the exception of one day.
Q Well, did you hear any testimony from various
witnesses about any investigations where you were personally
present at a house?
A No, sir.
THE COURT: Well, I understood from Mr. Murphy,
was he present at one of them?
MR. MURPHY: He was present on North Chapel
Street or Allendale.
THE WITNESS: Allendale Road. I didn't hear
that testimony. That must have been the day I wasn't there.
THE COURT: You were present at Allendale?
THE WITNESS: Allendale, 2101 and 2301
Allendale Street.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q That's a frame house with three apartments?
A That particular house I know the outside end
the back, and this is a three story, I imagine wood shingled
home.
Q Who wae in charge?
A Lieutenant Cadden was the entering officer.
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
1f>
1«
17
18
10
20
21
•>2
22
24
25
460
Q And they were stationed at the entrance to the
first floor and the stairway to the second and third floor?
A I was in the rear, I was coming back by the
garage in the rear of the home.
Q And the officers stationed in the alleyway or
behind the house, were they directed, was the procedure for
them to point their weapons at the windows and doors?
A They're instructed to concentrate their weapons
in the vicinity in which you're searching. If it's the home
they're going to concentrate their weapons on that immediate
home, second floor, roof, or first floor or wherever there ma]
be an exit.
Q By "concentrate" you mean the direction in
which they point?
A Yes, sir. You're prepared at all times. You
don't know what to expect from that window.
Q And getting covered?
A If available, to seek cover; if not, just what
ever means you have to protect yourself at ail times in case
someone should fire from that vrindow.
Q Did I understand you correctly to say that nine
out of ten times the person calling up wouldn't want to give
their names or identify themselves?
A I didn't say nine out of ten times. I said
that on numerous occasions the person failed to give their
1
•)
:{
4
7
<>
7
S
!)
10
n
12
i:i
14
1.7
Hi
17
is
10
20
21
22
22
24
22
461
name because they stated they did not wish to have their name
published in the paper.
Q Have you any idea of what the percentage of
calls there would be like that?
A No, sir, I haven't.
Q More often than not?
A I have no way of knowing, sir; I didn't keep
track of them.
Q When you gave the name, when you were given the
name rather by the caller did you have any routine procedure
or use to determine if that was real or false information?
A As I say, I don’t recall getting any names, but
if we were given a name, it would just be to call downtown
and try to check everything out it would be more or less a
waste of time because if you're going on information, we
receive a lot of very, very valuable information from people
who aren't on the side of the law. We receive information
from knowing criminals who are informants, and we're not goin
to check their background for veracity.
Q Do I understand you correctly that you do not
recall getting any names?
A I said, to my recollection, I don't recall any.
Q Then according to your best recollection it's
ten out of ten?
A ns I say, I wrote nothing down, sir.
1
•)
4
r>
<i
7
8
9
10
11
12
12
14
If)
l(i
17
18
19
20
21
22
28
24
25
462
THE COURT: Well, you say that people, that
people would say they didn't want their names put in the
pciper. Don't you have the right to seal files on confidentia
information that you get or does everything go in the paper?
THE WITNESS: Your Honor, in this particular
case and in the case prior to this we have talked to persons,
we have taken them before certain members of certain panels,
and almost invariably before the time the people reach the
street these names come out with a name and address and so
forth, and these people call, and they don't feel like they
want their names published.
It happened in this particular case, in this
particular case itself it's happened^ in a case which was in
a rather large case prior to this case it's happened.
So a person says, "We wish not to tell you who
it is, we don't want our names in the paper," and we have no
control over that.
THE COURT: You mean that you have tried or
found it impossible to maintain secrecy in the Department or
what?
THE WITNESS: It doesn't come, Your Honor, it
doesn't eminent from the Department. It seems that it's
from places where we take these people to a higher level of
enforcement where this comes out.
By the same token, we are talking with a person
1
•)
:{
4
5
(>
7
S
!>
10
11
12
10
14
15
1(1
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
20
24
25
463
on the street end they don't know who, if it comes from us or
someone else.
THE COURT: You're talking about a witness?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Who is going to identify a man
who is charged with something or may be charged, and the
newspapers hang around the State's Attorney's office, and the
name gets out. I can understand that.
But if somebody calls you on the telephone and
gives you a tip that somebody who looks like the Veneys have
been seen somewhere, can't you take that and ask that person
who he is and assure him that his name will be kept secret
and arrange to have it kept secret?
Isn't there any way of keeping that type of
information secret? They’re not witnesses to a crime.
Have you tried to see whether that can be done
and have found it impractical or have you concluded that it
is impractical?
THE WITNESS: Your Honor, we repeat this to th
person, but they still say they do not wish to divulge their
name.
If it comes to our office we can keep it. We
have files now where persons have talked to U3 and given us
information which has never been divulged. We're in a
position to keep our information, but as I say, but if it go
464
2
4
i
S
<)
10
11
12
12
14
15
10
17
18
1!)
20
21
28
24
25
to a higher step or someone up it gets out, and the person
you’re dealing with on the street, when you tell them this or
try to reassure them, they're still reluctant. They do not
wish to give their names.
THE COURT: Well, I can understand that, but
it seems to me there may be a difference, and I was asking
you whether any difference is recognized between people who
say they have witnessed a crime and people who simply have
information as to the whereabouts of someone who is wanted.
You mean that they are afraid that they may be-*
THE WITNESS: Involved to the extent of having
furnished information where the person may be found, if you’re
successful you must divulge where it came from and if the
person is brought into court they are made to testify, and
that’s the experience which they may probably get to at a
later date.
THE COURT: You mean the fact that not being
witnesses to a crime but by reason of the fact that you may
have to prove your justification for an arrest or to justify
the search, you neve to give their names? I assume that’s
what you mean?
BY MR. NAERIT:
Q You recognize the problem of error with respect
to cranks?
A Sir?
1
•)
4
5
<i
7
S
!)
10
n
12
12
14
15
IK
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
28
24
25
465
Q R e c o g n i z e t h a t t h e r e i s a p r o b l e m o f e r r o r a n d
y o u h a v e p o s s i b l e c r a n k s f u r n i s h i n g i n f o r m a t i o n ?
A I n a l l p r o b a b i l i t y t h e r e c o u l d b e ; b u t a s I s a y ,
w e ' r e l o o k i n g f o r c e r t a i n p e r s o n s f o r a c r i m e t h a t ' s b e i n g
c o m m i t t e d i n t h e S t a t e o r t h e C i t y , a n d w e e n d e a v o r t o l o c a t e
t h e p e r s o n , a n d i t m a y n e c e s s a r y - - m a y n e c e s s i t a t e t h a t w e g o
t o h o m e s o f p l a c e s t h a t a r e c a l l e d , a n d w e k n o w s u c h p l a c e s
w h e r e t h e y ' v e b e e n c a l l e d .
" I g o t a f r i e n d a t s u c h a n d s u c h a s t r e e t .
W o u ld y o u g o u p a n d l o o k ? I t h i n k h e m a y b e . "
T h i s i s d i s r e g a r d e d .
THE C O U R T : T h a t ' s t h e C o u r t ' s d i f f i c u l t y w i t h
t h e n e w r u l e s s u c h a s r e q u i r i n g t h e p o l i c e t o g i v e t h e
s o u r c e o f t h e i n f o r m a t i o n o n w h i c h t h e y g o t a w a r r a n t o r o n
w h i c h t h e y e n t e r e d a n d s h o w in g t h e n a m e s ra a k e 3 p e o p l e l e s s
w i l l i n g t o c o - o p e r a t e w i t h t h e p o l i c e , b u t i t ' s n o t f o r t h i s
C o u r t t o s a y w h a t t h e judgment o f t h e b a l a n c e o f p u b l i c
i n t e r e s t i n t h e l a w r e q u i r e s . T h e Supreme C o u r t h a s l a i d
d o w n c e r t a i n r u l e s i n t h a t r e s p e c t .
B u t i t ' s p e r f e c t l y a p p a r e n t t h a t t h e r u l e s
r e q u i r i n g t h e d i s c l o s u r e o f n a m e s , a n d i f a m a n i s a r r e s t e d
a n d o b j e c t s t o a s e a r c h o f h i s p e r s o n a f t e r h i s a r r e s t
d i s c o u r a g e s c i t i z e n s f r o m g i v i n g i n f o r m a t i o n l e a d i n g t o t h e
a p p r e h e n s i o n o f c r i m i n a l s .
MR. NABRIT: Well, I don't think this is the
466
85
l
:t
4
(i
i
s
!)
10
11
12
i:i
14
I;)
1(4
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
24
25
place to discuss the law but perhaps we can discuss the
latest cases later.
THE COURT: You mean the most recent case?
MR. NABRIT: Yes, sir, but I don’t read the
law thut way but perhaps we can discuss the law later.
THE COURT: Well, I don’t think that is
immediately involved here but it is only involved periph
erally here; it just deals with the discouragement of people
giving their names, and it is an indication of why people
may be unwilling to give their names, and that is one factor,
I suppose, in the proper rule to be established, and of course,
there are so many factors involved in it.
MR. NABRIT: But the warrant in that particular
case was not thrown out, according to my understanding,
because the informant was anonymous but on the basis of the
knowledge--
THE COURT: Well, on the requirement of the
reliability of the informant.
MR. NABRIT: Reliability as measured by the
opportunity to observe.
THE COURT: It's right hard to establish that
without knowing whom you're talking to, although the witness
apparently has been doing his best here according to the
testimony based upon the information given.
MR. NABRIT: You may inquire.
1
■)
4
4
r>
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i:i
14
15
IK
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
24
24
25
467
MR, MURPHY: No questions.
MR. SAUSE: Just a minute.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q You indicated that people on the telephone
expressed to you that they had fear of publicity, that is,
that some people did; is that correct?
A That's correct, sir.
Q And did anyone, did any of those people express
any fears or any reservations of any other sort?
A Yes, sir, they were afraid of probably what the
could get from the Veneys, from the family of the brothers,
sisters, along with the brothers themselves.
Q Of the suspects?
A Of the suspects, yes, sir.
RECROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q How many of those calls did you get?
A I have no recollection of how many but we'd get
a call and they'd say, they'd say they'd like to tell us but
they don't want to divulge their name because they were
afraid of what the sisters or the brothers would do.
Q How many calls did you get? Was it ten or a
hundred or what? .}r
A I have no recollection.
468
87
i
2
4
5
<>
s
<>
10
11
12
12
14
15
1«
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
24
25
THE COURT: You muat be able to estimate
whether it was near ten or near a hundred?
THE WITNESS: Your Honor, I would say in the
neighborhood of fifty, forty-five or fifty since the case
when it started, and actually it's about the twenty-sixth.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q How many did you discard and how many did you
accept?
A It wouldn't be no more than about three or four
that would be discarded; the others were acted upon.
THE COURT: That also ties-in with the report
of the Masters assuming as nearly the ratio of people in
charge.
X MR. MURPHY: Thank you, very much.
THE COURT: The ’numbers of the people in charge.
MR. MURPHY: Mr. Tucker.
Thereupon
WILLIAM S. TUCKER
was called as a witness for and on behalf of the defendant
and, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified
as follows:
THE CLERK: State your full name for the record.
THE WITNESS: William S. Tucker.
DIRECT EXAMINATION \
\BY MR. MURPHY:
Q Mr. Tucker, what is your home address?
1
• )
:{
4
.’)
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
IX
14
IT)
Hi
17
IX
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
469
A
Q
City?
A
Q
Northern?
3207 Milford Avenue.
Do you operate a retail establishment in this
Yes.
What part of the City roughly? Central,
A Western district.
Q Western district?
A Yes, northwestern, western.
Q Directing your attention to December the 27th
in the evening, did a police officer come to your establish
ment?
A Yes, sir.
Q For what purpose?
A Looking for information that I keep on file.
We keep identification cards, files. We cash checks and we
make out little identification cards, and we put down the
information, the best information we can at the time, and ther
we file these cards, and the police officer came in looking
for these cards.
Q What type of information is it on the cards, Mr.
Tucker?
A Well, names, addresses, latest place they work,
latest place they reside, description, driver's license,
social security card, and things like that, and we also
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
M
!)
10
11
12
12
14
17)
1«
17
1H
1!)
20
21
22
24
21
2-7
470
\fingerprint them.
Q Do you keep these cards current?
A Yes.
Q Do you know the name of the officer that came
to see the cards?
A Sergeant Dunn, Western District.
Q And he went through your card file?
A Yes.
Q Did he locate the card of the individual known
as Samuel Veney?
A Yos, Samuel Veney.
Q And wnat did he do with the card?
A He took che information off the card.
Q And he left the card in your establishment?
A Yes, he did.
Q And do you know the address of the individual?
A I believe it was on Eutaw, 1000 block.
Q 1000 block?
A Yes.
Q Is this a copy or is this the actual card that
you maintained?
A This is the actual card.
Q And what is the address on the card?
A 2416 Eutaw Place.
HR. NABKIT: 24 what?
1
• )
:t
4
f>
(i
7
(s
!)
10
11
12
l.'i
14
17
Itf
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
24
24
2.7
471
MR. MURPHY: 2416 Eutaw Place.
MR. MURPHY: Thank you very much, Mr. Tucker.
MR. NABRIT: May I see the card the witness
referred to?
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Mr. Tucker, did you call the name of the
Sergeant who came in?
A Oh, no.
Q Do you know him?
A Yes, we know him.
THE COURT: He gave his name, I thought.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Did you give his name?
A Yes, Sergeant Dunn.
Q Sergeant Dunn?
A Yes, Western District, Sergeant Dunn, John Dunn
Q Sergeant John—
A Sergeant John Dunn.
Q Sergeant John Dunn?
A Yes.
Q And how long did Sergeant Dunn stay in your
place when he came in?
A He just came in and asked if he could look
through the files, and we always had a policy that any law
]
• )
:t
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
18
14
15
If)
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
28
24
25
472
enforcement officer that walked in could use the files if he'd
like to.
Q And did you stand there while he looked at the
files?
A Oh, yes.
Q And did you see the information that he copied
down?
A He copied it on a piece of paper.
Q He copied it on a piece of paper?
A Yes.
Q But he didn't copy the fingerprints?
A No, oh, no. That's the original card.
Q And you had that in your possession from that
day until this?
A No, until Detective Bosack came in from
Homicide and asked for it and we give, it to him.
Q What day did he come?
A 1 believe it was ;.aybe two week ago. I'm not
too sure.
Q Well, how long was it after this first visit?
A Oh, maybe about ten days or two weeks.
Q After the first visit?
A Yes.
Q When Sergeant Dunn came?
A Yes.
92
i
Q Does this have the signature--
THE COURT: Show it to him.
473
10
n
12
10
14
15
Ki
17
18
1(1
20
21
24
MR. NABRIT: Yes.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Does this have the signature or the specimen of
the signature of the person whom you talked to?
A The person, yes.
Q Did the Sergeant; take off any photograph of
that signature?
A No.
Q But he sav7 it?
A He saw the card, yes.
Q Does this card indicate in any way when you las t
talked with that person?
A Well, I can tell you that the last known job he
had was in, I think, *63. He worked for Bethlehem Steel.
The original card was made out he v/orked for Gilbert Plastics.
That was made out in '62, but since he's changed his job, and
that's '63.
Q What are the numbers in the right-hand corner?
A That's his identification, type, weight, age.
Q Would you read thi3, height, weight?
Strike that.
Did you explain these figures to the officer?
A Only what's there, no, sir.
2o
474
Q He knew what they meant?
A Yes.
Q Did he copy if down?
A Yes.
Q What are they?
A Five foot eleven, 155 pounds, 21 years of age,
'62. Now, it would be about—
Q And what are they? Are there two addresses you
have for the person?
A Yes, he moved from Mount Street to--
Q What?
A The original address was 1332 North Mount Street;
then he moved to 2416 Eutaw Place.
Q Am I correct that the back of this card contains
five fingerprints; is that correct?
A Yes.
Q Is that a right hand print?
A Right hand.
Q The thumb and four fingers?
A Yes.
Q All right. Did the officer see those finger-
prints? Did he know that you usually keep fingerprints?
A Yes.
Q Did he ask you if he could have the card?
A Oh, he identified himself. If we know who they
1
•)
:{
4
7>
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
IT)
10
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
22
475
are we let them look at the file.
Q Did he ask you if he could take the card with
him?
A No, no.
Q He didn't ask you if he could take the card with
him?
A Nc. He always takes information off of the
card.
Q What day was this first visit by Sergeant Dunn?
A I don't know; I don't remember exactly, but I
imagine it was about, I guess approximately maybe four weeks
ago.
Q Can you recall what time of day Sergeant Dunn
came in?
A I don't recall the exact time. Sergeant Dunn
was sick and went to the hospital, but 1 think it was in the
evening.
q When is your store open?
A We're opened from eight until twelve.
Q And was your store open?
A Eight until twelve.
THE COURT: Eight until twelve? You mean
eight in the morning until twelve at—
THE WITNESS: Twelve at night.
THE COURT: Twelve at night?
1
•)
:t
4
r>
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
IT)
l(i
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
22
476
THE WITNESS: Yes.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Arid you think it v»s in the evening but you
don* t know whether i t s t : late a t night or early?
A I don't remember; I’m pretty sure it was in the
evening. 1 don't remember ex-let--I don't remember exactly
how long ago it was. It might have been, I know he came in
right after this holdup and shooting occurred. That's when
he came in; majbe a day or two later; I don't know exactly.
I don't remember the exact data.
Q Did tire officer question you about whether or
not you remembered this?
A Oh, no, I wouldn't remember it, sir. It
wasn't a case of whether I remembered or not. It just
happened that he knows we have these files, and we cash
checks and we do this type of business and we have them.
Q Do you have any recollection of the person?
A Mo.
q Do you make any credit check of the people befo
you give them a card?
A Oh, yes, we sure do, we try to secure an
identification. We don’t cash checks unless we're pretty
sure about it.
Q Well, generally do you make, do you accept for
identification what a person shows you or do you have someone
1
■)
:{
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
10
14
IT)
10
17
18
1!»
20
21
22
20
21
25
477
check it out for you?
A Well, at times and at times we call the company.
Q Call the company?
A That they wor'k for.
Q But >ou make your own check?
A On, yes.
MR. MURPHY: Thank you very much, sir.
THE CLERK: Step down, please.
(I>icue3b excused.)
MR. MURPHY: Lieutenant Manuel.
THL COURT; Well, the care has gone. The car<
has not been offered, and I suppose the fingerprints are not
the fingerprints of this one, that they are different, that ii
turned out to be of a different Samuel Veney. No question
about that, is there?
MR. MURPHY: No.
THE COURT: Well, if they are not offered how
can I tell chat? They were not even shown to me.
MR. NASRIT: Your Honor, I have no objection
to offering it.
THE COURT: there any question? I suppose
it will come up. Everybody can’t see everything. The only
question, it seems to me--well, there arc lots of questions,
but the first question is, it seems to me, whether there was
•>
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
Hi
14
If)
1<>
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
20
24
25
478
any duty to take fingerprints. There certainly wasn't at
that time, and I can't believe that the Court could find that
there was any duty to cake fingerprints before they conducted
some further inquiry.
Now, whether what was done was justified is
another question; but certainly good police procedure and
certainly good procedure was to try to find Baltimore address*
and Baltimore places where Samuel Veney went.
I am not saying whether it is probable cause to
enter a house or whether the entry was made, but if it was,
good police procedure would be to start some inquiries into
the matter.
MR. NABRIT: Weil, all I suggest to Your Honor
is that practically whether the Sergeant wrote down something
in the report, he had an opportunity to write it down in the
report.
THE COURT: Well, we are not testing the
efficiency of the Folice Department at this point. This is
a legal matter.
MR. CAUSE; If Your Honor please, we think
this should more properly be offered at the conclusion of the
testimony but in any case we are offering this as our exhibit
Your Honor.
THE COURT: I think it should be offered.
THE CLERK: Defendant's Exhibit No. 1.
1
■ )
2
4
7>
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
18
14
IT)
10
17
18
10
20
21
22
22
24
20
479
(Above document was marked Defendant's
Exhibit No. 1.)
THE COURT: Or it can be photographed.
MR. SAUSE: As an indication of our desire to
put in all the proof.
THE COURT: All right.
Thereupon
CARLTON H. MANUEL
was called as a witness for and on behalf of the defendant
and, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified
as follows:
THE CLERK: State your name for the record.
THE WITNESS: Lieutenant Carlton H. Manuel,
Baltimore City Police Department, Detective Bureau.
THE COURT: I think this had better be put in
a glacein envelope because I have seen better prints but 1
have certainly seen worse prints; so I think this had better
be put in a glacein case.
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Lieutenant, would you state your name and your
position, please, your station?
A Detective Lieutenant Carlton H. Manuel, Detecti
Bureau, Baj City Police.
Q Now, Lieutenant, directing your attention to
327
1
■>
2
4
7>
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
If)
l(i
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
22
480
December 27th of this year, the early morning hours, did you
have occasion to participate in an investigation at 241.6
Eutaw Place?
A I did.
Q Tell His Honor what you know about the back
ground of this house on the occasion when you went to Eutaw
Place from your own personal knowledge?
A I received a call from Sergeant John Dunn of
the Western District stating that Samuel Veney had cashed a
check at Al's Liquor Store, Fulton and Lanvale and had given
the address of 2416 Eutaw Place.
Q You received that call from Sergeant Dunn?
A I did, yes, sir.
Q Mow, just for His Honor's information Sergeant
Dunn is in the hospital; is that correct at this time?
A Sergeant Dunn?
Q Yes.
A I do not know that. I do not know that, no,
sir.
Q Nov?, do you know approximately what time you
received that call?
A I don't know exactly, no, sir.
Q Was it in the evening, sir?
A It was in the evening, yes, sir.
Q Now, after receiving that information what did
328
481
you do?
A After receiving that information we proceeded
to that address.
Q Now, Lieutenant--
THE COURT: Are you the one that decided to go
or were you acting under instructions?
THE WITNESS: I was the one that decided; I
acted on the information, yes.
THE COURT: Did ne tell you the date that the
check had been cashed?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. As well as I remembe^:
it was in June of this past year.
THE COURT: Did you make a note of it in any
way? Is there any note on that? Is there any note on that
showing the information?
3 2 9
THE WITNESS: June 19, 1964.
MR. NABRIT: Let the record show that with
respect to the Court's question that in the last answer the
witness referred to some papers to refresh his recollection.
THE COURT: Well, sure he's not expected to
remember it and to carry it in his mind.
MR. NABRIT: l wasn't objecting, Your Honor,
but just wanted the record to show it.
\
THE COURT: Well, let's see what the records
are.
1
.}
:!
4
5
(i
7
s
I)
ID
11
12
l.'i
14
15
1<>
17
1H
1!)
20
21
22
20
24
25
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Lieutenant Manuel, I want to hand you a paper
and ask you if you can identify it, please?
A Yes, sir, this is the report that Sergeant Dunn
made.
\ Q It's the report of Sergeant Dunn?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, can you identify that as an official
document of the Police Department kept regularly in the course
of business of the Department?
A Yes, 3ir.
THE COURT: Does he have some memorandum that
shows that?
MR. SAUSE: Yes, Your Honor. Counsel has
looked at it.
THE COURT: All right. Counsel has looked at
it.
MR. NABRIT: May it please the Court, I object,
there's no proper foundation for this document, and I think
I ve stated the ground of my objection, and this is a report
from Sergeant Dunn and Captain Poole and no testimony of this
witness to show that he ever saw it before today.
MR. SAUSE: Well, if Your Honor please--
refresh a present recollection.
482
THE COURT: Well, he can use anything that will
483
102
i
:{
4
;>
(i
i
S
«)
10
11
12
i:s
14
1.')
THE COURT: Well, let's see. Is it an
official report?
HR. SAUSE: It is, and he has identified it as
an official report kept in the course, the regular course of
business of the Department.
HR. NABRIT: May I be heard on this, Your Honor,
before Your Honor rules because it's important and may affect
other matters of testimony in the case?
THE COURT: Is this one of the reports that
was given to the Masters yesterday?
MR. MURPHY: Yes, Your Honor. It was a type
written matter and this was part of it that was given to the
Masters.
THE COURT: Well, let me see this.
H R . NABRIT: Well, may it please the Court--
1<>
17
IS
1!)
20
21
2.5
24
Well, what is the objection to this if the
testimony is that this was a record made in the ordinary
course of business? Maybe you would have to get it that thit
witness believes it co be.
MR. NABRIT: My objection was relevancy.
THE COURT: Was what?
MR. NABRIT: It was relevancy. I object on
the grounds that this was not relevant because this witness
testified that he made the decision uo go there.
25 TILE COURT: That's rignt.
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
14
14
15
l(i
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
24
24
25
484
never saw it, he got a report.
THE COURT: That’s what he was told.
MR. NABRIT: That's what he was told.
THE COURT: And if he was told this, and if he
was told was what was out of an official report, isn't that
sufficient? You don't have to prove every hand it goes
through.
I'll overrule the objection. I don't have any
doubt about it at all if this is an authentic report, and I
would have some doubt as to where the information came from
since the information is contrary to what the State's last
witness testified to, but it seems to me that it goes to
weight rather than admissibility.
MR. CAUSE: If Your Honor please, the witness
has identified this and I would like to have it marked in
evidence.
THE COURT: Yes.
THE CLERK: Defendant's Exhibit No. 2 marked
in evidence.
(Document above referred to was marked
Defendant's Exhibit No. 2.)
BY MR. SAUSS:
Q Lieutenant, I am handing you back—
MR. NABRIT: But after acquiring knowledge, he
THE COURT: The report is not only admissible
1
• >
:i
4
5
(>
7
S
9
10
11
12
i:i
14
15
Id
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
24
25
485
Co sustain his recollection but to prove the facts. You may
have an objection if you question that this was taken from
\the records of the Western Police Department it will have to
come in, if you want to make that objection.
MR. NABRIT: Well, my point, Your Honor, and
perhaps it's not well stated, but my point was, my point
simply was that if this witness made the decision to make an
investigation, that probable cause can not be determined on
the basis of a fact that he was not given.
THE COURT: But he was given the fact. Ke
says he was told by Sergeant Dunn, that he had received a cal
from Sergeant Dunn saying that a check had been cashed on the
19th of June 1964. He didn't remember the date of the 19th
of June, but he remembered it was June '64.
Then he refers to this paper and says it
refreshes his recollection.
Now, this paper may be used to refresh his
recollection if rt refreshes a present recollection. I don'
know whether this refreshes a present recollection or not
because that point: wasn't made; but the point is that if this
was a record in the Police Department, the fact that Sergeant
Dunn told him over the phone the same thing he put in a
report doesn't mean this witness has got to read the report
before he can act on it.
Do you recall personally at this point or do
1
•)
:i
4
5
<;
7
S
!)
10
11
12
l . 'l
14
15
l(i
17
IS
1!)
20
21
■>•_>
22
24
25
486
you have a recollection apart frorr this now that it was the
19th or do you just remember that you think it was in June?
THE WITNESS: I remember it was June but after
my recollection.
THE COURT: All right.
THE WITNESS: After looking at it.
THE COURT: Well, that refreshes a present
recollection by showing that it was the 19th of June, but it
is admissible of itself to prove the fact and to show that or
as tending to prove the fact, but I’m not finding . ny fact,
and I'm not passing on the weight at this time until I hear
all the evidence and cross-examination, but just ruling on
admissibility.
I have no doubt that it is admissible. All
right.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Lieutenant, I show you Defendant's Exhibit No.
which you identified a tew moments ago. Could you tell His
Honor whether or not the information contained therein was
the information which was given to you by Sergeant Dunn at
the time that he called you on the telephone?
A Yes, this is the information Sergeant Dunn had
given me on the phone.
Q And that calls to mind your present recollectic
the fact that he told you all that information that's on it?
106
487
10
n
12
12
14
15
1(5
17
18
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
\ A\\ Yes, sir.
witness looks at it and he's never seen it before.
MR. MURPHY: He lias seen it.
THE COURT: He says it refreshes his recollec
tion, a present recollection. I hold it is admissible, and
you can cross-e.xar.ine on weight.
MR. MURPHY: Your Honor, if Sergeant Dunn wasn'
in the hospital he would be here.
THE COURT: Obviously the real question is wher
did Sergeant Dunn get the information about the date which is
contrary to that of the last witness, your last witness, which
raises curiosity on the Court’s part.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Lieutenant, following your receipt of that
information you indicated that you went to the address which
you indicated in that information. Did you send a surveillance
crew there first?
A Yes, sir, I went there myself with a few other
members of the crew.
Q You went there yourself with the surveillance
M R . NABRIT: Objection, Your Honor. This
crew?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, who else was on that surveillance?
A Sergeant Shrimer, Detective Walker, Detective
1
')
:{
4
.")
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
10
14
15
1(5
17
IS
10
20
21
22
20
24
25
De\Paola.
Q Sergeant Shrimer?
A Sergeant Shrimer, George Shrimer.
Q Yes. Who else?
A Detective Robert De Paola.
Q Yes, sir.
A Detective Oliver Walker.
Q Now, approximately what time did you arrive at
the scene?
A It was approximately one-thirty in the morning.
Q One-thirty in the morning?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now--
THE COURT: Just a moment. Are these the only
people who came?
MR. SAUSE: This surveillance crew.
THE COURT: The surveillance crew?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Now, at that time after you arrived you began
the surveillance?
A We seen a light in the house and fe.lt t;hat some
one was up in the house. So that's when I returned to the
other units about two blocks away and deployed the men to the
back of the house along with other men and I went to the front
488
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
,s
!)
10
11
12
i:i
14
15
10
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
489
of t̂ he house.
group?
A \ Yes, sir, I was.
Q Now, tell Ilis Honor, Lieutenant, what you did in
this particular case with reference to deploying the men and
why you deployed the men?
A Well, armed with this information that one of
the brothers lived at this address or gave this address,
Sergeant Shrimer who was the lead man
MR. NAMIT: Objection, Your Honor. I don't
understand the purpose of this is testified to.
THE COURT: Read back the answer.
(The last answer was read by the Reporter.)
THE COURT: Well, he's just jumping to a
conclusion there, and if he wants to say what he believes, it*
obvious that th:i ia simply not the fact.
Is the State now contending that there is an
identity of the two men named Veney?
MR. MURPHY: No* sir, Your Honor, we are not
but just saying what they did when they got there.
THE COURT: Well, he says, "Armed with this
information that one of the brothers lived there.''
they had.
Q Now, were you in command of this particular
MR. SAUSE: Well, that's the information that
1
• >
:i
4
.’)
(i
7
8
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
l(i
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
A90
THE COURT: Well, that's subject to ray finding
of fact, which I haven't found yet.
HR. MURPHY: Yes, but that's what took them
there that they thought that.
THE COURT: They thought that.
MR. MURPHY: Maybe that's not it but they
thought that maybe Sara Veney was there.
THE COURT: But the question is whether there
were adequate grounds for believing.
Are you going to bring the other man back and
let him sey whether there was ever any cheek cashed in June oi
1964?
MR. MURPHY: I believe he has no present
recollection of that, Your Honor.
THE COURT: It hasn't been very long.
MR. MURPHY: He cashes too many checks.
THE COURT: It's not a long time past since
December 26th to January 20th.
MR. SAUSE: If Your Honor will look at the car<
which is Exhibit 1, Your Honor will see that the date on ther<
6/19 does coincide, but the difficulty, Your Honor please, is
with the year.
THE COURT: There isn't any 6/19 anywhere.
The Virginia driver's license. The Virginia driver's license
is 426519. There's nothing remotely like that anywhere.
\
1
•)
:t
4
(i
7
S
!*
10
11
12
14
14
If)
10
17
IS
10
20
21
22
2.4
24
2.')
491
MR. SAUSE: But if Your Honor please, it appear
from the color of the ink on there.
THE COURT: But it’s written after October 26,
1962.
MR. SAUSE: And also at that time the address
was changed.
THE COURT: 1 don't know.
MR. SAUSE: And 1 don’t know or see how it
resolves the question as to the year.
THE COURT: No. it resolves the question that
he cashed the check on Jane 19th, and certainly indicates the
reasonable probability that he cashed the check on June 19th c
some year,
MR. SAUSE:
THE COURT:
Yes, sir.
And he gave on that day, he gave
that address.
-rr
MR. SAUSE: Yes.
THE COURT: A change of address, change of empl
MR. SAU'E: And as i recall Your Honor mention*
the other day that one of the witnesses also testified the
other day that Samuel Veney of this address was also in
Baltimore on leave in June of ’64.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Now, acting upon he information which was giver
to you by Lieutenant Dunn, or Sergeant Dunn ratner, you went
1
• )
:i
4
•")
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
10
14
15
1()
17
IS
19
20
21
22
20
24
25
492
to this Eutaw Place, 2416 Eucaw Place, you were in the
surveillance car, and you saw what you saw, and you went to
deploy the men?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, I asked you before, and the question was
asked, and I believe interrupted, where you deployed the men
and why you deployed the men at those places?
A Because of the--
Q In the first place, where did you deploy the me:
THE COURT: Is there any serious question that
if Lhere was probable cause to believe that Veney was in the
house at that time that the deployment was sufficient, that it
was not excessive at the time, and if there was not probable
cause to believe that he was in the house at that time it
raises a different question, and I suppose we have got to find
out what was done.
I don’t think we have to have all of these
deployments. Of course, if there was probable cause to
believe that he was there, you have got to have a full group
of people to protect the public as well as to protect the
police. I don't understand that is seriously questioned.
MR. SAUSE: If Your Honor please, as Your Honor
has indicated many times, and it’s certainly true that in thes
cases the police officers are called upon to make judgments in
a very short period of time, and they haven't time for the
1\
• )
2
4
5
(i
7
S
!»
10
11
12
12
14
15
1(5
17
18
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
493
reflection that we are making here today.
Certainly what they did, the matter of how they
did it, the deployment of the forces, what they did, the way
they protected themselves, certainly indicates, certainly
showed indication, Your Honor, the fact that they took the
matter seriously and the fact that there was indeed probable
cause for believing that he was there. Otherwise, if they
had acted sloppier they would have just sent one man in.
MR. NABRIT: I know of no case holding that th
officers precautioned to protect themselves has anything to
do with the basis of his information.
THE COURT" Well, the point is that if they ha
so many men, I don't think that we have to prove in each case
whether he was standing in front or in back, but the matter
which may be important is what happened in the entry, the
form of entry.
MR. PAUSE • And we have had these heartrenderii
cases of the police officers standing in the back or standing
in the front with guns
THE COURT: I don't, think that's it, the fact
that the officer was standing in the hr ok with guns or standii
in the front with guns, that doesn't make any difference to
me in this case, but the question is what was done in enterin;
the house, it seems to me, and searching people in the homes,
what justification there is for that.
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
Hi
14
1')
i<;
17
18
1!)
20
21
■>•_>
22
24
25
494
MR. MURPHY: But after all police action plays
a very vital part in it.
THE COURT: All right. I'll take it caen if
you think it is important and want it for somebody else. I
don't think it is; it’s not going to have any effect on me
because it has never seemed to me that whether the men were
standing with their guns, an:! no gun went off in 250 searches
and they went out in great force.
There isn't any question that they went out in
great force, and I don't think it makes any difference where
they are standing. The question is, how many went in the
house, and what reason they had for going in the house, what
justification they had for going in the house, and what they
did when they went in the house.
MR. MURPHY: And many times it may help the
Court to show who they are, and there is some suggestion that
they bore on monstrosity in their conduct.
THE COURT: I understand that.
MR. MURPHY: And that's our purpose, or one of
the purposes.
THE COURT: Well, I want you to put as many on
as you want on each raid, but it seems to me that setting out
the full deployment of the police is relatively unimportant.
We'll go ahead with this at ten minutes past
two. I was just trying to save time, and I think what is
1
•)
4
4
•>
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
1.4
14
IT)
1(1
17
18
l!l
20
21
•>•)
24
24
2.')
495
important is the total aum^r and what happened at the entry
and after the entry.
(Thereupon, at 1:1^ o'clock p.m. a recess was
taken until 2:JO p.m.)
1
■>
:i
4
5
(I
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1<>
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
496
\ AFTERNOON SESSION
(The Court reconvened at 2:10 o'clock p.m.)
THE COURT: In connection with the conversation
before lunch I don't mean to indicate that the number of
people who come may not have some bearing on the reasonable
ness and on race, but the way they are deployed whether in
front of the house or behind the house does not seem to me to
be the question.
I think the questions that we have got to devot€
our attention to are the reasons that the police had for
visiting the house and for searching the house, what was done,
and the number they took along to do it.
Then the circumstances at the time of the entry,
wnether there was a consent, and if there wasn!t a consent,
what was done, and then what was done inside the house once
they were there, and the number of people who came in the
house. I think the number of people on the outside is
relatively unimportant, I mean where they were outside so lonj
as they were there.
Does the plaintiff dispute that?
MR. NAER1T: Not entirely, Your Honor. I jus1
want to mention that an officer standing across the street
pointing a gun at the window or at the door may influence the
alleged consent or nonconsent when a gun is being pointed at
\
1
• )
4
r>
ii
7
s
!)
10
li
12
i:i
14
15
1(1
17
18
lit
20
21
22
22
24
25
497
him.
THE COURT: Well, they're hunting for murderer£
too or are hunting people for whom they have a warrant out as
being guilty of murder. You have to balance these things.
I agree with you that it's a question of consent
and I'm not saying that it's going to be easy in these cases.
There is evidence from one side. I don't know what the
evidence is going to be beyond the Lieutenant's testimony that
he has consent in every case, but itJs admitted that they
pushed in through the door without consent or without announc
ing their purpose in every case according to the Lieutenant;
so you have that much anyhow. I think that a man with a gun
who walks in the house and the other man across the street
with a gun or a man in the alley with a gun seems to me to be
relatively unimportant, if the roan with the weapon and with
the bulletproof vest has gone in the house before the man who
does the announcing.
Now, I don't see any use in wasting time on it,
on anything beyond that. Beyond that it gets to be almost a
matter of manners rather than of legal rights or judgment or
one thing or another.
All right.
THE CLERK: Lieutenant Carlton H. Manuel.
1
•)
:s
4
.’)
(I
7
s
!)
10
11
12
IS
14
15
1«
17
18
19
20
21
22
28
24
25
498
Thereupon
LIEUTENANT CARLTON H. MANUEL
resumed the witness stand and testified further as follows:
THE CLERK: You are still under oath, Lieutenai|)
MR. SAUSE: May I proceed?
THE COURT: Yes.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued.)
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Lieutenant, when yoxi went to 2.416 Eutaw Place
you indicated that how many officers in the crew went to the
door?
A
Q
A
Q
admittance?
A
Q
A
Q
A
at that time,
door.
Q
Four went to the front door.
Four?
Yes.
And do you remember what they did to gain
Did they knock or ring the doorbell?
They knocked and rang the doorbell.
Both?
Yes, sir.
Now, do you remember who answered the door?
I don't know the man or I didn't know the man
a man clad only in pajama bottoms answered the
And what happened after that? Tell His Honor
what happened after that?
330
1
■>
2
4
.")
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
lf>
i<;
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
28
24
25
499
A Well, Sergeant Shrimer went In and talked to
this man, and then 1 entered and told him what our reason was
for being there.
THE COURT: Who went? Who went in? Who did
you say went in first?
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
THE WITNESS:
Sergeant Shrimer.
How do you spell that?
And I followed him up.
How do you spell it?
S-h-r-i-m-e-r. George is his
first name.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Sergeant Shrimer, was he clad in a bulletproof
vest?
A Yes, sir.
Q And he had a weapon?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, he went in and then what happened?
A I entered after him.
Q All right, and what was said?
A And he was talking to the man when I walked in,
and I informed this man of our reason for being there, and
this gentleman walked back with me to the dining room.
Q I think it's fairly important for you to tell
His Honor exactly along as best you remember it whether you
3 3 1
1
•)
:i
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
28
24
25
500
told this man why you were there?
A I told him that we had information that one of
the Veneys had lived at this address or was at this address
at this time.
THE COURT: Do you remember which it was?
THE WITNESS: Samuel Veney.
THE COURT: I know, but you are saying, you
said "or" and were you saying that you told him "or" or that
you don't remember exactly what you told him or are you
correcting your first statement? I’m not quite clear.
THE WITNESS: I told him that w-a had informatio
that Samuel Veney lived at this address and could be at this
address at this time.
BY HR. SAUSE:
Q And what, if anything, did this man say?
THE COURT: Well, let me get this clear.
Didn't you know where Veney lived or what was the home of
Veney? I thought that the previous witness said that the
home of Veney was on or near Kirk Avenue?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Well, wa3 it true that you believed
that Sam Veney lived at this address?
THE WITNESS: He could be, yes, sir, according
to our information.
THE COURT: All right.
332
1
■>
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
«)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1(>
17
IS
19
20
21
22
22
24
25
501
BY MR. L*AUSE:
Q Well, the information that you referred to is
the information that you received from Sergeant Dunn; is that
correct?
A That is correct.
Q
force?
Lieutenant, how long have you been on the polio
A Eighteen years.
Q Is it unusual in the course of your work that
when you find that someone was a suspect or a wanted person
or whoever had more then one address?
Ho, sir, it's not unusual.
Q Now, you tolu this man who answered the door
that you had information that Samuel Veney had lived there
and might be there at that time?
A Yes, sir.
Q And what did you— what, if anything, did he say
to you in response to that?
n He told me that no one lived there by that name
and no one was there by that name now.
Q iill right. What happened after that?
h I told him that we had a warrant for this man,
and he told me that we were perfectly welcome to search.
Q Now, did you have any photographs with you at
that time? _ 3 3 3
502
10
n
12
12
14
i:>
i<;
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
A I did not have any photographs with me, no, sir.
Q And did you ask him if he knew anyone named Sam
Veney?
A Yes, sir.
Q And what was his answer to that?
A He said he knew no one by that name.
Q He said he knew no one by that name?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, from the time that this man opened the door
and the Sergeant stepped in, were both of those, in your sight
the whole time until you went, inside?
A Yes, sir.
Q What, if anything, did you see that the Sergeant
did after he went inside before you got inside?
A He didn't do anything; he talked to the man.
Q Talked to the man?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you see him pat the man down?
A No, sir.
Q Is it customary in police work to pat a man down
when he's only clad in pajama bottoms?
A No, sir. If he is fully clothed, then we would
pat him down.
Q Now, after you and the Sergeant went inside, what;
happened?
1
•)
:i
4
.")
(i
7
S
<)
10
11
12
12
14
ir>
l(j
17
IS
lit
20
21
•>2
22
24
22
503
A
Q
A
Connelly,
Q
A
Other men came in.
How many of them went in?
That was Detective Walker, De Paola, Sergeant
Lieutenant Go ace.
Anybody else?
And a couple of officers, I don't know their
names.
Q Now, Lieutenant, what did these men do when they
got inside?
A Detective Walker talked to a woman in the back
room. She wanted to know what was going on, and he talked to
her and told her what we were there for.
The rest of the officers then went to the second
and third floors or upper floors. I don't remember how many
floors there were and I remained there and talked to the man
who opened the door.
Q Now, these people that went up to the second
and third floors, these officers, were any of them clad in
bulletproof vests, bulletproof clothing?
A Yes, sir, they were.
Q Is it usual practice for persons wearing bullet
proof clothing to go to the second, to go to the other parts
of the house?
3 3 5
A Yes, sir.
Q And what is the reason for that?
1
•)
3
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
13
14
i r>
1 (i
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
23
24
25
504
A For their own protection.
Q Now, while you--did you ever talk to anyone elsi
other than this one man?
A No, sir, I never talked to anyone else.
Q Did he ever make any complaints to you about
how he was being created or about the fact that the search
was being undertaken?
A No, sir, he never made any complaints to me.
He said that this was a terrible thing and that we were
welcome to search, and he told me that he was a diabetic and
had ulcers too.
1 told him I knew what he was when he had a
diabetic because I‘m a diabetic myself, but his ulcers had
made him a lot worse.
Q Did you talk to anyone else in the house?
A No, sir.
Q Now, when you left did he say anything to you?
A He. wished us a Happy New Year and hoped we soon
foxmd the men. He was very pleasant.
Q Did he make any complaints at that time to you?
A He made no complaints to me whatsoever. He
seemed willing to co-operate.
Q Now, lieutenant, during the course of this
search or the portion of it that was under your view, did the
officers under your command conduct themselves in accordance
-336
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
1.1
14
15
1(i
17
18
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
505
with not only the regulations of the Department but with
common decency and propriety?
A Yes, sir.
MR. NABRIT: Objection, opinion evidence.
THE COURT: Well, he didn't see them all. He
was downstairs, and he wouldn't see what happened upstairs.
MR. SAUSE: Well, he saw some of these people.
THE COURT: Well, I don't think any impropriety
has been suggested, has there, in this case? I don't
remember any impropriety that is suggested except the claim
of searching this man or patting the man down in the front.
MR. NABRIT: There was the testimony that this
witness was taken upstairs at gunpoint.
THE COURT: She wasn't taken upstairs; she led
the men up, and the man behind her had a gun which was in her
back, and the paper said something sbout that they had a gun
in her back.
X didn't understand the gun was poked in the
woman's back from her testimony, out the man with the gun at
'‘ready1* was walking up behind her, immediately behind her,
and she was afraid that if he had slipped it might hurt her.
Is that the question that you were asking him?
MR. NABRIT: I object to the question.
THE COURT: I don't know what you mean by
"impropriety." If tnat's what you are talking about, if you
337
1
•)
:{
4
<i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
10
14
17)
1<>
17
18
1!»
20
21
22
20
24
27)
wane to ask him whether he noticed how a man going upstairs
carries a gun, he may or may not have. 3 3 8
JY MR. SAUSE:
Q Lieutenant, were all the officers who had fire
arms, pistols, were they to your knowledge specially trained
officers
A Yes, sir.
THE COURT: All with pistols?
MR. CAUSE: No, all other than pistols, fire
arms other than pistols.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q And you're familiar with the Department--
THE COURT: Well, I don't know. Is there any
dispute about that that the men on the ..quad had been given
guns, that they were specially trained? The evidence is tha
they were.
Do you have any evidence to dispute It? Is
there any need for the Commissioner to keep on having people
to testify to that?
MR. NABRIT: That the men with the firearns--
THE COURT: That the men had the machine guns
and were specially trained?
MR. NABRIT: I don't know. I have no evidenc
506
on the point.
Then there's no use going into it,THE COURT:
1
•)
2
4
5
<)
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
10
17
18
1(1
20
21
22
22
24
25
507
HR. NABRIT: I have no evidence on the point
either way; I don1t know.
THE COURT: All right. The Court, unless you
are going to contest it, 1 don't think it need be testified t(
over and over again if the evidence is that every man who
carried a machine gun or shotgun were men who had been traine<
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Did all the officers who had heavy firearms who
went to 2416 Eutaw Place in your view handle those firearms
in accordance with the regulations prescribed by the
Commissioner?
A Yes, sir.
Q And did you see anyone take anyone anywhere at
2416 Eutaw Place at gunpoint?
A No, I didn't, I did not.
Q Lieutenant, from the time that the door was
opened at this 2416 Eutaw Place until the time that you and
the other officers left there, approximately how long a time
was it?
A I'd say approximately fifteen minutes.
Q And there are three floors in that house?
A That's what I was told but I don't know for
sure.
Q And you didn't leave the first floor?
A I didn't leave the first floor, no, sir
3 3 9
508
hR. SAUSE: Your witness.
THE COURT: Were any Negro police officers or
involved in the search?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, Detective Walker.
THE COURT: Was he the only one?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: What was the total number of people
THE WITNESS: I seen two women and one man.
THE COURT: No, the total number of people who
participated in the search?
THE WITNESS: The raid?
THE COURT: Inside, outside and everything?
THE WITNESS: I'd say approximately twenty.
THE COURT: And he was the only Negro?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, to my recollection.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. MURPHY: Your Honor, there were about
thirteen or fourteen, and we have them all here, our records.
They indicate thirteen or fourteen.
THE COURT: All right. Thirteen or fourteen
altogether outside and in you mean?
MR. MURPHY: Altogether, yes, sit',
THE COURT: Well, one of the questions that I
don't think is a legal question but it's a practical question
OY^E \
\\
detectives
involved?
1
•)
2
4
:>
(i
7
s
!»
10
11
12
12
14
IT)
l(i
17
18
10
20
UT
22
22
24
25
X
in the case, is the evidence generally has been that there wai
one Negro along, and everytime there has been any evidence
\
there whs one Negro along that I have heard so far.\
\ Sometimes there's been no discussion as to
whether there^as anyone but at least the evidence has been
that there was one.
Now, can the Court have for what it may be
worth the percentage or policemen in the Baltimore Police
Department who were Negroes?
MR. MURPHY: We can find that out, Your Honor.
We could find that out from the Commissioner.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. MURPHY: Do you want an officer to testify
to that?
THE COURT: Oh, no, I just want to know what it
is, but since these raids or these entries and so forth were
being made in force in a Negro neighborhood, one of the
questions that occurred to me was why there were no more than
one Negro in these large groups under the circumstances, and
was just interested to know if there was a reason.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Lieutenant, your recollection was that there
were about twenty men there?
A I'd say around twenty; I couldn't, I didn't
509
341
510
129
1 count them.
• ) Q They were men under your supervision, from your
:{ Bureau? 3 4 2
4 A Yes, sir.
f> Q What weapons were you carrying when you went to
(i the door?
7 A My side arm, .38 police positive.
S Q And what weapon was the officer preceding you
!) carrying?
10 A lie was carrying a shotgun.
11 Q How many officers entered the house?
12 A I'd say there was six or seven, seven of us.
i:l Q Lieutenant Detective Walker?
14 A Yes.
1.') Q And do you know Officer Walker's first name?
16 A Oliver Walker.
17 Q Oliver Walker. And someone named Connelly?
IS A I don't know his first name, no, sir; he's a
10 sergeant.
20 Q A sergeant?
21 A Tea, sir.
22 Q And you referred to a third name which I didn’t
20 get. What was that? \
24 A De Paola .
2o Q De Paola ? \
1
•_)
4
r>
ti
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1«
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
22
511
A Yes, Robert De Paola.
THE COURT: The man who went in first he said
was Sergeant George Shrimer.
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q And someone named Gonce?
A Gonce, yes, Lyman Gonce.
Q How do you spell it?
A L-y-m-a-n G-o-n-c-e.
Q Who was the highest ranking officer who was in
there? Strike that.
What bureau is he from?
A He’s from the Northern District.
Q Was he in command or were you?
A I was in command.
Q Were there others who entered?
A Yes, sir.
Q Do you know the others, the name I mean?
A A couple of other officers, I don't remember
their names. I don’t know the names.
Q You don't know the names?
A No, sir.
Q Was there somebody there from Homicide?
A Not that I recall, no, sir.
Q When the door was opened what were you doing wit\\
1
•)
:{
4
.')
(>
7
,K
!)
10
11
12
1:1
14
15
1(>
17
18
19
20
21
22
28
24
25
512
your .38?
A I had it in my hand.
Q You had it in your hand?
A Yes, sir.
Q \ Where was it pointing?
A Sir?\
Q Where was it pointed?
A I had it pointed at the ground at that time.
MR. SAUSE: Excuse me.
If Your Honor please, I just want to point out
at this time, and we're not trying to try Your Honor's
patience about these guns, but the plaintiff keeps coming bacfe
to this, and they seem to attach some significance to it, and
the only way in which we can rebut it is to show what, when,
and why, and that's all, and I'm sorry 1 interrupted.
Mit. NaBRIT: I just asked him whether he was
pointing a gun at a person.
BY MR. NABR1T:
Q
A
Q
A
Q
The door opened in or out? Do you remember?
Opened in.
\Opened in?
V‘ • ■ \Yes.
Had you had any conversation with the man who
opened the door, any communication with him before he opened
it? \
1
•)
:{
-L
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
If.
1(>
17
IS
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
513
A No, sir.
Q Did you ever talk with, did any of your other
men talk with him from an upstairs window?
A No, sir.
Q Did any of your men tell someone to come down
from upstairs?
A I did not hear it, no, sir.
Q Where were you standing at that time?
A I was standing back on the curb back of a car.
Q When the knocking began?
A Yes, sir. 1 took cover as all the rest of them
did.
Q Well, how many people were actually up by the
door during the knocking?
A Four.
Q Four?
A That's right.
Q So that you were behind the car?
A Yes, sir.
Q And how many feet away?
A Approximately fifteen feet.
Q And were you to the right or the left of the
door?
A To the right of the door.
Q How many feet to the right of the door?
343
\
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
M
It
10
11
12
1H
14
15
1(1
17
18
lit
20
21
28
24
25
514
away?
A Two feet, almost right in front of the door.
THE COURT: And standing about fifteen feet
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
BY MR. NABRIT ••
Q And behind this car, behind the automobile?
A Yes, sir.
Q Which was parked on the near side of the street?
A Yes, sir.
Q One of your cars?
A Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Well, now, who went in? What was
the order In which these people went in?
THE WITNESS: Sergeant Shrimer went in first
and then I was right after him.
THE COURT: What did the other people do, the
men who came up to the door?
THE WITNESS: They followed me in.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Well, how soon did you get inside after Sergeant
Shrimer?
A Seconds.
Q Seconds?
A Seconds.
Q How many seconds? £44
1
•>
:{
4
.">
(i
7
8
!)
10
1]
12
12
t
14
IT)
1<>
17
IS
10
20
21
22
22
24
2.7
515
A Two or three seconds, from the time It took me
to go from this car to the door where he was after the door
opened.
Q Did you run or walk?
A 1 didn't run 1 made a— fast steps.
Q You got in as soon as you could?
A Yes, sir.
Q After the door was opened?
A Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Was Sergeant Shrimer covering the
man who opened the door?
THE WITNESS: No, sir, he was, he had the gun
in front of him but he wasn't pointing it at him or anything.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Was he pointing the gun up the steps behind the
man?
A No, sir, he was pointing it up at the ceiling.
Q Was he looking behind the man up the steps?
A The man was standing in the hallway; he wasn't
up the steps.
Q Were they behind him, the steps? Any steps
behind of him?
A Back of him there were some steps, yes, sir.
Q When you entered did you look up those steps?
A No, sir. I talked to the man right in the
345
135
10
n
12
i:i
14
lf>
Hi
17
18
10
20
21
22
28
24
25
hallway.
Q Did you see anyone come down those steps?
A Later on a woman came down the steps, and 1
asked for a key.
Q Asked for a key?
A Yes, sir.
Q You hadn't seen her come down before that?
A No, sir.
Q Now, who did you find on the first floor?
A I found this man, the woman standing in the door
in the rear room.
Q Now, when you went in was her door open?
A She opened the door, and Detective Walker was
talking to her, yes, sir.
Q Were you there?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you look in the room?
A No, sir, I didn't look in the room.
Q How was she dressed?
A She was fully clothed as far as I could see.
Q Fully clothes?
A Yes, sir.
Q Was she in night clothes or day clothes?
A It was dark; 1 couldn't see. She looked like
she was fully clothed.
516
346
1
')
:i
4
5
(i
7
s
I)
10
11
12
14
14
15
10
17
18
10
20
21
22
24
24
25
Q Well, you don't know whether she had day clothes
or night clothes?
MR. SAUSE: If Your Honor please, he has
answered it; he said she was fully clothed.
THE COURT: Well, he doesn't know. It was dar
and he doesn't know whether she had night clothes on or day
i k 347clothes on.
517
BY MR. NABRIT:
Where were you standing at the time?
A I was standing at the dining room, and she was
across the room, entirely across the room at the door.
Q Do you see that woman in the courtroom now?
A I wouldn't know her if I'd seen her, no, sir.
Q What room was she standing in?
A She was standing at the rear door.
\
THE COURT: Of the dining room, the dining room
THE WITNESS: No, the door, the room that led
off the dining room. I was standing at the doorway that lead]!
into the living room, the dining room, and then there was a
room in the back that she was standing in this doorway, and
Detective Walker was standing there talking with her.\
THE COURT: And there was no light? There was
no light on out there?
THE WITNESS: There was no bright light, t̂ o,
sir.
1
•>
2
4
>>
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1(4
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
518
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Did you see any children on this floor?
A I seen no children, no, sir.
Q Go back to the front door. Describe what it
looked like. Are there steps in front?
A One step there, 1 believe.
Q One step?
A Yes, sir. Well, there is about, there are thre
steps leading up to the vestibule, and then there's one step
up after the inside door, as well as I remember.
Q Is there a middle door or single door?
A There's a double door outside and a single door
inside, as well as I remember.
Q When the door was opened the man at the door,
Shrimer, went right in?
A Yes, sir.
Q And how far inside did he go before you got in
there?
A Approximately six or eight feet.
Q Where was he at that point?
A He was in the hallway.
Q In the hallway?
A Yes, sir.
Q How many--to get to the hallway do you go
through three doors?
348
1
• )
8
4
a
(i
7
>4
«)
Trr
n
12
18
14
ir>
1(4
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
28
24
2o
519
A As well as 1 remember, there is the hall, in the
hall there'8 a doorway at the end, and then there's a double
door in the living room.
THE COURT: Well, he said to get into the hall
way, and he said there was an outside door, and I don't know
this house, but it's not uncommon in these houses in that part
of the City to have a double outside door that opens in the
middle, and then a large inside door inside the vestibule.
That's what I took him to mean by his descriptio
THE WITNESS: That's correct, sir.
BY &R. NABRIT:
\ o Now, between the car and the front door there is
a walkway| is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q Is that walkway level? Is it level?
A As well as I remember, yes, sir.
Q As well as you remember it was level?
A Yes, sir.
Q No steps?
A Yes, there's two or three steps up to the
vestibule, and then one step inside the vestibule.
\Q And that's a regular two feet of door as you go
in it opens on the sidewalk? \
A I believe there's a couple of steps.
THE COURT: Well, I guess this is quite a largd
1
•>
4
r>
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
14
14
15
Id
17
18
10
20
21
22
24
24
27)
520
tse. Where is it? Where is it with respect to Whitelock
Street?
THE WITNESS: It’s about a half a block south
of Whitelock Street, I believe.
BY MR. ^BRIT:\
Now, having entered the first door, are there
steps there?
A Yes, sir.
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
Entering the door?
As well as I remember, yes, sir.
And then you got to the hallway?
Yes, sir.\
Where you found the Sergeant talking to a man?
Yes, sir.
Is that what you're saying?
Yes, sir.
And what was the position of this man? Where
was the man in the house standing when you got there?
A He was standing there talking with Sergeant
Shrimer.
Q
A
Q
A
Q
Where was his hands?
Whose hands? \
This man, the occupant of the house?
It was at his side.
Not against the wall?
1
•)
:i
4
<i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
ir,
l(i
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
2o
521
A Not when I entered, no, sir.
Q \ Did you see him against the wall at any time?
A I didn't see him against the wall at any time,
no, sir.
Q And no children on the first floor?
A 1 seen no children, no, sir.
Q Now, after this door to the rear room was opened
what happened after that?
A What do you mean what happened?
Q Tell me what your men did after they examined
that room?
A Nobody entered that room. Detective--the
woman came to the door, and Detective Walker was talking to
her, and nobody entered that room at all.
Q Did your men search any other room before they
left?
A No, sir. Oh, they searched all the rooms, all
the rooms had been looked over on that floor, yes.
Q And where was this occupant, this man that let
you in, during this period?
A He was standing there in the dining room talking
to me.
Q Did you see him in your sight all the time?
A Yes, sir, except for once he went to the cellar
to open the door, to a room, I believe, or he went down there
1
■)
:t
4
.’)
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
Hi
17
18
10
20
21
•)•>
28
24
25
522
to get a key for the girl.
Q Did you go down the cellar?
A No, sir. I stayed on the first floor at all
times.
Q Who went into the cellar? What officers?
A I don't know what officers went down there.
Q Did this man go by himself or go alone, this man
the occupant?
A No, he went down with one of the officers.
Q Was he asked to go?
A Yes, sir, he was asked for the key.
Q The key to what?
A The key to a room. I don't know what room it
was. Somebody asked him for a key, and he went to the cellar
to get the key or went to the cellar to open the door.
Q You didn't go on the second floor?
A I didn't, I didn't leave the first floor at any
time.
Q What day, what day of the month was this?
A January--December 27th, I think it was.
Q This happened on December 27th and he told you
’’Happy New Year"?
A Yes, sir.
Q What, where was the other three officers pointin
their guns while you were going from behind the car into the
1
•>
:i
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
1.4
14
15
l(i
17
18
111
20
21
22
22
24
25
523
houses?
A They were pointed at the ceiling.
Q At the ceiling of the house?
A Pointed at the ceiling of the house or air or
whatever, outside it would be into the air; inside it would be
into the ceiling.
Q Were they in the vestibule, in the hallway or on
the steps?
A They were on the steps and in the vestibule.
THE COURT: Were you given instructions to poinl
the guns at the ceiling or up in the air?
THE WITNESS: That's the practice, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Well, I guest; we are going to have
to have evidence on that. The last officer said the practice
was to cover the places where the men were expected to be, anc
I was trying to see whether there were some things that we
could agree on as being practice.
Do you say that when they came in they didn't
cover the stairways with their guns, that none of the men
covered the stairway with their guns?
THE WITNESS: Not that I seen, no, sir.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q You say that the men had the guns pointed at the
ceiling? And you mean before he went inside the vestibule,
not on the steps; right?
1
• )
8
4
5
(i
7
8
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
I(j
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
28
24
25
524
\ THE COURT: Well, he said that the man who went
in, he had testified that the man— you mean this time or the
previous time? The previous time he testified that the man
who went in first had the gun pointed at the ceiling and
neither at the man who let him in nor up the steps.
That's what he said some time ago. Mow, this
time he has told us about the three men there and the man out
side, and his testimony of what the practice was, and the
testimony of the last Lieutenant with respect to the practice
was different, and 1 suppose we'll have to have enough evidenc
to make some finding of whether there is a practice, if it is
important.
I gather that the plaintiff thinks it is
important, and therefore 1 don't want to make a ruling that it
is or isn't at this time, but to the extent that it may be
important we had better get the facts straight.
Is there a rule on the matter?
MR. MURPHY: I don't know that there is any
rule in the Manual, but the Lieutenant has testified as to
what is the practice in this situation.
THE COURT: Well, he has testified, and the
other Lieutenant who was on the stand this morning testified
just the opposite, and because of that I think we had better
have a little more.
He said the practice was to point them at the
1
2
:i
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
14
14
15
I<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
24
24
25
places where they thought people would be likely to come, and
he was talking about the man outside and not inside.
MR. MURPHY: Yes.
MR. NABRIT: Except that the man inside it's a
different situation.
525
THE COURT: All right.
BY MR . NABRIT:
------1 \ As I understand your testimony, Lieutenant, whei
you were coming from the car to the house, from behind the cai
to the house, I understood you to say that these three other
men were pointing their guns at the ceiling?
A They were holding them in a ready position,
which was pointed—
Q You said at the ceiling?
A That's right, yes, sir.
Q And then you told me that some of them were
inside the house in the vestibule and others on the steps or
were they all in?
A Some was on the steps and some were in the
I couldn't have got in if they'd all been in thevestibule.
vestibule.
Q
A
Q
A
Were they in a sort of single file?
I would say that, yes, sir.
So that you were able to go by?
Yes, sir.
\
1
■ )
4
5
<>
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
1
1<i
17
1H
lit
20
21
22
22
24
25
526
Q
V
Were any of them beyond the vestibule into the
main ha livefay when you got there?
A Not as I recollect, no, sir.
Q They were there just a second later?
\
A Yes.
\
Q As soon As you got there?
A Yes.
Q And you're sure they didn't go in before you?
A Not as I recollect, no, sir.
Q How many raids did you go on?
A 1 went on quite a few.
Q Including this, how many?
A I'd say about maybe ten.
Q How many others this evening December 26th or
27th, that night?
A I went on one other than this.
Q That night?
A Yes.
Q Any later that night?
A No, sir. \
Q Did you go on any the previous day?
A Yes.
Q How many? \
A Two or three.
Q What time did you decide that you would raid
3 5 0
527
145
!)
10
11
12
i:i
14
15
l(i
17
1H
lit
20
20
24
2.')
this house?
A
Q
A
Q
It's approximately one o'clock, one a.m.
What time did you actually enter? . ̂
Approximately one-thirty.
When you were on surveillance did you see anyone
\
go in or out of the house?
A No, sir, we did not.
Q Did you see anyone inside the house?
A No, sir.
Q Did you see lights in the house?
A Yes, sir.
Q What floor?
A The first floor.
Q
A
a later tim
A
Q
A
Q
What time?
It was a little after one.
No, sir.
No, sir, what? Which?
1 didn't make them that night, no, sir.
When did you make the notes if you remember the
time?
A That's the report that I made. I'm referring
to the dates only on that.
Q Of the report that you made?
1
■>
:{
4
r>
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
If)
1(5
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
22
528
Yes, sir.
That's the same one you are holding in your hand
Yes, sir. I have this here but it's nothing
concerning this.
Q Were you referring to those papers in your direc
testimony?
A No, sir.
MR. SAUSE: If Your Honor please, if he's going
to call for them they are going into evidence. I believe
that's the rule.
THE COURT: If he calls for them, if he called
on you to produce something--
MR. NABRIT: The witness is looking at them.
THE COURT: And you examine them and the witnes
has been using the notes, the papers to refresh his recollec
tion, I think he may look at the papers which have been used
to refresh his recollection, and the witness says he's been
using one paper to refresh his recollection and not the other.
MR. SAUSE: And only show the one.
THE COURT: Show him the one that has been used
to refresh his recollection, and I will not say or decide that
that should be admitted in evidence. That's not my understan
ing of the rule. If he asked you to produce the paper and
you produced it voluntarily, unless you run into something lik
the Jencks Act, under the Maryland rule, that makes it
]
‘>
:i
4
<>
7
S
!)
10
n
12
1M
14
15
1<>
17
18
19
20
21
22
20
21
25
529
admissible; but I don't believe that rule applies when a man
is using something to refresh his recollection.
Counsel is entitled to know what he is using to
refresh his recollection. That's my understanding of the
rule. If I'm wrong I will be glad to hear authority.
(Paper was handed to counsel.)
MR. NABRIT: I want to see what you have.
THE COURT: Both sides are entitled to look at
it.
THE WITNESS: This is the official report that
I made.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q When did you write this report that you've been
referring to?
A The date is on the heading, sir.
Q Would you read it, please, for the Court?
MR. SAUSE: Just a minute. Is this going in?
THE COURT: Well, if he uses it as part of his
examination I'll allow you then to put it in.
MR. SAUSE: Yes.
THE COURT: He has a right to look at it, but
once he decides to use it I guess it comes in evidence unless
the plaintiff has some reason to suggest the contrary.
I'll cross bridges as they come. \Nobody has
offered it yet.
530
148
24
made, was written.
THE WITNESS: This was written on January 12,
1965.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q What record, did you consult the records and
papers before you wrote it?
A No, sir.
Q None at all?
A I consulted the report of Sergeant Dunn.
Q The report that you previously identified in
your testimony before?
A Yes, sir.
Q You read that report of Sergeant Dunn before
you wrote your report; is that correct?
A That's correct, yes.
Q And you incorporated some of Sergeant Dunn's
information into your report?
A Yes, sir.
THE COURT: I want to get this: Was this
report made in the ordinary course of business or was it made
at the request of the Attorney General or by whom, if you know,
as a part of the defense of this case?
THE WITNESS: It was made at the request of
MR. NABRIT: 1 asked him when the report was
2.'>
the Attorney General.
1
• )
:i
4
7
S
<>
10
11
12
i:$
1±~
1.7
Hi
17
1H
10
20
21
22
22
24
2o
531
\ THE COURT: All right.
MR. NABRIT: Your Honor, may I have the Court's
indulgence? May I have the Court's indulgence for a moment?
TIffi "COURT: Certa inly.
BY MR. N&BRIT:
' Q Lieutenant, isn't it true that your report
indicates that your procedure was for the four men you named
would go into the house and that then you would go into the
house?
A The four men would go in the house.
Q This paragraph 3 of your report, and I just ask
you if it is true?
A Four men went to the door.
Q Is that what your report says?
MR. SAUSE: If Your Honor please, there's
nothing in the report contrary to this.
THE COURT: I think the report will be admitted\
in evidence at thi&, instance of one side or the other before
very long.
MR. SAUSE: \Yes, sir.
\
THE COURT: I don't think this is improper
cross-examination so far. v
- \ \
I'll overrule the objection, if it was an
objection, at this time and will be glad to hear further
\ Aobjections when you have any. \
J
•)
:i
4
f)
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
i:i
14
15
1<>
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
2-'l
24
25
532
Q You may answer the question.
A The report says that three— four men entered the
house and I entered after them, but they were at the door.
Q So, which is correct now, that one entered and
then you or that four entered and then you?
A The one entered and I, they were at the vestibuL
and I entered.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q They crossed the threshold of the door before
you did; is that right? At the door?
A Yes, sir.
Q All four of them?
A Yes, sir.
Q So that nobody outside was left to point at the
sky now before you?
THE COURT: Well, they had people there.
THE WITNESS: There were people on the outside.
THE COURT: Well, he had thirteen people, he
had between thirteen and twenty.
MR. NABRIT: I voider stand, but I was phrasing m
question that there was nobody among this four who was outside
before you got in; is that correct? Who stood outside when
you went in pointing a rifle at the sky?
THE WITNESS: Not necessarily; they could be in
the vestibule,on the steps.
353
533
151
10
11
12
12
14
15
Hi
17
18
111
20
21
22
22
24
25
Q Did you move from behind the back of the car
before the front door was opened?
A No, sir.
Q And as soon as the door opened the four men were:
standing right by the door?
A Yes, sir.
Q Moved forward?
A Yes, sir.
Q All four of them moved forward?
A Yes, sir.
Q And you moved forward too?
A Yes, sir.
Q And they went through the door before you did?
A They were standing in the vestibule or the door
way when I went in.
Q All four of them went through the outer door
before you did?
A They were--
THE COURT: You don't mean the outer door?
You mean the door into the vestibule.
MR. NABRIT: Yes, the interior of the house.
THE COURT: No.
MR. NABRIT: The door leading in.
THE COURT: As I understand it, the vestibule
BY MR. NABRIT:
354
1
•)
:i
4
5
(i
7
S
!(
10
11
12
1.4
14
15
10
17
1H
1!1
20
21
22
24
24
25
534
is not inside of the house. Maybe I am wrong in my legal,
but I have lived in Baltimore a long time, and the door that
is usually locked is the inner door, and that's the door to
the house.
The vestibule door is usually unlocked in Baltim
City and I've lived, visited row houses for a long time, and
unless the practice has changed, and I would say this that the
testimony certainly has been that the men, that all four of
them at all times the testimony has been that all four were in
the vestibule before, that all that could get in were ahead of
him.
His testimony and his report differed, and it
is whether one or four were in through the house door before
him. That's what I understand, and if you're talking about
the vestibule door, you've been treating it as the house door,
and I think that's where the misunderstanding may be.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q When your men arrived was the outer door locked,
the door that leads from the street into the vestibule?
A I don't know whether it was locked or not.
Q The door was closed?
A I do not know that.
THE COURT: Well, didn't you say that the men
went into the vestibule ahead of you?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
355
1
•)
:{
4
r»
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
ir>
Ki
17
1H
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
535
THE COURT: That all four men went in ahead of
you?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Well, how did they get in if it was
locked?
THE WITNESS: Well, apparently it was unlocked.
THE COURT: All right.
THE WITNESS: Unlocked, Your Honor.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q
A
Q
Did they open it or someone else did?
No, sir, none of my men opened the door.
None of your men opened the outside door from
the vestibule, from the street into the vestibule?
A
Q
A
Q
If it was unlocked they opened it.
If it was unlocked they opened it?
Yes, sir.
I thought you were looking at it all the time?
You don't know whether they opened it or someone opened it?
A
Q
hallway?
A
It was dark there; I couldn't see everything.
So you couldn't see into the, clearly into the
As I entered/ yes, I could see into the hallway,
yes, sir.
Q From where?
A As I entered the house.
3 5 6
1
•)
:i
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
IK
17
18
1!)
20
21
->2
22
24
25
Q You couldn't see into the hallway from behind
the truck?
A No, I couldn't see into the hallway but as soon
as I seen the door opened I entered, I started for the door.
Q You're not able to tell then whether the outer
door was opened by your men or by someone inside the house?
MR. SAUSE: He said that.
THE WITNESS: I could not say whether the othei
3 5 7door was open, no, sir.
MR. SAUSE: This is repetition, Your Honor.
If Your Honor please, counsel doesn't have to
make asides, when I make my objection, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Well, what is your objection?
MR. SAUSE: Your Honor, I want to object.
THE COURT: Well, what is the objection, what
is the ruling you want to make?
MR. NABRIT: His objection is to the cross-
examination.
THE COURT: Well, I'm not addressing you at tt
moment, but what is your objection?
MR. SAUSE: That the question was, if Your Hoii
536
please, repetitive.
THE COURT:
ruling? On what?
Well, are you asking me for a
We are on the grounds that theMR. SAUSE:
155
10
11
12
14
14
15
l(i
17
I T
1!)
20
21
22
24
24
25
crose-examination is asking questions which are repetitive.
THE COURT: Has the question been answered or
is there any question before the Court?
THE REPORTER: No, sir.
THE COURT: 1 didn't think there was. I
thought he was testing his recollection.
HR. SAUSE: And this is repetition.
THE COURT: Repetition?
MR. SAUSE: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: And you made a comment that didn't
call for the Court's ruling and you got a reply.
Now, let's address your remarks to the witness
or to the Court on both sides, and if you address the Court
generally it's best to ask for a ruling.
All right. Any more questions on cross-examina
tion?
MR. NABRIT: Yes, sir.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Lieutenant, did you make the decision to go to
this house based on the oral report from Sergeant Dunn?
A I did.
Q And that alone?
A I did.
Q And you made it upon the basis of the oral
report alone?
537
358
1
•)
:t
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
i:i
14
1.')
l(i
17
18
lit
20
21
22
28
24
25
538
A That's correct.
Q And you never saw Sergeant Dunn's written report
until after?
A That's correct.
Q Was Sergeant Dunn along with the raid?
A No, sir.
Q Sergeant Dunn's oral report to you did not
contain--did it or did it not contain or include the date when
the check was supposed to have been cashed?
A Yes, sir.
Q And what date was given you?
A January the 9th or June 19th '63, as well as I
remember.
Q June the 19, 1963?
A Yes, sir, or '64 rather.
Q Well, which was it?
A 1964.
3 5 9
Q Are you sure?
A That is the information he gave me, yes, sir.
Samuel
Q Have you received any reports of a subsequent
investigation of a Samuel Veney?
A I haven't received none, no, sir.
Did you make any subsequent investigation of a
Veney wfto-aised to live at that address?
A No, sir.
1
•>
:i
4
5
<>
7
,s
!)
10
11
12
14
14
15
1(5
17
18
1!1
20
21
22
21
24
25
539
Q You have no knowledge of his present whereabouts
A No, sir.
Q \ Of any sort?
A No, sir.
Q Do you know of any other officers who may have?
THE COURT: Well, I don't understand the releva
or materiality of this. If it has I'm glad to have you do
it, but I just don't want to go off into sidelines.
The question was when he made his entry, what he
knew then, and what's been turned up since would seem to me
V
to be relatively unimportant from your point unless you want t
confirm the fact that Veney was in the Navy and entered the
Navy at a certain time, in which event the quickest way to
get that is to ask Mr. Murphy if he will stipulate it.
MR. SAUSE: If Your Honor please, the great
difficulty here is this that counsel presupposes that his
clients showed the same candor with the officers that they die
with him and told them that there was no Sam Veney there.
THE COURT: Well, of course, it's admitted that:
he told the officers that he didn't know a Sam Veney.
MR. SAUSE: Yes, sir, that's right.
THE COURT: And he said afterv^rd that he did
\
recall that he did know one and that he had been scared.\
V
MR. SAUSE: That's right.
THE COURT: I think that's the effect of it, of
1
•)
:i
4
.’)
(i
7
s
!(
10
11
12
12
14
ir>
l(i
17
18
1!)
20
21
•>2
22
24
25
540
words to that effect, as I recall it.
Now, that has nothing to do with it, and the onl
fact that has any possible bearing on this case as to after
wards is that if you checked and found the witness said that
Sam Veney who had lived on Eutaw Place did in fact enter the
Navy, whenever he entered it and if you have any information
as to his dates of leave.
They are the only possible facts which could be
important, as far as I see.
If they can be stipulated, fine. If they can't
I suppose I can't prevent plaintiffs' counsel from trying to
get evidence to support the credibility of his witness'
statement.
MR. SAUSE: I don't see how he can get it from
this witness.
THE COURT: Are you prepared to stipulate
whether or not this man Veney entered the Navy at a certain
time?
MR. SAUSE: No, sir.
THE COURT: All right. Then I suppose I have
got to let them go up some blind alleys if you question the
testimony of these people that this Sam Veney that they are
referring to entered the Navy whenever they say he did and
was home on vacation at one or both of the times that they
said. He has already referred to it, that they testified
1
•>
:t
4
r>
<;
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
IT)
10
17
IS
10
20
21
22
22
24
2.7
that ha was home on vacation at one time, at one hour, or one
month as being some support for your theory, and do you
challenge it?
If not you don't have to go any further.
Is there any question about that?
MR. MURPHY: Well, I just found that out the
541
other day and it's just a question, and we can inquire into
THE COURT: Well, suppose you just find out
about it.
MR. MURPHY: Just the fact that this is not
the Sam Veney that the police were looking for, if he lives
there.
THE COURT: Well, it seems pretty clear that
it's a different Sam Veney.
MR. MURPHY: Oh, yes.
THE COURT: And I don't see any point in chasii
this, if it's admitted that it's a different Sam Veney and
there is no contradiction of the fact that he went in the
Navy, I don't see any reason to go beyond that in this case.
If either side disagrees I'll be glad to hear
your reasons why.
MR. NABRIT: Well, again, I gather there is no
stipulation.
MR. SAUSE: You gathered correctly.
360
1
•)
:t
4
it
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
18
14
lo
Hi
17
18
10
20
Til
22
22
24
25
542
THE COURT: Well, there's no stipulation but
it's not contested. We've got a stipulation that it's a
different Sam Veney.
MR. NABRIT: I gathered I didn't even get that
stipulation.
THE COURT: I thought Mr. Murphy said so.
MR. MURPHY: Your Honor, for the purposes of
this argument I will agree with everything you said.
THE COURT: Well, if it's just a question of
checking the fingerprints, I think I could do that with five
fairly clear prints.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Have you made any efforts to compare the finger
prints of Sam Veney with the fingerprints on the card, on the
liquor store card?
A I was not aware of the fingerprints being on
that card until today.
THE COURT: I don't see any use in harrying hi
on that. We've got more important issues than that. Mr.
Murphy has admitted that it is a different for the purpos
of this case.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Did you testify on direct examination that your
eyes were on the man who opened the door and the officer who
first went in from the moment the door was entered, the doorX 4
1
•>
4
4
5
<i
7
s
«)
l(j
11
12
14
14
1.')
i<;
17
18
1!)
20
21
■’2
24
24
25
543
was opened until the time you got into the house; is that youe
original testimony?
A I started for the door as soon as the door was
opened, yes, sir.
Q I asked you if your eyes were on those two men
from the time you went from behind the car until you actually
got into the house?
A My eyes couldn't be on them because I had to
watch where 1 was walking.
Q Your eyes weren't on them?
A Not on them constantly, no, because I had to
watch where I was walking going up steps.
Q And coming around an automobile?
A Yes, sir.
Q So that your prior testimony was incorrect that
your eyes were on them all the time?
MR. SAUSE: Oh, Your Honor.
THE WITNESS: 1 did not say that my eyes was
on them at all times, no, sir.
MR. SAUSE: I object.
THE COURT: If you give him a chance to correct
it, why object?
MR. SAUSE: Well, Your Honor—
THE COURT: I don't know whether he said it or
not.
THE COURT:
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
<1
10
11
12
HI
14
1.')
1<>
17
18
10
20
21
22
24
24
25
544
MR. MURPHY: It’s a different question whether
his eyes were on them constantly or not.
THE COURT: I suggest that both sides,even
against the weight of the evidence,consider that the Judge has
some common sense.
How, ask him another question.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q You don’t know for sure whether this man was
searched in the time while you were coming from behind the car
to the walkway?
A If he was searched it would have had to be
mighty quick.
Q Well, a quick search could have been accomplishe
without your observing it?
A It could have been.
Q And a search of a pair of pajama bottoms
wouldn't take long, would it?
A No, it wouldn't take long, no.
MR. NABRIT: I have no further questions.
THE COURT: Any redirect?
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. MURPHY:
Q Do you know whether the practice in these
investigations containing, involving guns was to keep the
safety on or off?
1
• >
4
4
(i
7
S
«>
10
11
12
1.4
14
15
IK
17
18
10
20
21
22
24
24
27)
545
A The safety is on at all times.
Q And what is the ready position? Can you attemp
to state that in words?
A The gun is held like this in ready position
(indicating).
Q Is that a kind of port arms position that you
have?
A Yes, sir.
MR. MURPHY: Thank you, very much, sir,
Lieutenant.
RECROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Lieutenant, does the Rising submachine gun have
a safety?
A I cannot explain that because I don't know much
about them.
Q
A
Q
A
Q
you release
A
Q
A
Does the shotgun have a safety?
Yes, sir.
Is the shotgun fired by cocking with the thumb?
No, sir.
Does it make a clicking sound? That is, if
it to fire, does it make a clicking sound?
Racking it, yes, makes a clicking sound.
Racking?
Yes.
1
•>
2
4
3
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
13
l(i
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
23
546
THE COURT: That is, releasing the safety is
racking?
\
THE WITNESS: No, sir, you don't have to releat
the safety to rack them, no, sir.
\ THE COURT: Well, if the safety is on at all
times, how do you release the safety?
THE WITNESS: In this new type of shotgun that
we've gone, that we've got the safety can, the safety of the
gun can be used to throw a shell into the chamber and the
safety is on at all times. You do not have to take the
safety off at any time on this new type shotgun that we have.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q That is referred to as a pump gun?
A That is correct.
MR. NABRIT: No further questions.
THE COURT: Well, I'm afraid I'm not such an
expert to understand that, and perhaps you might bring one
and explain it to me.
MR. MURPHY: Thank you, very much, Lieutenant.
(Witness excused.)
THE COURT: There may be one in the Marshal's
office; I don't know.
547
Thereupon
OLIVER WALKER
was called as a witness for and on behalf of the defendant
and, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified
as follows:
THE CLERK: State your full name.
THE WITNESS: Detective Oliver Walker, Robbery
Squad, Baltimore Police Department.
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Detective Walker, tell His Honor your regular
assignment?
A I am in the Assault and Robbery Squad of the
Detective Bureau of the Baltimore Police Department.
Q Detective, directing your attention to the early
morning hours of December 27th of last year, did you make an
inspection of certain premises at 2416 Eutaw Place?
A I did, sir.
Q Now, Detective, have you received clearance and
have you taken special training in the handling of heavy
weapons of the Police Department?
A As far as the riot guns or the shotguns are
concerned I have had training in the use of the shotgun, yes.
Q You have?
A Yes, sir.
1
•)
:i
4
r>
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
i:>
i<;
17
is
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
548
Q Now, on that night did you have any of those
weapons in which you had been specially trained in the handli
of?
A 1 did, I had a shotgun.
Q A shotgun?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you have any protective clothing?
A Yes, I had on a bulletproof protective vest on
my body.
Q Now, tell His Honor what your part was in the
inspection of these premises on December 27th?
A On the night of December 27th in company with
Sergeant Shrimer, Lieutenant Manuel, Detective DePaola, and
Sergeant Connelly, we made a search of the premises of 2416
Eutaw Place,
I was on the first floor of these premises and
I went to the rear of the first floor where I was told by the
man that had entered, given us admission to the house, that a
lady by the name of, what 1 understand, was Aunt Lizzie was
asleep.
This man called to the rear of the house, "Aunt
Lizzie, the police officers are here and they are looking for
someone."
This lady stuck her head out of the door in the
rear of the kitchen, which appeared to be a bedroom, and she
363
1
■»
:{
4
.')
(i
7
S
!(
10
11
12
10
14
IT)
1<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
20
24
20
549
says, "What is going on?"
And we, I explained to her that we were looking
for a Samuel Veney who was wanted for assault and murder.
She in turn told me that we could search the
house because there was no one there but she wanted to make
sure that no one would be hiding in her house.
Q She told you she wanted to make sure no one was
hiding in her house?
A That is correct.
Q Now, Detective, going back for a few minutes,
who were the officers who went up to the front door and
summoned someone from the inside and knocked at the door and
rang the bell?
A Sergeant Shrimer rang the doorbell at this
residence.
Q And where were you at that time?
A I was standing on the steps.
Q You were standing on the steps?
A On the steps of 2416 Eutaw Street.
Q And you had your gun and bulletproof vest on at
that time?
A Yes, I did.
Q Now, what happened after he rang the bell?
A The man, approximately about five foot three tc
five foot five, 125-130 pounds, medium brown skin, opened the
1
■ )
2
4
f>
(i
7
S
9
10
11
12
12
14
IT)
l(i
17
1H
19
20
21
22
29
24
25
550
front door, and Sergeant Shrimer had a conversation with this
man.
THE COURT: Where was he standing when the doox
was open?
THE WITNESS: He was standing right the— the
Sergeant you are speaking of?
THE COURT: Yes.
THE WITNESS: He was standing right in front oi
the door.
door?
THE COURT: You're speaking about the inner
THE WITNESS: The inner door.
THE COURT: He had gone through the vestibule?
THE WITNESS: He had gone through the vestibul*
He was standing there, and he had a conversation with this
man, and Lieutenant Manuel then came up on the steps, and we
were admitted to this residence.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q By this man?
A By this individual.
Q Now, did you or anyone else in your presence pa^
this man down?
A I nor anyone in my presence patted the man down
because he only had on a pair of pajama pants.
Q And how long have you been on the force, been a
365
1
.)
4
4
5
(>
7
s
!)
10
11
12
1.4
14
15
l(i
17
IS
1!»
20
21
22
24
24
25
551
member of the force?
A It will be seventeen years the 11th of March of
this year.
Q Now, in your experience is it necessary or
customary to pat a man down when he has only that amount of
clothes on?
A No, you never pat a man down like that.
Q Now, did you go anywhere other than the first
floor in this house?
A Yes, I did.
Q Tell us about that?
A After having the conversation with the lady on
the first floor who was identified as Aunt Lizzie, to my
recollection, I went to the second floor of this residence
along with Sergeant Shrimer and Lieutenant Gonce.
We were admitted to a rear room on the second
floor, which was locked. This door was unlocked by the lady
sitting there in the blue dress with the white collar.
She admitted Sergeant Shrimer and myself and
Lieutenant Gonce to this room.
At that time she told us that the room belonged
to a roomer who was away at the time. We walked in, looked
in the room. We could see that there was no one in the room.
We immediately left the room and returned to the first floor
of the house.
1
■>
2
4
.’)
(i
7
N
!t
10
11
12
12
14
15
i<;
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
552
Q Did anyone make any complaint to you at that
time about the way they were treated?
A No one made any complaint in my presence, no, si
Q You indicated that you told this Aunt Lizzie whc
you were looking for; is that correct?
A That is correct.
Q Did she indicate to you that anyone named Sam
Veney ever lived in the premises?
A No, she didn't make any indication that anyone
had lived there by the name of Sam Veney to me.
Q She didn't tell you that?
A She did not tell me that, no.
Q Did anyone in those premises tell you that Sam
Veney had lived there?
A No one told me, no, one way or the other.
MR. SAUSE: Your witness.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q You are Detective Walker?
A That'8 correct, Detective Oliver Walker.
Q Detective Walker, how was the person who you
say--or the one you called Aunt Lizzie clothed, as you recall'1
A This person was apparently in night clothing.
There was a dim light in the kitchen of this residence where
I was standing, and the room that this lady stuck her head oui:
3 6 7
1
•)
:t
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i:l
14
15
Hi
17
18
10
20
21
22
24
24
25
553
of was in the rear of the kitchen on the first floor of this
residence.
Q Before she stuck her head out, did you or any
of the other officers knock on her door?
A No, and I presume you are referring to the
conversation, but the man that admitted us to the house, I
know, he called her, he called to her, and I think the name
that he used was "Aunt Lizzie" and he said to her that the
police were there looking for someone.
Q But he called, he called to her that you were
there and the other officers, did you and the other officers
take up his call and call Aunt Lizzie?
A I did not, no, nor anyone in my presence.
Q And you didn't hear any of the other officers?
A No, I didn't hear any of the other officers, no.
Q Did you hear anyone or see anyone knock on this
inner door that this lady came out of?
A No, because I was standing right next to the
door and no one passed me.
Q And you didn't knock?
A I did not knock, no.
Q Did you say anything through the door?
A I didn't say anything to her through the door,
no. Her nephew called to her or at least the man that
admitted us to the house called to her.
S B 8
1
•)
:{
4
9.j
n
7
S
!>
10
11
12
12
14
15
l(i
17
1H
l!l
20
21
22
22
24
25
THE COURT: Before or after she stuck her head
out?
THE WITNESS: Before she stuck her head out of
the door he called, "Aunt Lizzie, the police are here looking
for someone."
Zt in turn stuck he head out of the door.
554
MR. NABRIT:
Did you--was there a knob on the door, to her
door, if ypu remember?
A I presume there was a doorknob, but I couldn't
say right at this moment whether there was or not but I
presume there was a doorknob on the door.
Q Did you try the door or not?
I did not tpuch the door.
And you did not open it?
I did not open it or touch the door.
Did any other officers?\
No one in my presence.
No knocking at all? \
V
No knocking at all. \
\I understand. \\When you observed this person d̂ Ld you look intc
the room when you opened the door?
A No, I didn't look into the room. \
Q Did any other officer look into the rooiit̂ Wat
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
1
■>
2
4
5
u
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
Ki
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
555
that room searched?
V\Q Did you see anyone else in that room?
No, the room was not searched, no, sir.
No, I didn't see anyone else in the room.
Q Did you look to see if anyone else was in that\\\room?
A When the lady stuck her head out of the door,\\\
I did not go beyond her nor could I see into this particular
room because it was not, because there was no light in the
room at that time.
Q Any searchlight shown inside of this room or
flashlight?
A No, there was no light shining in that room in
my presence.
Q How long did you stay there?
A At this door or in this residence?
Q In the residence, at this particular bedroom
door where the lady was?
A I would say about thirty seconds.
Q And where did you go then?
A To the second floor.
Q To the second floor?
A That's right, along with Sergeant Shrimer, we
went to the second floor.
\
Q When you got to the second floor did ypu search
1
•)
:i
4
.’>
(i
7
S
<>
II)
11
12
1 :l
14
1.7
Hi
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
21
2o
556
one room or more than one room?
A We searched one room on the second floor.
Q By yourself or with someone?
A In company with Sergeant Shrimer and Lieutenant
Gonce.
Q And you said that the lady who stood behind you
it' s
and/stipulated that it is Mrs. Regina Summers, was the lady
you saw?
A That's the lady I saw there that night.
Q Now, did you, when you entered the room that
you were informed belonged to a roomer?
A I didn't understand what you said.
Q Let me make it clear. You said when you
were
entered the room that you/told belonged to a roomer, to a
boarder?
A No, we did not enter a room; we were admitted
to a room by Mrs. Summers with a key that she obtained to
open the door with.
Q Did you ask her to get the key or open it for
you?
A She was coming with the key when we were stand
ing on the second floor in front of this room. \
Q Did she put the key in the lock or not?
\
A She did put the key in the lock and unlocked
the door.
1
•)
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i:s
14
15
i<;
17
18
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
557
And no other officers took the key from her?
She put the key in the lock and unlocked the
door herself.
Q Now, where was she coming from when you saw her
coming with the key?\\
A She was coming down the hallway.
\
Q She was coming from some place else?
A She was coming from somewhere else; where, 1
couldn't say.
Q You don't know whether it was downstairs or
upstairs?
A I don't know where she was coming from.
Q And you didn't make any other search of any ottu
room on that second floor?
A No, I didn't make any other search.
Q Did you make any search of any other room on
that second floor subsequent?
A No, I did not.
Q You then went downstairs to the first floor
again?
A I returned to the first floor.
Q Did you search upstairs on the third floor?
A No, 1 never went to the third floor.
Q Did you observe any other officers on the third
floor?
558
\
176
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
IK
17
18
1! )
20
21
22
28
24
25
vA No, because where I was stationed, where I was
standing\I could not see who would be going to or from the
third floo\of this residence.
Q \^Did you testify in your direct examination,
Officer, that you ascertained that the person to whom the room
belonged to was put of town before you went in there?\
A That was before we had entered the room, she hac\
told us that the room belonged to a man that was out of town
at the time.
Q Did you understand that he was a boarder?
A He was a roomer, yes.
Q You understood that?
A That's what we were told, yes.
Q This was before she opened the door with the kejf?
A Before she unlocked it, yes.
Q Was she asked to unlock the door before you had
already unlocked it?
A As I say, she was coming down the hall with the
keys in her hand, and she stuck the key in the lock and openec
the lock.
Now, what conversation someone else had with hex
I don't know.
Q I see.
A I didn't have a conversation with her concerning
\
it.
1
•)
:{
4
5
(>
7
s
!)
10
11
12
l.'l
14
15
l(i
17
18
111
20
21
22
22
24
25
559
Q Did you see any children in the house at all?
A I didn't see any children in this residence at
all.
THE COURT: Did you hear any?
THE WITNESS: No, sir, I didn't hear any child
I saw three adults: the man that admitted us to the house,
the lady that I know as Aunt Lizzie, and Mrs. Summers there.
They are the only three individuals that I saw in this house.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Now, where was this person that— can you descri
this person that you call Aunt Lizzie?
THE COURT: What is that?
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Can you describe the person you heard called
Aunt Lizzie?
THE COURT: You mean the man who opened the
door?
MR. NABRIT: No, no, the lady.
THE COURT: Called Aunt Lizzie?
MR. NABRIT: Yes, sir.
THE WITNESS: The lady that I saw that was on
the first floor in the residence, I noticed when she stuck
her head out of the door it was disarranged and I could see
that it was an elderly woman; and that is the only description
that I could give of her, other than maybe she was about five
3 7 0
1
•)
2
4
:>
(>
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
l(i
17
18
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
560
foot two or five foot five. She was not a very tall person;
but she just stuck her head out of the door.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Did you ask her what her name was?
A No, sir, I did not ask her her name.
Q Did you ask her who she was or anything about
the ownership of the house?
A No, sir, 1 did not.
Q Well, what was your conversation with her?
A I told her that we were looking for a man that
was wanted in connection with an assault and a shooting of a
police officer, assault and murder, assault and murder of a
policeman at that time.
And she said, "Well, he doesn't live here, and
if there's anybody in here I want you to search the house and
see that they are not in my home."
Those were her words.
Q Was there any other conversation?
A That's the only conversation I had with her.
Q Where was she standing when this conversation
occurred?
A At the door with her head stuck out of the door
Q Was the door wide-open?
A No, it wasn't wide-open. It was open, say,
about ten to twelve or maybe fourteen inches.
371
1
■ )
2
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
lo
1(1
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
561
Did you a6k her who else was in the room with
No, I did not ask her who else was in the room
Did anybody else ask her?
I couldn't tell you that.
Could you see in the room?
No, I could not see in there; there was no light
\
And you didn't ask the lady who was in that root
with her.
Q
A
Q
A
in there.
Q
with her?
A No, I did not.
THE COURT: Is there any evidence about that?
I don't remember any evidence that anybody went into that root
Is there testimony that somebody went into the room?
MR. NABRIT: I have reason to believe that
someone looked into the room, and that there was six people
in the room, five children and an adult.
\
effect?
THE COURT: Was there any testimony to that\
MR. SAUSE: No.
THE COURT: Well, all right.
MR. NABRIT: I'm prepared to offer it.
THE COURT: What?
MR. NABRIT: I'm prepared to offer such \
1
■ )
2
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1 (>
17
18
1!)
20
21
■>2
22
24
25
562
testimony.
THE COURT: It seems to me you're off on side
lines ,
\ MR. HABRIT: I'm prepared to offer it.
Excuse me, there were four children and an adult
THE COURT: Well, suppose there was. He
didn't go in, and Ixdon't see what the point is.
MR. HABRIT: Well, we haven't finished the whol
story, and I have some more questions.
THE COURT: \I don't see that it has any
\materiality to any issues in the case, and I don't see the
relevancy and materiality to the present line of cross-examine
tion.
MR. HABRIT: Well, it's to test the witness'
recollection, Your Honor. His testimony was that he had a
conversation and he said he wanted to search the house to this
woman, and we are entitled to test his recollection of the
circumstances.
THE COURT: You are entitled to do that.
MR. HABRIT: And also credibility.
THE COURT: If that's the purpose you can do it
but you can't contradict him on irrelevant matters, in
rebuttal.
You can contradict him on relevant and material
matters in rebuttal but not on irrelevant and Immaterial
\
1
•>
3
4
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
563
\jatters.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Go ahead. Continue your cross-examination.
Q Did you make any effort at this time to gather
V
all the children in the house in one room?
A I told you before that I did not see or hear
any children in this residence. I saw three individuals
whom I have previously identified.
Q Did you ask if there were any children in the
house?
A Mo, I did not, sir.
Q Did you ask how many people were in the house?
A No, I did not.
THE COURT: Who instructed you what rooms to
search and what rooms not to search or did you do it on your
own determination?
THE WITNESS: We were under the instruction of,
from time to time in some of these searches, it would be a
lieutenant or a sergeant. As we would do a search, the
systematic way of doing it was to try to search the entire
area.
If an area had been searched by the first two
or three men that had entered the premises, they in turn would
consider that area secure, and then go to an area that had not
been searched.
1
•)
2
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
1 :i
14
15
l(i
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
564
V THE COURT: Well, do you know who searched the
rest of the second floor?
\ THE WITNESS: No, sir.
qTHE COURT: If anybody did?
THE WITNESS: No, sir, I could not tell you whc
searched the front part of the second floor.
THE COURT: All right.
BY MR. NABRIT:
XQ Now, at the time you entered the premises, who
entered first?
A Sergeant Shrimer.
Q Where were you standing?
A I was standing on the steps of 2416 Eutaw Place.
Q This is outside the vestibule?
A That is outside the vestibule.
Q Were the other officers between you and Sergeant^
Shrimer?
A There were other officers on the stairway there,
but now to define between Sergeant Shrimer and myself, I coul<
not tell you at this time if there was maybe Sergeant Connelly
or Detective DePaola whether they were standing to my right or
to my left or what position they were standing in,\I could not
tell you that.
Detective, did you enter this house before or
after the Lieutenant?
565
A I entered after Lieutenant Manuel.
Q And what was the first thing you did when you
got in there?
A The first thing 1 did when I got inside of the
house?
Q Yes.
A I walked inside of the house and after Lieutenan
Manuel had received permission, he and Sergeant Shrimer had
received permission for us to search the house, I went toward*
the first floor rear of the house.
Q How long was this conversation where you
received permission? How long did that take?
A It was just a matter of seconds.
Q A matter of seconds?
A Yes.
Q How many?
A I could not define how many seconds but it was
not a long conversation.
Q Did you overhear it?
A I heard them talking, but the various things
they were saying and whatnot, 1 could not tell you that; not
word for word, I could not tell you.
Q Did you accept somebody's word for it that they
got permission?
A I was acting under the orders of a superior
V72
1
•»
2
4
5
<>
7
S
!)
10
11
12
18
14
17)
1<)
17
IS
li t
20
21
■>2
22
24
25
566
officer.
Q You assumed he got permission?
A No, I did not assume. I was acting under orde:
of a superior officer.
Q Well, you testified that the Lieutenant got
permission and I am asking you whether you heard and you said
you didn't hear the conversation? Which is it?
A You'll have to bring me back to that. I don't
understand.
THE COURT: Well, the point is that you
testified, or the effect of your testimony is that after
Lieutenant Manuel had obtained permission to search the house,
you walked to the rear of the first floor.
The question was, did you hear the conversation
in which he was given permission, and you then said in effect
that you couldn't answer, that you were acting under instruc
tions .
I think you've got to clear that up. Did you
hear Lieutenant Manuel obtain the permission yourself, and if
not, how do you know if he obtained permission?
THE WITNESS: It would be an assumption.
THE COURT: That's the effect of the question,
isn't it?
THE WITNESS: It would have to be an assumptioi
373
1
•>
3
4
5
(i
7
(s
!)
10
11
12
13
14
15
10
17
18
10
20
21
22
23
24
25
567
Q Now, when the woman you referred to as Aunt
Lizzie came to the door, did you make another assumption that
her room was empty or what?
THE COURT: Did he say that? Did he say that
her room was empty? I never heard any assumption about
BY MR. NABRIT:
rooms being empty.
MR. NABRIT: I'm just curious about why the
police didn't search the room, didn't search this room if the
were looking for someone.
THE COURT: Well--
MR. NABRIT: Just curious about his version of
it.
THE COURT: Well, he said he didn't search
that room, and I'm not sure whether it's his decision or
somebody else's.
Whose decision was it not to search the room
that this old lady was in? Was it your decision or someb<
else's?
THE WITNESS: Well, if Your Honor, if I may
infer at this point, there are certain things where you use
common knowledge when you are doing these things, and if
you've been doing them long enough you can use a certain
amount of judgment.
THE COURT: I'm asking you whether it was you
3 7 4
1
•»
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i:l
14
15
l(i
17
18
19
20
21
22
22
24
25
568
judgment or somebody else's judgment?
THE WITNESS: Well, I consider it my judgment,
I consider it my judgment, that it was my judgment not to wal
into that lady's room.
THE COURT: Then it was your judgment not to g
in?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: I'm not criticizing you for not
going in. I just wanted to know whether it was your decisio
or somebody else's decision not to go in, and the witness say
it was his decision not to go in.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Did you say anything else to her when you moved
away?
A No, I didn't say anything else to her when I
moved away from her, no.
Q Did you question any of the other, any of the
adults in the house, did you question either the Summers or
the man who lived there?
A I showed a photograph or a pair of photographs
to Mrs. Summers after we all came back to the first floor
before we left the residence. At that time I asked her did
she know either of the two people that were on these
photographs.
Q And she replied?
A And she replied to me, her response was, no,
569
i
2
4
(i
i
s
i)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
28
24
25
that she did not know the two individuals that I showed her.
Q Was there any other questions that you asked
her?
A I didn't ask her any other questions, no.
Q Did you say anything else to her?
A Yes, I did. In fact, we both said something
to each other at that time. She wished us a Happy New Year,
and I returned the reply to her.
Q Was this Mrs. Summers or who it was wished you
a Happy New Year?
A You say was it Mrs. Summers?
Q The lady?
A That was the lady sitting there that I am
speaking of (indicating).
Q Where were you standing at that time?
A Right there in the foyer of the house.
Q As you and the others were leaving?
A As I was leaving, yes.
Q Had the others left before you?
A They may have preceded me going out of the door.
Q Did Mr. Rayner wish you a Happy New Year?
A Is that the man that entered--that admitted me
to the house? If that's the person you are speaking of, yen.
Q They both waved?
A They both— no, they didn't wave. They said
376
570
188
!)
10
1J_
12
i;i
14
15
lfi
17
18
lit
20
21
•>2
20
24
25
Happy New Year?
Happy New Year, yes.
And this was December 27th, wasn’t itc
That's right.
How did you reply to that?
3 7 7I returned the greeting.
Christmas or New Year's?
I returned the greetings she said.
COURTS It's been answered. Ask another
the words.
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
question.
...___ — - ■ * ~* "■ ■■ 1 -T „ , „
^BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Did you ring the doorbell?
No, sir, I did not ring the doorbell; Sergeant
Shrimer rang the doorbell.
q Did you hear any--did you talk to anyone?
Were you standing outside talking to anyone from the upper
\
window or not? \
A No, I did not;
Q Did you hear anybody else do that?
A No, I did not.
Q Did you see any lights go on when you started
up to the door? \
A No, I did not.
q Was there a glass in that door?
1
• )
:t
4
.")
(i
7
,s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
571
A Yes, there's a glass in the outer door and the
inner door.
Q Did you see any lights go on before the door was
opened?
A The lights were already on on the first floor of
this residence.\
Q In the hallway?
A In the hallway and what I would presume was the
living room or the dining room or foyer, the lights were on in
the front part of the first floor of this house.
Q Are you sure about that?
A Positive.
Q Did anyone ask Hr. Rayner to turn the lights on,
the man who opened the door?
A Not in my presence.
Q Now, Detective, when you entered this front door
when you entered the front door in which direction did you
look? Were you looking up the hallway or down the hallway
or stairs or living room or what, all those places?
A Sir, I could not tell you at this moment just
where I was looking on December 27th at that particular time.
I know I was looking into the house; but at what
specific object, I could not tell you.
Q
A
\
Did you have your shotgun at the ready?
I had my shotgun at port arms.
572
190 l
3
4
(i
i
8
«)
10
11
12
13
14
IT)
10
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
23
24
25
Q Did you ever see Sergeant Shrimer, could you see
him all the time before while you were standing outside?
A Yes, I could see him.
Q Were you able to observe him the full time?
A I didn't understand your question. Would you
repeat your question?
Q Could you see him continuously, is what I meant,
after he had, after he was admitted to the house?
A Yes, 1 could see him.
Q Was there any time when the man, you say the mar.
that admitted you had his hands placed against the wall?
A No, sir, at no time did I see this man with his
hands placed against the wall.
Q Were you looking at him all the time or were you
looking up toward the second floor or up the steps or what?
THE COURT: When do you mean? He's testified
that he went in the back, and I don't suppose he looked at him
when he was talking to the lady in the back, and I don't
suppose he was looking at him when he went up the stairs to
the second floor.
What time do you mean? What time are you
referring to?
MR. NABRIT: I'm referring to the period
immediately after he went in the door.
THE COURT: All right.
1
•>
:{
4
fi
(i
7
S
!>
10
11
12
18
14
ir>
i<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
20
24
27)
573
THE WITNESS: Immediately upon entering the
building when I saw Lieutenant Manuel and Sergeant Shrimer
talking to this man, his hands were not up in the air or
against the wall.
THE COURT: Did you ever see his hands above
his head?
THE WITNESS: No, sir, I never saw his hands
above his head, no.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q How tall was Lieutenant Manuel?
A Lieutenant Manuel is about six foot, six foot
one.
Q How tall are you?
A Six foot three-and-a-half.
Q And how tall was the Sergeant who went in?
A Which Sergeant are ycu speaking of? Shrimer?
Q Sergeant Shrimer?
A Yes, he's about five foot ten.
Q How about Officer DePaola?
A He's about five foot nine or nine-and-a-half.
Q Were there any others who entered?
A There were other officers that entered the
house but not in my presence at that time, at that specific
point.
Q How many did you see enter the house?
1
•»
4
4
.">
(i
7
S
!)
10
n
12
l.'l
14
15
111
17
IS
10
20
21
22
24
24
2o
574
1!
A How many did I see inside of the house? I saw
Sergeant Manuel, Sergeant Shrimer, Sergeant Connelly, Detectiv
DePaola, Lieutenant Gonce. Those are the officers that I ca
identify that I saw inside the house.
Q Were there other officers inside the house that
you can't name?
A Those are the ones that I can identify. There
a possibility of other officers being in there, but they were
not officers that I could readily identify.
Q How long did this search last? How long were
you and the officers inside the house?
A I'd say we were inside the house about ten to
fifteen minutes.
Q Were you part of the group that went there to si
vey the house before it was entered?
A Yes, I was.
Q Did you see anyone enter the house or leave it
while you were there?
A No, I did not.
Q Did you see anyone inside the house?
A No, I could not.
Q How many raids did you go on?
A I had been working for about four days, and I
think in that period of time I had nine hours off in four
days, and it is utterly impossible for me to tell you at thii
1
•)
2
4
:>
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
18
14
15
l<i
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
575
time how many places I visited in that course of time.V
\0 During that period did you become tired?
a\ Yes, I did.\
Q And you had nine hours sleep in four days?
A That's correct.
Q Prior to this search?
A During this particular period that you are
speaking of.
Q Do you think that affects your memory from
sleeplessness?
A No, it doesn't affect my memory.
Q It has some effect so you can't tell how many
places you were at?
A I can't--
THE COURT: He said he ddesn't know, and the
Court finds it quite reasonable that he doesn't.
Next question.
MR. NABRIT: You may inquire.
MR. SAUSE: Just one moment, Your Honor.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Detective, other than yourself did any other
Negro officers participate on this squad in this particular
investigation or series of investigations?
A Yes, there were other Negro officers involved.
1
•)
4
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
14
14
15
l(i
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
24
24
25
576
Ther£ was Sergeant Robinson of the Narcotics Division;
Detective Cheeks of the Narcotics Division; Officer Smith of
the Emergency Unit; Officer Brown of the Emergency Unit;
Officer White 6 i the Emergency Unit; Sergeant Roy of the\Homicide Unit; Sergeant Watson of the Northern District.
\
THE COURT: Do you mean on this particular one'
THE WITNESS: No, he said in this series of
Vraids in the times that I was involved in it, in this
\
investigation, and Detective Tillman of the Robbery Division;
V
and there are about five or six others that I can't give you
the names of. I know them by sight but I can't say now.
THE COURT: You mean they were part of this
squad?
THE WITNESS: They were not directly members
of this squad.
THE COURT: You mean they participated?
THE WITNESS: They participated from time to
time, yes, sir.
THE COURT: How many were members of the squad
altogether? I understand altogether there were about fifty
in the squad, was the evidence so far, but they all didn't
participate at one time, but all were not members of the squa|
\at one time, but from time to time there were as many as
V
fifty who were part of it.
THE WITNESS: Well, see, Your Honor, in this
1
•»
8
4
5
(i
7
S
!t
10
11
12
18
14
15
1(1
17
18
10
20
21
22
28
24
25
577
investigation the participation of an individual would be
pretty hard to define as to the actual part that they are
playing, but from time to time, like I say, the men from the
Narcotic Unit, they were only there maybe two days, but they
had specificXreasons for being there, and yet you would
consider them as a part of the squad.
THE COURT: Well, my question was whether you
had anywhere from, say, when you had the people who went in
originally, beyond that some others went in, and some others
were standing around, were there usually other Negro officers
who participated, if there were more than four or five?
THE WITNESS: At least six that were constant
participants. There were at least six Negro officers that I
would consider.
THE COURT: Constant participants?
THE WITNESS: Constant participants, yes, sir,
in this investigation.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Detective, to your knowledge did you or any
other Negro police officers refuse to participate in this
series of investigations?
A No, sir, no one refused to participate in any
phase of this investigation.
Q And was your failure to get sleep for qnly nine^ \\
hours in four days is that because of direct orders? Was
1
•>
8
4
f>
(i
7
,S
!)
10
11
12
i : i
14
1'>
I d
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
28
24
25
578
that because you were working the rest of the time or was that
of your own volition?
A This is my job; that's my reason for being in
the entire investigation. Regardless of what hours I am
through I just have to be there.
MR. SAUSE: No further questions.
MR. NABRIT: That's all.
MR. SAUSE: Thank you, very much.
(Witness excused.)
THE COURT: Well, that will be all the witnesse
we will have for today. Let me talk to counsel about these
reports and about the schedule.
(Thereupon, there was a bench conference, after
which the Court adjourned at 4:03 o'clock p.m. to January 21,
1965.)