Story of Murder on St. Valentine's Day.doc

8/14/2019 Story of Murder on St. Valentine's Day.doc

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/story-of-murder-on-st-valentines-daydoc 1/23

Murder on St. Valentine's Day

On St. Valentine's Day, 1929, one of America's most atrocious crimes was committedwhen seven men were lined up aainst a wall in a !ootleer's arae and machine"unned to death. #he St. Valentine's Day $assacre, the centerpiece crime of the

lawless decade, clima%ed ten years of wholesale murder. #he mass &illin too& placein hicao, America's favorite crime scene, and the man !ehind the !lood!ath wasnone other than $r. Death himself, Al apone.1

#he St. Valentine's Day $assacre was the straw that !ro&e the camel's !ac&. #he&illins were so open and savae, they unsettled hardened ansters. Al apone hadone too far, and the citi(ens of hicao had had enouh. #he violence would have tostop.

)esides mar&in the !einnin of the end of apone's career and the anster eraitself, the crime !oosted the science of firearms identification to new heihts. alvin

*oddard's success in the case would esta!lish firearms identification as a standardinvestiative in+uiry.

t all started when *eore -)us $oran, the leader of a an operatin in /orthhicao, !ean hi0ac&in shipments of whis&y to apone from Detroit. ith his supplyof !oo(e endanered, apone decided to ta&e remedial action. 2

An undercover spy wor&in in the $oran camp arraned for a valua!le shipment ofapone whis&y to !e delivered to $oran's warehouse. #he shipment was to !eoffloaded on e!ruary 13 at 14564 in the mornin. apone wanted to et $oran andhis men toether in one place so they could !e eliminated en masse. apone wanted

to &now if $oran had ta&en the !ait, so he had three of his men watchin thewarehouse that mornin from !oardin rooms across the street. rom this vantaepoint his men watched as mem!ers of the $oran an reported to wor&.

#he first man to appear was 7ohnny $ay, a 84 a wee& auto mechanic. A few minuteslater Adam :eyer arrived. :eyer was $oran's accountant who had done time forem!e((lement. :eyer was followed !y 7ames lar&, $oran's !rother"in"law. lar& hadserved time for !urlary and ro!!ery and had !eaten a rap for murder. #he ne%t toarrive were the *usen!er !rother, ;ete and ran&, each with lon felony prisonrecords. #he si%th man to enter the arae wasn't in the an. :e was Dr. <einhardt:. Schwimmer, a local optometrist. Schwimmer was a hoodlum worshipper, sort of a

roupie, who had stopped !y on his way to his office to say hello to his heroes. #heseventh man was Al!ert <. einshan&, a spea&easy owner and official of $oran'scleanin and dyein association. #he important thin& a!out einshan& was he loo&edand dressed li&e $oran. hen the apone men across the street saw the si%"foot,!road"shouldered einshan& in his fedora hat and liht ray top coat wal& into thewarehouse, they were under the false impression that $oran had arrived. heneinshan& was inside, one of the apone men went to a phone to set thins in



motion. :e reported that $oran and si% of his men had ta&en the !ait and were inplace for the &ill.

)us $oran, #ed /ew!erry, and the third *usen!er !rother, :enry, were still on their

way to the warehouse. As they approached their destination, they saw a !lac&;ac&ard pull up in front of the !uildin. t was the &ind of car used !y the hicaoDetective )ureau. ive men alihted from the vehicle. #wo of them were in policeuniforms and the other three wore civilian overcoats. $oran thouht his warehousewas !ein raided !y the police, so he and his two assistants fled the scene. #heir liveshad !een saved !y their tardiness and alertness.

#he uniformed men wal&ed throuh the front office into the warehouse area. ithrevolvers drawn, they ordered the seven men up aainst the yellow !ric& wall. $oran'smen protested anrily as they were !ein disarmed !y the phony cops. hen this wasdone, the men in overcoats entered the arae. #wo of the men opened their

overcoats and pulled out #hompson su!machine uns. #he unners then opened fire,sweepin their tommy"uns !ac& and forth three times across the !ac&s of theircollapsin victims. #he &illers were careful to fire their shots !etween the ears and&nees of the dyin men. #he methodical e%ecution lasted several minutes. After theuns fell silent, one of the shooters noticed that a !ody was still twitchin. #his wasstopped !y a dou!le"!arreled !last to the man's face with a saw"off shotun.

After the massacre, the men in civilian clothes wal&ed out of the warehouse with theirhands held a!ove their heads. $archin !etween them with their revolvers drawnwere the phony policemen. t was intended to loo& li&e the police had arrested three!ootleers. )ac& in the warehouse with the dead men was 7ohnny $ay's do,

:ih!all. #he animal was tearin at his leash and !ar&in hysterically. #he whole thinhad ta&en less than eiht minutes.

Several residents of the neih!orhood had witnessed the fa&e raid, and a loder in anear!y roomin house was as&ed to chec& on the !ar&in do. A few second afterenterin the warehouse, the man came runnin out. -#hey're all dead, he said.

#he police were reeted with a ruesome siht. our of the victims had fallen!ac&ward from the wall and were starin up at the ceilin. Another was face down,stretched alon the !ase of the wall. A si%th man was on his &nees slumped forwardaainst a wooden chair. #he yellow !ric& wall was !ullet"poc&ed and !lood"splattered,

and streams of !lood were sna&in across the cement floor from the !odies. One ofthe men, ran& *usen!ur, was still alive when the police arrived. :avin !een shotfourteen times, with seven !ullets still in his !ody, he had manaed to crawl a!outtwenty feet from the wall. hen as&ed !y a policeman who had shot him, *usen!urreplied, -/o!ody shot me. :e died ninety minutes later without ivin the police anyleads. Some of the men had !een virtually cut into pieces !y the swinin #ommy"



uns.

)efore the !odies were moved and the other evidence distur!ed, hicao's coroner,Dr. :erman /. )undesen, went to the warehouse to ta&e chare of the crime scene

investiation. :e had do(ens of photoraphs ta&en and ordered a careful collection ofall the empty shells, !ullets, and !ullet framents. #he firearms evidence was placedinto envelopes that were appropriately mar&ed and sealed.

#he !ullets that were later ta&en out of the victims !y the coroner's physicians wereplaced in envelopes la!eled with the name of the !ody that had contained the slus.

Dr. )undesen immediately esta!lished a coroner's 0ury made up of seven prominenthicao citi(ens. #he 0ury went to the warehouse shortly after the &illins to view thescene first"hand. #he foreman of the coroner's 0ury, )ert A. $assee, &new of *oddard

and his firearms wor&. A day or so after the crime, he phoned *oddard at the )ureau oforensic )allistics and as&ed him to drop everythin and come to hicao. *oddardtraveled to hicao the followin day and was iven the larest num!er of firearmse%hi!its he had ever received from any sinle case. 6

Seventy empty 3"cali!er cartride shells had !een athered from the warehouse floor,all of the same ma&e. )y e%aminin the shell casins, *oddard determined that theyhad !een fired from an automatic weapon. *oddard &new that there were only twoautomatic uns made in the =nited States that fired .3"cali!er ammunition. One wasthe 3 olt automatic pistol, and the other the #hompson su!"machine un, alsomanufactured !y the olt ompany.3 )y e%aminin the mar&s made on the shells !y the

!reech !olt, *oddard &new that the shells had !een fired in a #hompson su!"machineun. )y differentiatin two distinct sets of e0ector mar&s on the cartride case, *oddarddetermined that two weapons had fired the seventy shells. ifty cartrides had !eenfired from one #hompson and twenty from the other. rom this *oddard concluded thatone su!"machine un had !een loaded with a twenty"shot clip and the other a fifty"shotdrum.

#he police had pic&ed up fourteen !ullets from the arae floor. #hese pro0ectiles hadeither missed or passed throuh their tarets. All !ut two were deformed from impact.#he riflin mar&s on the slus indicated they had !een fired throuh a !arrel with si%rooves twistin to the riht. #his was characteristic of a #hompson su!"machine un.

#he !ullets all contained two manufacturer's mar&s made !y the =.S. artrideompany. *oddard learned that ammunition mar&s li&e this had only !een produceddurin the period 7uly, 192> to 7uly, 192?.

*oddard also e%amined forty"seven !ullet framents that had !een collected from thewarehouse floor. $any of these pieces were lare enouh to contain the imprints of the=.S. artride ompany. $ost of the framents showed riflin mar&s that !ore roovescharacteristic of the #hompson type of riflin. #wo empty twelve aue shot"un shells



had also !een found. #hey contained traces of smo&eless powder and had !een loadedwith !uc&"shot. #he firin pin imprints on the shot un casins indicated they had !eenfired from the same weapon.

#hirty"nine !ullets and !ullet framents had !een removed from the seven dead men.

#he !ody of Adam :eyer, the accountant, yielded fourteen. #he !odies of 7ames lar&and ran& *usen!er produced seven each, and si% had !een e%tracted from Ale%ander einshen&. #he remainin five !ullets were shared !y the other threevictims. <einhardt Schwemmer, the hapless eye doctor, was the one who had !eenshot"unned. Seven !uc&"shot pro0ectiles had !een removed from his !ody.

As *oddard la!ored over his firearms evidence, the shoc&ed citi(ens of hicaorappled for a solution. A reward of 8144,444 was offered. #he money was collectedfrom overnment institutions, !usiness roups, and the eneral pu!lic. $eanwhile, wildchares were !ein thrown a!out. #he assistant administrator of the federal prohi!itionforce in hicao pu!licly theori(ed that the &illers were corrupt hicao policemen who

had !een feudin with $oran.

@

#he ne%t day the prohi!ition administrator retracted hisstatement, claimin that he had !een mis+uoted. #he federal overnment transferredthe official out of hicao, !ut the suspicion linered.

#he manitude of the crime put the hicao police department under tremendouspressure. #he fact that many people !elieved that policemen had !een involved createdan additional incentive to solve the case. )ecause of this suspicion, coroner )undesenas&ed *oddard to test several shot"uns and #hompson su!"machine uns in thehands of the police in hicao and its su!ur!s. *oddard would also e%amine the unspossessed !y the oo& ounty ;olice orce. *oddard test"fired eiht #hompsons andsi%teen shot"uns. )y comparin the police !ullets and cartride cases with the

evidence found in the warehouse, *oddard concluded that none of these weapons had!een used in the crime. *oddard's findins helped lift some of the suspicion off thehicao police.

After *oddard had completed his initial firearms wor&, he returned to the )ureau oforensic )allistics in /ew or& ity. Over the ne%t several months oroner )undesenwould send *oddard do(ens of #hompson su!"machine uns for testin. /one of themturned out to !e a murder weapon.

#he day after the &illins, )us $oran read in the newspapers that the police wanted to+uestion him a!out the massacre. $oran presented himself to the police, and wheninvestiators as&ed him a!out his theory of the murders, he stated, -Only apone &illsli&e that.

hen all this was oin on, apone was in lorida rela%in at this $iami villa. #heauthorities in lorida had iven him the perfect ali!i, on the mornin of e!ruary 13,apone was in the office of the Dade ounty solicitor !ein +uestioned a!out hiscriminal activities in the $iami area.



#he first arrest in the case came on e!ruary 2>, 1929. #he arrestee was 7ac& $c*urnBreal name, 7ames De$oraC, apone's favorite e%ecutioner, a hood credited withtwenty"two murders.> A witness who had passed !y the warehouse on the fatal morninhad heard one of the &illers say, -ome on, $ac. #his witness identified a photoraphof $c*urn as one of the e%ecutioners. ollowin his arrest, $c*urn immediately posted

the 84,444 !ail and was out on the street. t was !elieved that $c*urn hadmasterminded the massacre.

On $arch 13, the police announced several other suspects. #hey were 7oseph olordo,red )ur&e, and 7ames <ay. olordo had dropped out of siht and would remain atlare. )ur&e and <ay were a pair of hoods from East St. ouis, llinois. 7ames <ay hadvanished, and red )ur&e was a !an& ro!!er and &iller who at the time was wanted inOhio in connection with the murder of a policeman. )ur&eFs wherea!outs was alsoun&nown.

#he police also made some arrests. #hree of apone's hired &illers, 7ohn Scalise,

Al!ert Anselmi, and 7oseph *uinta were ta&en into custody. *uinta was freed shortlythereafter for lac& of evidence. Scalise and Anselmi made !ail and were released.Scalise and $c*urn were later indicted on seven chares of murder. $c*urneventually !eat the case on a leal technicality, and all chares aainst him werepermanently dropped. #his happened when the prosecution failed to !rin $c*urn totrial after he had demanded and was denied a trial in four separate terms of court. #heprosecution had !een forced to wait !ecause there was never enouh evidence to !rin$c*urn to trial. t didn't help that $c*urn's irlfriend was prepared to testify that theyhad !een toether in a hotel room at the time of the &illins.

Al apone returned to hicao on $ay >, 1929. On the evenin of his arrival, Scalise,

*uinta, and Anselmi were the uests of honor at a apone party. After a nice meal,apone !eat his honored uests with a !ase!all !at, then for e%tra measure, shot them.#heir !odies were found early the ne%t mornin. Scalise and *uinta were in the !ac&seat of a car that had !een rolled into a ditch alon side a rural ndiana road. Anselmiwas found twenty feet from the car. #he &illins had to do with internal apone!usiness, and were unrelated to the St. Valentine's Day $assacre.?

So, as thins stood, one suspect had !eaten the prosecution on a leal technicality,three others were dead, and three more were still at lare. #here was no concreteevidence tyin apone to the crime, and the police hadnFt found the murder weapons.

#en months after the massacre, when it seemed as thouh the investiation had diedon the vine, the police oy a luc&y !rea&. On Decem!er 13, a police officer in St.7oseph, $ichian was escortin two motorists to the police station. #he motorists werehavin an arument over a minor traffic accident. One of the men suddenly drew apistol and fired three shots into the policeman, &illin him instantly. #he murderer tried toescape in his own car !ut had another collision. A!andonin his wrec&ed vehicle, thefuitive stopped a passin motorist and at un point commandeered his car.



;apers found in the wrec&ed automo!ile led the police to a home in St. 7osephoccupied !y red )ur&e's wife. )ur&e was one of the criminals for East St. ouis!elieved to have !een on the St. Valentine's Day e%ecution s+uad after an eye"witnesshad identified him as the driver of the phony police car. )ur&e wasn't home, !ut asearch of the house revealed an arsenal which included two #hompson su!"machine

uns. #he police also sei(ed #hompson ammunition clips and drums.

ive days later, the district attorney in St. 7oseph delivered the weapons andammunition to *oddard. *oddard was immediately encouraed when he found thatmuch of the ammunition had !een made !y the =.S. artride ompany durin the oneyear period from 192> to 192?.

*oddard test"fired twenty !ullets throuh one un and fifteen throuh the other. henhe compared these thirty"five !ullets and their shell casins with those found at themurder scene, he was certain the two tommy uns found in )ur&e's home were theweapons that had !een used to &ill $oranFs men.

On Decem!er 26, 1929, *oddard presented his evidence !efore the coroner's 0ury. As aresult of his testimony, the 0ury recommended that red )ur&e !e apprehended andheld for the rand 0ury on a chare of murder.

)ur&e was captured the followin April, !ut the authorities in $ichian refused tosurrender him to llinois. nstead, )ur&e was tried in $ichian for the murder of thepoliceman. :e was found uilty and sentenced to life in the $ichian State ;enitentiary,never to !e returned to hicao to !e tried for his role in the St. Valentine's Day$assacre. :e died in the $ichian State ;enitentiary.9

ith three of the murder suspects dead, another missin, one off the hoo&, and anotherin prison for life, the St. Valentine's Day $assacre !ecame a dead issue. #here would!e no more arrests.

A St. Valentine's Day $assacre trial would have !een a spectacular event that wouldhave pu!lici(ed the science of firearms identification.

As for Al apone, his career was comin to an end. n Octo!er, 1961, he was convictedof ta% evasion and sentenced to eleven years at the federal prison in Atlanta. Sufferinfrom syphilis, apone was released in 1969 and died in 193>.

7ac& $c*urn, the suspected !rains !ehind the massacre, was machine"unned !yother ansters in 196@. :e died on the streets of hicao with fourteen !ullets in his!ody.

)us $oran was later convicted of !an& ro!!ery. :e died in 19> while servin time inthe federal penitentiary at eavenworth, Gansas.



HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

HHHHHH

1. )etween 1922 and 192@, the an wars in hicao alone claimed the lives of 21

hoods. Another 2@4 were &illed !y the police. n 192@, 32 were &illed in crime feuds

while @4 died in !attles with law enforcement personnel. #he &illin continued. )etween192> and 1964, 22> ansters died within the city limits of hicao. Bashman, Sean

Dennis, Prohibition: The Lie of the Land , /5 #he ree ;ress, 19?1, p ?4C.

2. An account of the events leadin up to the St. Valentine's Day $assacre can !e

found in5 Allsop, Genneth, The Bootleggers: The Story of Chicago's Prohibition Era,

/ew <ochelle, /5 Arlinton :ouse, 19@1.

6. A!out a year after the St. Valentines Day $assacre, *oddard recorded the details of

his wor& on the case in the followin article5 *oddard, alvin, -#he ValentineFs Day

massacre5 A Study in Ammunition #racin, American Journal of Police Science, 151

B1964C, pp @4">?.3. #he #hompson su!"machine un was invented in 1924 !y *eneral 7ohn #hompson.

#he olt o. started sellin it in 1921. t was the first weapon of its &ind. t weihed 9

pounds and fired standard .3"cali!er !ullets. #he un had a rane of @,444 yards and

could fire 1,44 rounds a minute. #he early model cost 81>.44. #he army couldn't

afford the un !ecause it fired too many !ullets. )ootleers had the money and found

it +uite useful. #he #hompson was first used !y ansters in hicao in 192. 7. Edar

:oover was fascinated !y the weapon and adopted it as a standard ) weapon in the

mid 1964's. t wasn't until the late twenties that laws were passed ma&in the

possession of the weapon illeal. )y then, ansters were payin five thousand dollars

for the un. See5 :elmer, illiam 7., The Gun that ade the T!enties "oar , ondon5

ollier"$cmillan o., 19@9.

. All of the !ullets fired at the warehouse were stamped with a small letter -s and

imprinted with an encirclin rin. #his told *oddard that the ammunition was of the =.S.

artride !rand and made durin that one year period.

@. A month !efore the massacre, 44 cases of li+uor destined for the $oran warehouse

had !een sei(ed !y hi0ac&ers. ederal prohi!ition aents !elieved that croo&ed police

were responsi!le for the heist. t was theori(ed that $oran had found out a!out this and

had threatened to e%pose the policeman. n response, the police had plotted to &ill

$oran !efore they were either &illed or disraced. #he prohi!ition official ma&in thesechares was rederic& D. Silloway.

>. or more on $c*urn and his involvement in the St. ValentineFs Day $assacre, see5

:alper, Al!ert BEd.C, The Chicago Crime Boo# , leveland5 #he orld ;u!lishin o.,

19@>.

?. hen Anselmi and Scalise were arrested and tossed into prison with 7ac& $c*urn,

they tried to entice him away from apone in order to form a new an. t was *uinta



who tipped off apone a!out this. apone &illed Scalise and Anselmi !ecause they

were disloyal and a threat. :e &illed *uinta !ecause he didnFt li&e owin people favors.

Bashman, Sean Dennis, Prohibition: The Lie of the Land , /5 #he ree ;ress, 19?1,

pp 99"144.C

9. Other accounts of the St. ValentineFs Day $assacre can !e found in5 Go!ler,

7ohn, Ca$one: The Life and %orld of Al Ca$one, /5 *.;. ;utnamFs Sons, 19>1 and

yle, 7ohn :., The &ry and La!less ears, Enlewood liffs, /75 ;rentice":all, 19@4.

Firearms Identification in the Sacco-Vanzetti Cas

Seven years after the murder and ro!!ery of the paymaster and the security uard,the Sacco"Van(etti case was still in the news. #he e%ecution date, postponed severaltimes !ecause of the flood of worldwide protest, was approachin fast. On 7une 1,

192>, $assachusetts *overnor 7ohn uller appointed a committee of three men toloo& into the case. A. awrence owell, the president of :arvard =niversity headed thecommittee.

)y 192> firearms identification was on the vere of !ecomin a reconi(ed forensicscience. harles aite, the !allistics pioneer who would later !e considered the fatherof the science, had formed a private company in /ew or& ity called the )ureau oforensic )allistics. n partnership with aite were two other scientists, ;hillip *ravelleand 7ohn ischer. A short time after the formation of the !ureau, Dr. alvin *oddard, aphysician and native of )altimore, had 0oined the orani(ation. )ecause of his intenseinterest in firearms, Dr. *oddard had iven up a promisin career as a heart sureon.

:e had transferred from the $edical orps to Army Ordnance and had risen to theran& of olonel. Shortly !efore aiteFs death in 192@, ischer and *ravelle had leftthe )ureau, leavin *oddard as its head and sole owner. 1 *oddard had studied thephotoraphs of the Sacco"Van(etti !ullets ta&en in 1926 !y harles Van Am!urhwhen they appeared in the press. *oddard had !een interested in the case and hadfollowed it closely in the papers. )y the sprin of 192>, *oddard felt he had the&nowlede, tools and techni+ue to determine, once and for all, if Sacco's un had firedthe fatal !ullet.

$eanwhile, the case was eneratin a new storm of protest and controversy. nSeptem!er, 192@, another motion for a new trial had !een re0ected !y 7ude #hayer.

n the sprin of 192>, 7ustice eli% ran&furter, then on the faculty of the :arvard awSchool, came to Sacco and Van(ettiFs aid with an impassioned article of protest inthe Atlantic onthly . 2ran&furter also pu!lished a small !oo& on the case. 6 n thesewor&s ran&furter harshly critici(ed 7ude e!ster #hayer for denyin the new trial,ma&in much of aptain ;roctor's chane of mind and resultant affidavit to thateffect.3 ran&furter couldn't understand why a new trial hadn't !een ranted on thispoint alone. :is o!0ections, however, were not restricted to the firearms evidence, he



too& e%ception to 7ude #hayer's rulin on many rounds.

7ohn :enry imore, Dean of the /orthwestern =niversity School of aw, wasanered !y ran&furter's criticism. imore was the author of the renowned Treatise

on E(idence and a tireless crusader for court acceptance of scientific evidence. :eaccused ran&furter of underminin the orderly process of the court and violatinanon 24 of the American )ar Association's ode of Ethics. Banon 24 prohi!itsnewspaper pu!lications !y a lawyer a!out pendin litiation.C ran&furter and manyother intellectuals felt that Sacco and Van(etti hadn't !een iven a fair trial !ecausethey were radicals. #he pu!lic dispute !etween these two iants in the leal fieldillustrates how passionately people felt a!out the Sacco"Van(etti case.

alvin *oddard couldn't remain on the sidelines any loner. On 7une 6, 192>, threedays after the creation of the owell ommittee !y *overnor uller, he offered hisservices to the defense. ithout referrin to Sacco's or Van(etti's uilt or innocence,

*oddard said he would ma&e tests to determine if the fatal !ullet had !een fired fromSacco's un.

#he defense wasn't interested in *oddard's help. #hey were still holdin to theopinions of their e%pert, Dr. Al!ert :amilton. Althouh he was a phony, his findins!est fitted their theory of the case. hy ta&e a chance with a real e%pert li&e *oddardI

#he defense attorneys' !iased and naJve view of Dr. :amilton is illustrated in thispassae from a !oo& written several years later !y one of the Sacco"Van(etti defenselawyers5

Al!ert :. :amilton was a firearms e%pert, si%ty"two years of ae, who had thirty"sevenyearsF e%perience as a criminoloist. n the course of his e%periences he wasemployed in 1@3 homicide cases throuhout the country. n ninety per cent of thosecases he represented the *overnment. n connection with his wor& he repeatedlyvisited all the leadin American cartride, revolver, and pistol factories, inspectin themachinery used, their products, and the peculiarities of manufacture that aveindividuality to a firearm or to cartrides.

t must !e o!vious that :amilton was well +ualified to pass opinion on +uestions of factreardin firearms and cartrides. n April 1926 he made an e%amination of the so"called Kmortal !ulletF in the Sacco"Van(etti case. n this e%amination he used a

compound microscope which could measure 1L144,444 of an inch. :e came to theconclusion that the famous )ullet /o. 6 had not !een fired throuh SaccoFs pistol. @

#he prosecution, however, welcomed *oddard's assistance. #he e%amination too&place on 7une 6, 192>, in the office of the cler& of the courts in Dedham with one of thedefense e%perts, Auust *ill, present. *ill had never seen a comparison microscope!ut +uic&ly reali(ed its usefulness as an aid in comparin !ullets and shell casins.



Also present were four newspaper reporters and a stenorapher.

*oddard first compared the four empty cartrides found at the scene with a test shellthat had !een fired in Sacco's un. :e concluded that the third crime scene shell he

e%amined was identical in its mar&ins to the test cartride. *oddard was certain thatthe two shells had !een fired in the same weapon. #he firin"pin imprints were e%actlyali&e, and the mar&ins made !y the !reech"loc& were identical.

*oddard then e%amined the four !ullets from the !ody of the murdered uard. #hecomparison microscope revealed !eyond +uestion that the fatal !ullet num!er had!een fired from Sacco's un. #he riflin rooves were the same depth, width and rate ofpitch. n addition, there appeared tiny lonitudinal scratches that matched perfectly.<otatin the !ullets, *oddard lined up and compared each roove. :e then invited thedefense e%pert to loo& into the microscope. Auustus *ill areed, -#hat !ullet, he said,referrin to the fatal !ullet num!er , -ould not have come from any other un.

Auustus *ill had no choice !ut to inform the defense attorney that he was chanin hisopinion. :is 1926 testimony had !een in error. hen 7ames )urns, the defense e%pertwho had testified in the 1921 trial, had the opportunity to e%amine the !ullets throuh*oddard's microscope, he too chaned his opinion.

A report containin *oddard's test results was sent to the owell ommittee. On Auust6, 192>, *overnor uller, on the strenth of the owell ommittee's findins, refused tocommute the sentences of Sacco and Van(etti. #here is no +uestion that *oddard'sfindins reatly influenced the committee and the overnor.

*oddard also wrote a letter to *overnor uller settin out his findins. #his letter,printed in the Auust ?, 192> edition of the Boston E(ening Transcri$t , e%plains thefunction and wor&ins of *oddardFs comparison microscope5

#he instrument in +uestion is nothin more than a hihly perfected form of comparisonmicroscope, employin optical principals lon &nown. #he model used was, however,especially desined for investiations upon !ullets and shells and to the !est of my&nowlede none other e+ually well adapted to this purpose has !een constructed. tsfunction is to fuse into a sinle one, the imaes of two !ullets or shells, so that, in casethey !ear identical mar&ins, the composite picture produced will reveal, after theidentical mar&ins have !een located and !rouht into appro%imation, what appears to

!e a sinle o!0ect rather than the fusion of two o!0ects. =nless two !ullets have passedthrouh the same !arrel, they can never !e so fused as to present the appearance of asinle !ullet, the picture always revealin mar&ed differences in its two halves. #hisholds true also for shells which have or have not !een fired in the same arm. . . . >

After *oddard had filed his report and written his letter, he mentioned, in a discussionwith one of the defense attorneys, that !efore ma&in his tests he had already formedthe opinion, from loo&in at Van Am!urh's photoraphs, that Sacco's un had fired



!ullet . *oddard also e%pressed a low opinion of Dr. :amilton !ut was em!arrassedwhen the attorney produced a letter *oddard had written to :amilton in 1923 as&in hisadvice a!out startin a career in firearms identification. *oddard could only reply that in1923 he didn't &now a!out :amilton and his reputation. *oddard had pro!a!ly heard,for the first time, a!out :amilton's e%ploits and fiascos in 192 from harles aite when

*oddard 0oined the )ureau of orensic )allistics. At any rate, the discussion ended withthe defense attorney anrily defendin :amilton as a man of honor and first"classfirearms e%pert.

On Auust 26, 192>, more than si% years after the murderLro!!ery in South )raintree,the two em!attled radicals died in the electric chair at the harlestown State;rison.? ollowin their death, millions of demonstrators in do(ens of ma0or Americanand European cities too& to the streets in protest. 9 #he larest demonstrations were in)oston, /ew or& ity, and ;aris. Amon the protestors were several famous writers,artists, and intellectuals, many of whom were arrested when they attempted to stae apu!lic rally or refused to disperse.

Several years after the e%ecutions, the Sacco"Van(etti affair was still controversial. ore%ample, five years after their deaths, !om!s were still !ein thrown at the home of7ude e!ster #hayer whose death in $ay, 1966 came twelve years after the famoustrial.14 As evidenced !y the !oo&s and articles still !ein written a!out the case, interestin Sacco and Van(etti is still alive. 11 n 19>> Sacco and Van(etti had their namescleared in a special proclamation !y the overnor of $assachusetts.

One of those who !elieved stronly in Sacco's and Van(etti's innocence was the )ostonwriter, rancis <ussell. n 19@2 <ussell pu!lished a !oo& a!out the casecalled, Tragedy in &edham.12 BE%cerpts and materials from <ussell's !oo& have !een

cited previously in this chapter.C hile researchin the !oo&, <ussell as&ed 7ac eller,a firearms consultant and honorary curator of the est ;oint $useum, and ieutenant"olonel ran& . 7ury B=.S.A. retiredC, formerly in chare of the firearms identificationla!oratory of the /ew 7ersey State ;olice, to e%amine the firearms evidence in theSacco"Van(etti case. <ussell wanted two modern firearms e%perts, usin modern crimela!oratory e+uipment and techni+ues, to test out alvin *oddard's thirty"four"year"oldfindins.

n Octo!er of 19@1, the two e%perts test"fired Sacco's olt automatic. hen eller and7ury compared the test !ullets with the fatal !ullet num!er 6, !oth e%perts areed thatalvin *oddard had !een correct in his conclusion that one of the four !ullets ta&enfrom the !ody of the payroll uard )erardelli, the !ullet that had !een mar&ed , had!een fired from Sacco's olt automatic.16 ith these new test results in front of him,<ussell, li&e Auustus *ill and 7ames )urns !efore him, !ecame much less convincedof Sacco's innocence.

red 7. oo&, the author of the 19@2 article, -Sacco"Van(etti5 #he $issininerprints . ., wasn't impressed with <ussell's !oo& or his conclusion that Sacco'sun had fired the fatal !ullet. oo& called <ussell's !oo& -a masterpiece of



am!ivalence.13 oo& assets that <ussell's conclusions contradict the evidence hepresents in his own !oo&.

Amon other thins, oo& challenes the validity of the 19@1 tests !y eller and 7uryon the rounds that the two firearms e%perts were already convinced that Sacco's un

had fired the mortal !ullet. oo& points out that in 19>, eller and 7ury revised aclassic firearms identification te%t!oo& first pu!lished in 193@ !y 7ulian S. :atcher.1 nthe preface to the second edition, eller and 7ury pay tri!ute to alvin *oddard andharles Van Am!urh for their wor& in the Sacco"Van(etti case. $oreover, the te%t itselfcontains comparison photoraphs showin that !ullet had !een fired from Sacco'sweapon. rom this, oo& concludes that eller and 7ury were not impartial e%perts,thus castin dou!t on the validity of their findins.1@ Of course if one assumes thateller and 7ury are competent and honest scientists, any previous notions they hada!out *oddard, Van Am!urh, or the Sacco"Van(etti case would have !een put aside.t could !e arued that oo& has made too much of the e%perts' respect for *oddardand his wor&.

oo&'s s&epticism would !e shared, however, !y those who would !e +uic& to point outthat when the eller"7ury tests were made in 19@1, !ullet was over forty years old.#he un itself had pro!a!ly rusted and !oth the weapon and the !ullet had !eenhandled !y many people over the years.

hat oo& doesn't mention is that two other well"&nown and respected firearmsidentification e%perts, 7ac& D. and harles O. *unther, also reviewed the firearmsevidence in the case several years after the trial !ut !efore eller and 7ury had ta&enup the tas&. Althouh they found the e%pert testimony of !oth sides of the 1921 trialworthless and misleadin, they areed with *oddard that one of the crime scene shell

casins had !een fired from Sacco's pistol. n 196, the *unthers pu!lished The)dentification of *irearms from Ammunition *ired Therein which contains a compositephotoraph of the test shell and crime scene cartride. 1> #he *unthersF opinion that the!reech!loc& of Sacco's un had made the mar&s on one of the crime scene shells is notcontained in their te%t!oo&. #he opinion was, however, e%pressed in a letter to Edmund$. $oran, one of the authors of the 193? !oo& on the case, The Legacy of Sacco and+an,etti .1?

n his article, oo& also noted that althouh numerous latent finerprints had !een liftedfrom the et"a"way car, the police never confronted Sacco and Van(etti with finerprintevidence connectin them to the crime. rom this oo& concludes the neither Sacco orVan(etti's were on the car, this !ein, in his mind, further evidence of their innocence.oo& writes5

ertainly, if Sacco's and Van(etti's prints had !een o!tained from the murder car, thefinerprint evidence would have !ecome the ma0or, irrefuta!le item in the state's arsenalof proof. O!viously, Sacco's and Van(etti's prints were not on the murder car. #his isneative evidence, !ut loic does not stop here. #here had !een five men in the )uic&. .



. it is inconceiva!le that the finerprints of some of those five would not have !eenshown.19

#he a!sence of physical clues lin&in a person to the scene of the crime is notnecessarily stron evidence that the person is innocent. #his is particularly true with

reard to latent finerprints. t's always reasona!le to suppose that a suspect woreloves of that he carefully wiped off any o!0ects he touched that miht incriminate him.#his principle would certainly apply to a vehicle used in connection with a dou!lemurder.

oo&'s missin finerprint analysis of the Sacco"Van(etti case is considered !y;rofessor 7ames . Oster!ur in his !oo&, The Crime Laboratory .24 Oster!ur ma&esthe point that when a person touches somethin, an identifia!le latent is notautomatically left on that o!0ect. #he thin touched must have the &ind of surface thatwill accept a print. f the o!0ect is held too tihtly of released in the wron way, the latentwill !e smuded and therefore useless. $oreover, if the crime scene investiator uses

the wron e+uipment or techni+ue in treatin the print, it will !e lost. So, the fact that aperson's prints are not on an o!0ect isn't proof that he didn't touch it.

#he Sacco"Van(etti case certainly !rouht pu!lic attention to the developin science offirearms identification. )ut !ecause the outcome was so controversial and the firearmse%perts so divided and un+ualified, the case cannot !e considered a criminalisticmasterpiece. n this reard, the history of firearms identification and scientific liedetection have somethin in common. n !oth fields the opportunity to apply the newscience was ta&en !efore the practitioners were up to the tas&.


HHHHHH

1. #he )ureau was a commercial failure, most law enforcement aencies at the time

weren't sophisticated enouh to ta&e advantae of the )ureau's criminalistic services. t

wasn't lon !efore the orani(ation was dissolved.

2. ran&furter, eli%, -#he ase of Sacco M Van(etti, 169 Atlantic onthly , 349 B$arch,

192>C

6. ran&furter, eli%, The Case of Sacco - +an,etti: A Critical Analysis for La!yers and

Laymen, B)oston5 ittle, )rown M o., 192>C. #he !oo& was reprinted with a new

introduction !y Edmund $. $oran in 193 and in 19@2 !y *rosset M Dunlap B=niversal

i!rary EditionC.3. ran&furter, eli%, The Case of Sacco - +an,etti: A Critical Analysis for La!yers and

Laymen, B/5 *rosset M Dunlap, 19@2C, pp >@"91.

. 7ohn :enry omore B1?@6"1936C is most widely &nown for his Treatise on

E(idence, the first edition appearin in four volumes in 1943". #he second edition was

pu!lished in volumes in 1926 and a third in 1934 when the author was >> years old.

#he third edition comprised 14 volumes. #he edition was &ept up"to"date !y the use of



poc&et supplements. #he wor& has ained reconition as the standard in the leal field

and is cited more than any wor& of its &ind. imore wrote several other !oo&s and in

1929 helped orani(e the Scientific rime Detection a!oratory at the aw School at

/orthwestern =niversity. or a discussion of the ran&furter"imore dispute, see5

<oalfe, illiam <., -7ohn :enry imore N Scholar and <eformer, Journal of Criminal

La!. Criminology and Police Science, 656 BSeptem!er, 19@2C pp 2>>"644.

@. $ussmanno, $ichael a., After T!el(e ears, B/5 Alfred A. Gnopf, 1969C, p 1>@.

$usmanno, the author of several !oo&s, !ecame a distinuished 0ustice of the

;ennsylvania Supreme ourt, #he Sacco"Van(etti case is discussed in a later !oo& !y

$ussmanno entitled, +erdict/ , B/5 Dou!leday, 19?C.

>. #his letter has !een reprinted in its entirety in5 $ontomery, <o!ert:., Sacco0+an,etti: The urder and the yth, B/5 #he Devin"Adair o.,19@4C pp 14"@.?. or a complete record of the Sacco"Van(etti trial and related proceedins,see5 Transcri$t of the "ecord of the Trial of 1icola Sacco and Bartolomeo+an,etti in the Courts of assachusetts and Subse2uent Proceedings 345603457 , @ Vols, /5 :enry :olt M o., 192?. #he record consists of two and one"half million words. See also5 Common!ealth (s8 Sacco, 2 $ass. 6@9, 11/.E. ?69 B192@C9. ;etitions for clemency had poured in from such people as )ernard Shaw,:.*. ells, illiam O. Doulas, iorello :. a*uardia, :eywood )roun, Al!ertEinstein, Sinclair ewis, #heodore Dreiser as well as from hundreds of othersin the world of the arts, the academic community, the leal profession, andpolitics.14. #he followin notice appeared in the $ay 1, 1966 issue of Time aga,ine5

-Died. e!ster #hayer, >, $assachusetts Superior ourt 7ude of a cere!ralem!olism in )oston. As he lay diein in )oston's =niversity lu! a policemanand his personal !odyuard who had attended him since the !om!in of hisorchester, $ass home last autumn BTime, Oct. 6C, stood uard outside toforestall any last out!urst of violence which had threatened him since April 9,192>, when he sentences Shoema&er /icola Sacco and ish ;eddler)artolomeo Van(etti to death.11. Some of the more current wor&s a!out the Sacco"Van(etti case are5Ehrmann, :er!ert )., The Case That %ill 1ot &ie: Common!ealth (s8 Saccoand +an,etti , B)oston5 ittle, )rown M o., 19@9C Ehrmann was the associatecounsel for the Sacco"Van(etti defense euerlicht, <.S., Justice Crucified:

The Story of Sacco and +an,etti , /5 $c*raw":ill, 19>> ;orter, G.A., -#he/ever"endin ron, Atlantic onthly , B7une 19>>C pp 6?"@3 and Puesado,ernando, Sacco and +an,etti , /5 *ordon, 19>@.12. <ussell, rancis, Tragedy in &edham, B/5 $c*raw":ill, 19@2C16. #he results of the eller"7ury tests are on paes 3@3" of <ussell's !oo&.



13. oo&, red 7., -Sacco"Van(etti5 #he $issin inerprints . ., The 1ation BDecem!er

22, 19@2C

oo&, p332

1. :atcher, 7ulian S., *irearms )n(estigation. )dentification and E(idence, B:arris!ur,

;A5 Stac&pole o., 193@C Second Edition !y 7ac eller and ran& . 7ury, 19>

1@. <eardin eller's and 7ury's modern tests of the Sacco"Van(etti firearms

evidence, oo& state5 -n the preface, they paid personal tri!ute to olonel *oddard,

'who enerously ave us the !enefit of his uni+ue e%perience,' and in the !ody of the

te%t they also !estowed a !ou+uet upon Van Am!urh for wor& that 'was of reat value

to the cause of 0ustice in the famous Sacco"Van(etti case.' One section of the !oo&,

contri!uted !y the $assachusetts State ;olice, contains comparison photoraphs of the

!ullets desined to show that the mortal slu came from Sacco's un. #he whole tenor

of the te%t in this section is that the !allistics evidence in the Sacco"Van(etti case was

unimpeacha!le. hat the se+uence says clearly was that the two e%perts whom

<ussell selected to ma&e the 19@1 test were men already alined in sympathies withthe two most controversial state e%perts in the case, Van Am!urh and *oddard they

were men who had already accepted as final truth the police version of the case. n

such circumstances, their impartiality has to !e called into +uestion. Boo&, p 339C

1>. *unther, 7ac& D. and harles O., The )dentification of *irearms from Ammunition

*ired Therein, B/5 7ohn iley and Son, 196C. #he composite photoraph of the two

shells is iure 16@ on pae 113.

1?. 7ouhin, *. ouis and Edmund $. $oran, The Legacy of Sacco and +an,etti , B/5

:arcourt, )race and o., 193?C p 6>.

19. oo&, pae 31. ontemporary newspaper accounts of the investiation suest

that several difference sets of finerprints had !een o!tained from the et"a"waycar. The Broc#ton Times, on April 2, 1924, reported that aptain illiam ;roctor and

his detectives were hopin the finerprint evidence would turn up some suspects. On

$ay @, the day after the arrest of Sacco and Van(etti, The Broc#ton Times reported that

nspector *eore . hase was ma&in a comparison of the finerprints of Sacco and

Van(etti with the latents lifted from the et"a"way car. #he results of the comparisons,

made !y Eddie Sherloc&, the $assachusetts state finerprint e%pert, were never made

pu!lic.

24. Oster!ur, 7ames ., The Crime Laboratory: Case Studies of Scientific Criminal

)n(estigations, B)loominton, nd5 ndiana =niversity ;ress, 19@?C p 2. As of 19?2, the

!oo& is in its second edition.


HHHHHH

The Stielow Firearms Identification Case



harles ). ;helps was ninety"years"old and lived in a farmhouse one milesouth of est Shel!y, /ew or& with his house&eeper, $araret olcott.

Across the road in a tenant house lived harles . Stielow, a mentally slowfarmhand from *ermany who resided there with his wife, two children, mother"in"law, and !rother"in"law, /elson *reen.

At five in the mornin on $arch 22, 191, harlie wal&ed out his front door tofind, on his doorstep, the house&eeper, $rs. olcott. lad in her nihtown,she lay !loodied and dead in the snow. Stielow ran across the street to $r.;helps's house and found him unconscious on the floor. #he almost hystericalfarmhand rounded up several neih!ors who fetched Sheriff )artlett of Al!ionto the scene. $r. ;helps was rushed to a hospital in $edina, /ew or& !ut hedied a few hours later without reainin consciousness.

Sheriff )artlett found the contents of the !ureau drawers in $r. ;helps's!edroom strewn a!out and all of his money one. )oth victims had !een shot

!y .22 cali!er !ullets.

A coroner's in+uest was held on $arch 2@, 191. #he &ey witnesses wereharlie Stielow and his !rother"in"law who testified that on the niht of themurder they heard cries comin from across the street. #hey ot up andloo&ed out the door !ut didn't see or hear anythin suspicious so they went!ac& to !ed. )oth men denied ownin a un.

#he local authorities decided to hire a private detective out of )uffalo, /ewor& named *eore /ewton. Shortly after ta&in over the investiation,/ewton discovered that harlie Stielow owned a .22 cali!er revolver. On the

strenth of that discovery and the fact that he had lied, harlie was arrested on April 21, 191. n an effort to determine if this was the murder weapon, /ewton!rouht a man into the case named Dr. Al!ert :amilton.

:amilton was a former concoctor of patent medicines from Au!urn, /ew or&who mas+ueraded as a criminalist. After awardin himself a phony medicalderee, he !ean advertisin himself as an e%pert in the fields of chemistry,microscopy, handwritin, to%icoloy, !loodstains, causes of death, em!almin,anatomy, and firearms identification. ith less than a hih school educationand a!solutely no e%perience as a scientist, :amilton was a complete andshameless charlatan.

:amilton e%amined the four !ullets ta&en from the two victims as well as the .22 cali!er revolver and declared, without test"firin Stielow's un, that it hadfired the !ullets that had &illed $r. ;helps and his house&eeper. On April 26,while !ein +uestioned in the county 0ail !y /ewton and three police officers,Stielow was said to have confessed to the murders. :e refused, however, to



sin a written version of his confession.

Stielow was indicted of irst Deree $urder and !rouht to trial !efore 7usticeuth!ert . ;ound of )uffalo on 7uly 11, 191. #he prosecution led off with its

so"called firearms e%pert, Al!ert :amilton, who swore that he had found nine!umps inside the mu((le end of the !arrel to StielowFs revolver. #hese-pro0ections as he called them, had made nine correspondin scratches onthe four !ullets ta&en from the !odies. :amilton told the 0ury that no other uncould have fired these !ullets. #he prosecutor as&ed :amilton if the 0urymem!ers could see these scratches for themselves to which he replied, -/o, can tell !ecause am a hihly technical man. can see what the 0ury cannotsee.1

Stielow's defense attorney, David A. hite, arued that Stielow's confessionhad !een coerced and was therefore not admissi!le. 7ude ;ound ruled

aainst the defense, admittin the testimony of /ewton and the police officerswho had interroated Stielow. After eiht days of testimony, the case went tothe 0ury who found the defendant uilty as chared. #he 0ude sentencedStielow to electrocution. #he /ew or& Supreme ourt, in a $ercuriamdecision on e!ruary 22, 191@, upheld the conviction. harlie was sentto Sin Sin ;rison where he awaited his e%ecution on death row. :e wasscheduled to die on Septem!er , 191@.

Durin his incarceration at Sin Sin, several people familiar with the case!ecame convinced that harlie was innocent. /umerous lawyers too& up hiscase and on the eve of his scheduled e%ecution the *overnor of /ew or&

ranted harlie a stay of e%ecution.

n Septem!er of 191@, an itinerant peddler named Erwin Gin and an e%"connamed larence O'onnell confessed to &illin $r. ;helps and hishouse&eeper durin a !urlary. )oth men retracted their confessions shortlyafter ma&in them, claimin that the police had !eaten them. As a result,Stielow's motion for a new trial was denied. :e was rescheduled to die onDecem!er 11, 191@.

*overnor hitman had !een followin the case closely and a wee& !eforeharlie was to die, he commuted his sentence to life imprisonment, statin that

he !elieved Stielow innocent of the murders. #he *overnor ne%t re+uested andreceived from the state leislature, a special appropriation of 82,444 for areinvestiation of the case. #he *overnor as&ed *eore :. )and, a formerdistrict attorney from Syracuse, /ew or&, to spearhead the in+uiry. $r. )ondhired harles E. aite, an employee in the /ew or& State Attorney *eneral'sOffice, to assist him. aite's 0o! was to analy(e the firearms evidence in thecase, particularly Al!ert :amilton's claim that Stielow's revolver had fired the



fatal !ullets.

aite too& Stielow's revolver and the four !ullets to aptain :enry 7ones, thefirearms e%pert at the /ew or& ity ;olice Department. 7ones loo&ed over the

un and announced that it hadn't !een fired in three or four years. aptain7ones then fired several rounds throuh the o!solete weapon into cotton!attin. 7ones compared the murder !ullets with the ones 0ust fired throuhStielow's !arrel and could see with his na&ed eye that they were dissimilar.#he !ullets ta&en from the victims' !odies were smooth while the onesretrieved from the cotton !attin were oued and nawed. #o ma&e certain oftheir findins, aptain 7ones and aite too& the two sets of !ullets to $a%;oser, a noted e%pert in microscopy who e%amined them under his microscopeand declared Stielow's un couldn't have !een the murder weapon.

*overnor hitman received aite's report and was certain !eyond a dou!t

that harlie Stielow had !een wronly convicted. )ecause of this !elief, the*overnor commuted Stielow's sentence and ordered him immediately releasedfrom prison. A few months later, one of the men who had confessed to themurders earlier, confessed aain and was convicted. :avin served over twoyears on death row, harlie Stielow was never compensated !y the state forhis false imprisonment.2

#he Stielow ase is important in the history of firearms identification !ecause itled to aite's interest in the field. )efore his death seven years later, harlesaite would esta!lish himself as the father of modern firearms identification

1. aite, harles E., -irearms dentification, The &etecti(e BOcto!er, 192>C.<eprinted in Dilworth, Donald BedC, Silent itness B*aithers!ur, $D5nternational hiefs of ;olice, 19>>.2. #he account of the harlie Stielow ase is !ased upon the followin !oo&s5)orchard, Edwin $.,Con(icting the )nnocent B*arden ity, /5 *arden ity;u!lishin, 1966C pp. 231"25 )loc&, Euene ).,The +indicators, B*arden ity,/5 Dou!leday, 19@6C pp. 246"24 and <o!inson, :enry $orton, Science+ersus Crime Bndianapolis5 )o!!s"$errill, 196C pp. >2"?.


HHHHHH

Courtroom Charlatan

#he American trial, as a method of resolvin disputes, determinin uilt, and renderin 0ustice, is one of our most sacred institutions. ertain rules, such as the one thatprohi!its witnesses from statin opinions, are desined to screen out unrelia!leevidence. #he opinion rule, however, had this e%ception5 +ualified e%perts in certain



scientific fields are allowed to present their informed opinions to the 0ury.

)einnin in the mid"nineteenth century, physicians were allowed to state theirmedical opinions in court. Since then, the courts have !een slow to accept theopinions of other e%perts, and to reconi(e other sciences. #he courts will not allow,

for e%ample, the testimony of polyraph e%aminers, hypnotists, and rapholoists.

Durin the first two decades of the twentieth century, the courts !ean to reconi(e aroup of disciplines related directly to criminal investiation. /ow called criminalistics,these sciences include finerprints, +uestioned documents, and firearms identification.Durin this crucial period, the future of criminalistics was threatened !y phony e%perts.;erhaps the most serious threat involved one of the era's most famous personalities,the star witness in the Sacco"Van(etti defense, and a &ey player in do(ens ofcele!rated cases. #his man was Al!ert :amilton, and, as it turned out, he was the!iest phony of them all. :e was America's reatest courtroom charlatan.

n 194?, :amilton pu!lished a !rochure a!out himself called, -#hat $an rom Au!urn. n this piece of self"advertisement, the druist from Au!urn, /ew or&descri!ed himself as an e%pert in chemistry, microscopy, handwritin, in& analysis,typewritin identification, photoraphy, finerprints, and forensic to%icoloy. :e alsoclaimed e%pertise in the fields of unshot wounds, !ullet identification, uns,nitrolycerine, un powder, !lood stains, causes of death, anatomy, and em!almin.#o match his impressive +ualifications, he awarded himself a medical deree, andfrom then on he was &nown as Doctor :amilton.

Al!ert :amilton came into prominence in 191 when he testified for the prosecution asa firearms e%pert in a rural /ew or& murder case. #he defendant was harlie

Stielow, a slihtly retarded farm hand who was accused of shootin to death thecouple who owned the farm where he wor&ed and lived. Stielow was convicted of first"deree murder on the strenth of a coerced confession and the !allistic findins of:amilton who testified that a scratch inside the !arrel of StielowFs 22 cali!er revolverhad made a mar& on one of the murder !ullets. :avin earned fifty dollars a day for hiswor& on the case, :amilton impressed the 0ury !y showin them enlared photoraphsof the fatal !ullet.

:amilton's testimony was pure ho&um. #he science of firearms identification as it ispracticed today, did not e%ist in 191. #he comparison microscope, an instrumentessential to the comparison and analysis of firearms evidence, was not invented until

192@. /evertheless, :amilton assured the 0ury that the fatal !ullet had !een fired fromthe defendant's un. :is findins went unchallened, and no one seemed to noticethat he hadn't even test"fired the so"called murder weapon. harlie Stielow was founduilty, and sentenced to death.

#wo years later, a pair of tramps confessed to the murder, and the *overnor of /ewor& formed a commission to review the case. harles aite, an investiator in the



/ew or& Attorney *eneral's Office, was appointed !y the commission to loo& into thematter.

aite too& Stielow's revolver to a /ew or& ity police detective who &new firearms. A

thorouh e%amination of the un convinced the officer that Stielow's revolver hadn't!een fired in four years. $oreover, a na&ed eye e%amination of the test"!ullets showedvastly different !arrel mar&s than those found on the murder !ullets.

As a result of these findins, harlie Stielow was pardoned, and harles aite wenton to !ecome a well"&nown firearms e%pert. n 1922, aite formed the )ureau oforensic )allistics in /ew or& ity. #he !ureau, the first of its &ind, was ta&en over in192@ !y Dr. alvin *oddard an Army sureon and ordnance officer from )altimorewho !ecame the most prominent firearms identification e%pert in the world.

n 1926, two talian"American anarchists, /icola Sacco and )artolomeo Van(etti, were

convicted of shootin a factory paymaster and his !odyuard to death in South)raintree, $assachusetts. #he defendants' attorneys were see&in rounds for a newtrial and called upon the services of Al!ert :amilton. Since the Sacco"Van(etti casehad !een ra!!in headline for months, :amilton eaerly ot involved in the case.

Sacco's conviction has !een !ased chiefly on the testimony of three firearmswitnesses who said the !ullet that &illed the uard had !een fired from his 62 cali!erhandun. #he e%perts also !elieved that the un the police found on Van(etti whenthey arrested him had !eloned to the slain uard.

After e%aminin the firearms evidence, :amilton reported that the fatal !ullet had not

!een fired from Sacco's un, and the weapon in Van(etti's possession was not the unthat !eloned to the !odyuard.

<elyin on :amilton's findins, the Sacco"Van(etti defense made a motion for a newtrial. #o counter this motion, the prosecution ac+uired the services of two new e%perts.n /ovem!er, 1966, durin the hearin for the new trial, :amilton conducted an in"court demonstration involvin two olts and Sacco's un. #he new 62 cali!erhanduns !eloned to :amilton. n front of the 0ude and the lawyers for !oth sides,:amilton disassem!led all three pistols and placed their parts in three piles on theta!le. :e then e%plained the functions of each part and demonstrated how they wereinterchanea!le. After reassem!lin the handuns, :amilton placed the two new

weapons !ac& into his poc&et and handed Sacco's olt to the court cler&. )efore heleft the courtroom, the 0ude as&ed :amilton to leave the new uns !ehind. Severalmonths later, when the 0ude as&ed one of the prosecution firearms e%perts toreinspect Sacco's un, the e%pert discovered that the !arrel to Sacco's un was !randnew. ollowin an in+uiry, :amilton admitted that the new !arrel on Sacco's olt hadcome from one of his pistols. Althouh it was o!vious to everyone that :amilton hadmade the switch, presuma!ly with a mistrial in mind, he denied it. :amilton continued



his association with the Sacco"Van(etti defense, !ut he no loner played an importantrole in the case. :e had destroyed his credi!ility as a firearms e%pert witness.

#he Sacco"Van(etti motion for a new trial was denied, and in 192> the two men were

e%ecuted. ;rior to their death, Dr. alvin *oddard, the most +ualified firearmse%aminer in the world, stated that Sacco's un had !een the murder weapon. BSeveralmodern firearms e%perts have e%amined the !allistics evidence in the case and areewith *oddard's findins.C

#he !arrel"switchin incident in the Sacco"Van(etti case apparently had no effect upon:amilton's phony career as a criminalist. Eiht years later he testified for the defense asa firearms e%pert in a :oplinton, /ew or& murder case. #he defendant, on whose!ehalf :amilton testified, was convicted and electrocuted.

#he a!ove case involved the $ay, 1962 murder of harles itherell !y his sonStephen. hen initially +uestioned !y the police, the son admitted shootin his father atpoint !lan& rane with a <eminton, hih"powered rifle he had stolen from his cousin.#he rifle was identified as the murder weapon !y a firearms e%pert from the /ew or&ity ;olice Department.

hen the defendant too& the stand at his trial, he denied shootin anyone, and claimedthat the !ody in +uestion was not his father's. BDecomposition and the massive unshotwound to the victim's head had made the !ody unreconi(a!le.C

Al!ert :amilton too& the stand and said there were two unshot wounds on the !ody

the head wound caused !y a rifle, and a wound on the victim's hand, made !y a pistol. Actually, there was no hand wound at all, the victim had lost two finers in an industrialaccident. :amilton had proved aain that, at !est, he was rossly incompetent.

n 1966, :amilton was callin himself a -chemical and microscopical investiator. #hatsummer, he ot his hands on one of the circulars that had !een sent out !yinvestiators wor&in on the ind!erh &idnappin case. #he 24"month"old !a!y ofharles and Anne ind!erh had !een a!ducted from the ind!erh estate near:opewell, /ew 7ersey on the niht of $arch 1, 1962. #wo and a half months later, thechild's remains were found in a shallow rave two miles from the !a!y's nursery. A fiftythousand dollar ransom had !een paid si% wee&s earlier. #he /ew 7ersey State ;olice

were desperate for a solid suspect and the !est evidence they had were the fourteenransom notes from the &idnapper.

#he ind!erh circular contained photoraphs of two of the ransom notes. awenforcement officials all over the country were !ein as&ed to compare the handwritinon the fliers with that of suspicious persons in their custody.



Al!ert :amilton too& his copy of the circular to the prison in Au!urn where he found aninmate named $anny Strewl whose handwritin supposedly matched the ind!erhransom notes.

Strewl, a thirty"one"year"old e%!ootleer, was in 0ail as a suspect in the /ew or&

State &idnappin of ieutenant 7ohn :. O'onnell, the nephew of a local and prominentpolitician. ieutenant O'onnell had !een released !y his a!ductor followin a fortythousand dollar ransom pay"off.

After studyin Strewl's handwritin and the ind!erh ransom notes, :amilton fired off areport to the ind!erh authorities identifyin Strewl as the !a!y's &idnapper. hen theychec&ed on :amilton's !ac&round, the officers wor&in on the ind!erh case decidedto inore his report. :amilton's reputation as a phony had apparently cauht up withhim.

$eanwhile, the prosecution in the O'onnell case had secured the services of the

renowned +uestioned documents e%aminer, Al!ert S. Os!orn. Os!orn was also wor&inon the ind!erh case, and after loo&in at Strewl's handwritin, was sure he hadnothin to do with the ind!erh crime. :owever, accordin to Os!orn, Strewl hadwritten the O'onnell ransom letters. :amilton's findins, therefore, were in directconflict with Os!orn's, and that put :amilton in a difficult position. Strewl's involvementin the /ew or& &idnappin made him a ood suspect in the ind!erh case. )ut if:amilton too& the position that Strewl had written the O'onnell ransom notes, he would!e areein with Os!orn, the e%pert who had concluded that Strewl hadn't written theind!erh writins.

acin the possi!ility of !ein left out of !oth cases, :amilton too& the only avenue

open to him, he 0oined forces with the defense in the O'onnell case, ta&in the a!surdposition that $anny Strewl had not written the O'onnell ransom notes. #his mind"!olin switch e%posed :amilton as a !old"faced charlatan.

Strewl was tried for the O'onnell &idnappin in $arch, 1963, at Al!any, /ew or&. On$arch >, Al!ert S. Os!orn too& the stand, and usin enlared photoraphs of the hand"printed ransom letters, pointed out the similarities !etween the O'onnell ransom notesand Strewl's &nown writin. )esides the appearance of the writin, Strewl's specimenscontained the same misspellins as those found in the ransom notes.

#he ne%t day, the O'onnell prosecutor put two other handwritin e%perts on the stand,

El!ride . Stein of $ontclair, /ew 7ersey, and :er!ert 7. alter of hicao. )oth menlin&ed Strewl to the ransom notes.

:amilton was the first witness for the defense. After proudly tellin the 0ury he hadtestified in more than one thousand handwritin disputes, he stated firmly that $annyStrewl had not written the O'onnell ransom notes. On cross"e%amination, theprosecutor e%posed :amilton as the phony he was. :amilton was shown two letters hehad written si% months earlier to the prosecutor. n the first letter, :amilton had written,



-rom the e%amination have made of the &idnap writins and re+uest printinsu!mitted to me . . . it is my opinion that they were all written !y one and the sameperson. #he re+uest material :amilton was referrin to was $anny Strewl's &nownhandwritin. n the second letter, :amilton had assured the district attorney that he hadnot chaned his opinion that Strewl had printed the ransom notes in the O'onnell case.

:amilton had !een cauht red"handed and pu!licly disraced. n liht of this revelation,the 0ude had no choice !ut to rule his testimony unrelia!le. #he 0ude told the 0ury todisreard his findins.

#he defense collapsed without :amilton's testimony, and Strewl was convicted and sentto prison for fifty years. As for :amilton, his career as a criminalist was finally over. :ehad disraced himself for the last time. An old man, he died a few years later.

)y the 1964's most of the phony criminalists had !een identified and !arred from thecourts. Althouh he had disraced himself many times, Al!ert :amilton's career

spanned two decades, ma&in him one of the most successful courtroom charlatans in American history.

f there is anythin to !e learned from :amilton's career, it is this5 the world is full ofphonies, and if 0udes let down their uard, we will have charlatans in our courtroomsand !aloney in our verdicts.

Documents

Story of Murder on St. Valentine's Day.doc