The L.A. River Torso Slaying, Part 4

Posted on December 6, 2014 by Deranged

teeth drawing Captain Bright’s faith in his detectives and the crime lab wasn’t misplaced. Six weeks following the discovery of a woman’s torso in the Los Angeles River partial identification of the victim was made through her teeth. The dead woman was tentatively identified as Mrs. Laura B. Sutton. She was 40 years of age and had mysteriously disappeared at the end of March–six days before the torso was found.

teeth chart Mrs. Sutton’s brother, E.J. Groff, had seen the drawings of the teeth in the newspaper and immediately contacted his sister’s dentist. While the doctor wouldn’t go so far as to state positively that the teeth were Mrs. Sutton’s, he was willing to say that they closely resembled them–he would need to make a trip to the Coroner’s Office to make a positive match. Unfortunately, his trip to the see the skull would have to be delayed until he could find Sutton’s x-rays, which he had misplaced.

Groff told detectives that prior to her disappearance his sister had been behaving strangely. She seemed agitated and made a number of odd statements. She told him that she had left an unrecorded lot in his custody and then she said: “If anything ever should happen to me, that lot I deeded you is not recorded.”

She made no effort to explain herself further. Then she told him that two Liberty bonds had been stolen from a safety deposit box. Apparently whoever took them had slipped a sharp instrument into the envelope in which they were kept, removed the bonds, then resealed the envelope so carefully that nobody would have noticed if they’d merely glanced inside the box.

Groff provided the name of a man he felt could be responsible for the missing bonds, and for his missing sister. The detectives wouldn’t give out the man’s name until they’d had an opportunity to investigate further.

There were the usual false leads in the investigation; a hair sample taken from the skull and compared with hair found in Mrs. Sutton’s house seemed to indicate that the torso wasn’t hers. But then detectives interviewed Sutton’s hairdresser who told them that the missing woman had been attacked in mid-March, just a week or two before she went missing. The hairdresser said Sutton had told her she didn’t recognize her attacker, but she could have been concealing his identity for reasons of her own. Perhaps the attack was the result of a failed love affair. hairdresser story

Until they could get confirmation from Sutton’s dentist, Sheriff’s investigators continued to run down clues. They wanted to speak to Eugene Sutton, whom Laura had divorced in 1928. As an ex-spouse, behind in his alimony payments, Eugene was a person of interest.

While the detectives followed various leads the Coroner’s office reported that a minute examination of the knife marks on the toro where the head and limbs had been severed had produced results. The body had been dismembered by someone familiar with human anatomy and a surgical knife had probably been the tool used. An examination of the flesh suggested to the coroner than the murderer had a practical knowledge of surgery. The autopsy surgeon, Dr. Wagner, estimated that the killer would have needed about three hours in which to complete the gruesome task.

Dr. Frank William Westlake, retired physician and a former suitor of Mrs. Sutton’s, came forward to make a detailed statement to Captain Bright. Westlake said that he saw Laura on March 28th when she came to him saying that she planned to travel to Ventura for a few days to see her ex-husband about the unpaid alimony. According to Westlake, Laura had left two pet birds in his care.

Laura’s sister, Mrs. Ida Kleppe, was questioned by Sheriff’s detectives but she couldn’t offer much help. She said that she and her sister had been estranged for several years.

Round-the-clock efforts to either find Laura Sutton, or conclusively identify the torso as hers, consumed both detectives and scientists. Captain Bright got another visit from Dr. Westlake who brought with him several notes signed with the initials L.B.S., which he said were from Sutton. The notes were a mixed bag. Some of them were in envelopes and others had been stuffed into Westlake’s mailbox. Some had been typed, others handwritten, and each of them made reference to the pet canaries in Westlake’s care.

Frank Gompert with the portable lab. [Photo: Corbis]

The notes could provide useful information, but first they would have to be examined by handwriting experts to determine their authenticity.

If Laura Sutton had written the notes then why hadn’t she come forward? The woman had been missing for nearly three months. Neither her friends, nor her family, could offer any explanation for such peculiar behavior.

While detectives were following leads and the scientists were examining physical evidence, deputies where searching the river bottom from Vernon to Compton for the still missing limbs. They were also preparing to rip out the plumbing in Laura’s house to see if there was any physical evidence of a murder and dismemberment lodged in the pipes.

ear solves murder The scientists had found another interesting avenue of inquiry–the ears of the deceased. According to those who knew her Laura’s ears had been pierced for earrings, but the ears on the head were intact.

The case became further complicated when Laura’s attorney, Willard Andrews, perhaps the last person to see her alive, came forward with a statement that was mind-boggling. Laura told him she intended to find her ex-husband and her sister, Mrs. Kleppe, and “have it out with them.” Why? Because her sister and her ex were having an affair–in fact it was the reason for the divorce. No wonder Laura and her sister were estranged. Even worse, her sister and her ex-husband planned to marry. Talk about awkward family gatherings.

From virtually nothing to go on Sheriff’s investigators suddenly had suspects and physical evidence galore, all they had to do was to make sense out of it.

On May 28th an x-ray of the victim’s ears showed that they had been pierced but that they’d healed over so that the holes weren’t visible to the naked eye. The x-ray evidence was a step in the right direction–then the dentist, E.C. Hyde, positively identified the teeth in the skull as Laura Sutton’s.

With the victim ID’d Captain Bright still had to deal with a growing list of potential suspects. Just like in the movies Captain Bright summoned everyone connected to the case to the homicide squad’s office for questioning. The L.A. Times listed the people who had been rounded up:

“Eugene Sutton, divorced husband of Mrs. Sutton; Ben King, sweetheart of and roomer at the home of Mrs. Sutton when she disappeared; Dr. Frank Westlake, asserted sweetheart of Mrs. Sutton, said to have freqauently aided the woman in financial transactions involving real estate; Mrs. Ida Kleppe, sister of Mrs. Sutton who assert to Captain Bright that she and her sister had not been friendly for years, and Emerson De Groff, brother of the missing woman.”

By May 30th Captain Bright and his detectives had finally narrowed their list down to a single suspect. Who? Wait and see.

NEXT TIME: A suspect is named.

The L.A. River Torso Slaying, Part 3

Posted on December 4, 2014 by Deranged

A muddy river bank is the perfect place for a group of little boys to poke around searching for hidden treasures, and that’s exactly what William Pettibone, Ray Seegar, Floyd Waterstreet and Glen Druer were doing on May 18, 1929.

The boys were about 150 feet from the Florence Avenue Bridge in the city of Bell when they spotted what looked to them like a turtle’s shell, or maybe some peculiar prehistoric fish. One of the boys took a stick and poked it into an end of the bony structure and held it aloft for the others to gape at. It took a few minutes but the boys finally recognized their treasure for what it really was, a human skull. head key to crime

The boy with the head impaled on a stick ran up the roadway with his prize and showed it to a female motorist who was utterly horrified when she realized what the kid had. She managed to keep it together long enough to drive the boy to a public telephone where she called Bell’s Chief of Police.

Chief Smith and Motor Officer Steele met the woman and the group of boys near the river where the skull had been found. The woman who had driven the boy to the telephone booth wanted no part of the notoriety attached to the grim find and she declined to give her name to Chief Smith and then quickly and quietly fled.

One of Smith’s officers notified Captain Bright who, accompanied by Deputies Allen, Brewster and Gompert, drove out to the scene hoping that since the head had been found the limbs might be in the vicinity. While deputies searched the area a crowd of several thousand curious on-lookers turned up, just as they’d done when the torso had washed up on the river bank. hammer death

High profile murder cases draw not only spectators but a fair number of crackpots and people with private agendas, like Morris Singer. Singer, a grocer at 424 North Fremont Street, was found guilty of criminal libel and outraging public decency. Singer had written a letter to authorities stating that the torso murder had been committed at 2057 Oxford Street, the home of Dr. Gustav Meiss. Singer had recently lost a lawsuit to Dr. Meiss and was seeking revenge by accusing him of the atrocious murder.

The initial autopsy of the torso had not yielded anything which could be used to identify the deceased. But the head, even though it was not very well preserved, still had a number of extant teeth which made identification possible if not assured. Photographs and drawings of the teeth were published in local newspapers and widely distributed to dentists in the hope that one of them would recognize his own work.

dental quest torso Forensic odontology had been used successfully a few times in criminal cases as far back as the Salem Witch Trials. In 1692 Reverend George Burroughs was accused of witchcraft and conspiring with the Devil. Bite marks on the alleged victims were compared to the Reverend’s teeth and as a result he was convicted and hanged.

Ansil Robinson was accused of murdering his mistress in 1870. Investigators found five bite marks on her arm and apparently matched them to the defendant, but the evidence failed to convince a jury and Robinson was acquitted.

Solid detective work is one aspect of successfully resolving a criminal case, and science is another.

Just three days prior to the discovery of a woman’s torso in the L.A. River, the Los Angeles Times had reported on a new innovation in scientific crime detection–a portable laboratory. Sheriff Traeger announced that a portable laboratory had been constructed and would be used by the homicide squad. All deputies were instructed in crime scene preservation, which was virtually a non-existent practice at that time. Instead of tramping through a scene and contaminating it, deputies were told to guard the scene until the homicide detail could arrive. Among the equipment in the portable lab were a set of plates for the chemical analysis of hair. lasd portable lab

The portable lab was a game changer locally for LASD, but the construction of a complete lab in the basement of the Hall of Justice would set a national precedent. The proposed facility would be “the first of its kind to be installed in a sheriff’s office in the United States.” It would be used exclusively by the Sheriff’s homicide detail and outfitted with equipment for “blood analyses, fingerprint comparisons, hair and skin tests and other scientific work in criminal investigations.”

Captain Bright requested that Frank Gompert, who had formerly been attached to the county chemist’s department, be given the title of “criminal technician” and put in charge of running the new high-tech lab.

It appears that Gompert’s first assignment was the torso murder.

Photo shows Federal prohibition agents of Southern California, attending school to learn the latest methods of enforcement. View shows the class in session with F.B. Gompert, criminological technician at left, giving blackboard lesson. The pupils learn the sciene of shadowing, the art of raiding, the technique of preparing evidence, courtroom psychology, the mathematics of figuring the amount of liquor in seized containers and the chemistry of liquor analysis. Photo dated: October 7, 1930. [Photo courtesy LAPL]

Given that they only had the torso and the partially decomposed skull to examine, the experts needed to accomplish the scientific equivalent of pulling a rabbit out of a hat. Amazingly, they did just that. They were able to glean a remarkable amount of information from a minimum amount of physical evidence.

The head was first matched to the torso, and was a perfect fit. Then the cause of death had to be determined. It was concluded that the woman had died instantly of blunt force trauma, likely a hammer blow. There was a crushed spot on the skull that, when measured, fit best with a carpenter’s hammer. .

Sheriff’s homicide investigators postulated that due to the nature of the fatal injury the woman, whose age had been revised upward to from 40 to 60 years, had been killed in a family squabble. Murder committed in a family could explain why no report had been made for a missing woman fitting the description of the victim.

Captain Bright pulled his detectives off the search for missing girls under the age of 20 and instead he assigned half of the available men to follow-up on missing women over 40. The other half were assigned to assist in locating the dentist responsible for, or familiar with, the dentition in the found skull.

Bright had faith in his detectives and in his crime lab. He was convinced that an identification of the victim was imminent.

He was right.

NEXT TIME: The victim of the torso slaying is identified and so are a few possible perpetrators.

The L.A. River Torso Slaying, Part 2

Posted on December 3, 2014 by Deranged

Captain William Bright and the LASD Homicide Squad were being dragged from pillar to post across Southern California in their effort to identify the woman whose dismembered torso was found by father and son scavengers, Jose and Raymond Manriquez.

Los Angeles River c. 1930 [Photo courtesy of LAPL]

On April 9, 1929, Bright dispatched deputies to San Juan Capistrano where beach goers had reported seeing two men dumping mysterious packages into the sea. Deputies were also still conducting surveillance on a physician who seemed suspicious and searching for another medical man who had run off with an eighteen year old girl; the pair had so far eluded detection. sea may solve murder

The tally of missing girls grew by one when it was reported that a fourteen year old Redlands girl, described as being as large as a grown woman, was missing.

The Sheriff’s Department had been flooded with tips and reports of suspicious men and missing girls but Captain Bright admitted that the investigation had yielded very little useful evidence. If only they could find the missing limbs or, better yet, as horrendous as it would be, the head of the dead woman.

suspect named On May 4th the newspapers reported that there was suspect in the torso murder–Leland Wesley Abbott, an ex-con whose estranged wife was missing and had been living in Lynwood near where the torso was discovered. Deputy Sheriffs and LAPD were tipped off by a couple of his co-workers when he failed to turn up at the warehouse where he was employed. One of the co-workers, Ray L. Martin, said that Abbott had told him that his wife was “…in love with another man in Lynwood and had gone there to live.”

Martin told investigators:

“He (Abbott) asked me if I would drive him to Lynwood. When I asked him what for, he said he wanted to go down and get even with his wife. I told him I had a date and he said that he had a job to finish and that he had to do it in a day or two, or it would be too late, as he was going back east.

The next day, on April 3, it was stormy and raining and Abbott came to me and said that this was an ideal night for him to get even with his wife. I told him that he was crazy to think of such a thing and that he would be caught. He replied that there was plenty of quicksand in the Los Angeles River that was close by where she lived. I feared he might be in some bootlegging scheme and I told him I was afraid to drive him to Lynwood. He said that it was not connected with bootlegging, but that it was concerned with his wife being in love with another man. He left work and we’ve never seen him again.”

An APB was issued for Abbott who was described as “thirty-three years of age, five feet six inches tall, weighs 145 pounds, with dark hair and dark brown eyes. He had a scar on each wrist and one on his right fore-arm.”

Ray Martin wasn’t the only co-worker Abbott had confided in. He’d told William Spence he planned on “fixing her (his wife) plenty when he got ready.” Abbott had also said that he was aware of the quicksand along the Los Angeles River, and that it would be the perfect place to dump a body that you wanted to have vanish without a trace.

Threats against his missing wife coupled with his habit of carrying a surgical knife in a sheath on his belt, along with an automatic revolver in his pocket, made Abbott a damned good suspect, and his wife the likely victim.

Deputy Sheriff Modie and Detective Allen traced Abbot to a mountain road camp in Chilao, thirty-three miles north of Mt. Wilson. It was suspicious that he’d arrived at the camp looking for work on April 5th, just one day after the discovery of the torso in the L.A. River.

Abbott denied killing his wife–in fact he denied ever being married at all. He admitted that he had told his warehouse buddies that he was married, but it was a lie. When asked his former co-workers said that, come to think of it, they’d never actually seen Abbott’s alleged spouse. But that didn’t mean there wasn’t one.

What about the surgical knife? Abbott said that his stepfather was a surgeon and that he’d considered becoming a doctor himself and the knife was a gift. Somewhere along the way Abbot had deviated from the path to a medical career and had instead became a gun runner smuggling weapons into Mexico. He had been busted and served a term in Leavenworth Prison.

Abbott had more explaining to do when cops found a trunk belonging to him that was strained on the underside of the lid–stains that could be human blood. The contents of the trunk were no less ominous: two shot guns, half a dozen pocket knives and four pistol holsters–but the surgical knife wasn’t there. Abbott said he’d misplaced it. The trunk was delivered to county chemists for examination.

Attorneys for Leland applied for a writ of habeas corpus, but he said that he’d prefer to stay behind bars until his story checked out. The fact that he was being held as a suspect in such a brutal crime might make him a target if he was freed before he was cleared of any wrongdoing. He didn’t get his wish though and he was released from custody, but it was clear from subsequent newspaper reports that the Sheriff’s investigation had taken a slight turn away from Abbott based upon some new leads.

A few days following his release Abbott walked into Captain Bright’s office with the missing surgical knife. He said he’d found it in the pocket of an old coat in one of his trunks. Even though Abbott was cooperating with the investigation he remained a person of interest. There were several loose ends that the homicide squad had to tie up–in particular they were troubled by the conflicting stories Abbott had told his co-workers about having a spouse. Captain Bright received newspaper clippings from Indiana, where Abbott was from, which stated that he had been charged by a Miss Marion Stevens with abduction and robbery. However, until he got official confirmation from Indiana authorities Bright was willing to let Abbott return to the road camp–at least for the time being.

Whether Abbott had a wife or not wasn’t the issue, the fact that he obviously had violent fantasies about women was. And what if he’d abducted a woman in Indiana?

NEXT TIME: The investigation into the torso slaying heats up with the discovery of crucial new evidence.

The L.A. River Torso Slaying

Posted on December 2, 2014 by Deranged

headless body The Los Angeles River begins in Canoga Park, flows through the San Fernando Valley, through Downtown L.A. and then continues through several cities before reaching Long Beach where it empties into the Pacific Ocean. A series of devastating floods during the first thirty years of the 20th Century caused such public outcry that the River was channelized–encased in concrete–by the Army Corps of Engineers. But in 1929 the river was still free flowing and many Angelenos looked to it for their livelihood.

It had rained hard enough on April 4, 1929 to set a record–1.39 inches; but the wet weather hadn’t kept Raymond Manriquez and his father Juan from trolling the banks of the Los Angeles River for salvageable items. They were walking along the river bank when, about 100 yards north of Clark Street in Lynwood Gardens, they eyeballed a box that had washed ashore. Something pale was lying near the box but they couldn’t tell what it was until they moved in for a closer look. All thoughts of the box and its contents were forgotten when they realized that what they had found was a woman’s torso. The arms were severed and the legs torn off. It had been decapitated. They immediately went to notify the authorities.

torso found pic Constable Roselle of Compton accompanied the men to the scene of their grisly discovery and he then contacted Captain Bright, head of the Sheriff’s Homicide Squad. Captain Bright and Deputy Sheriffs Hutchinson, Gray and Vejar turned up to begin an investigation. All that was surmised from the scene was that the body was that of a girl between the ages of 16 and 21 and that she had been murdered and mutilated elsewhere before being dumped into the water.

With no evidence aside from the torso, Sheriff’s investigators were preparing themselves for the possibility of a long, and ultimately fruitless, investigation.

Through the press, and in radio broadcasts over ten local radio stations, Captain Bright issued a plea for all citizens of Los Angeles to report any missing woman. Bright said:

“The help of every citizen is needed to solve this crime, which apparently is the work of a fiend. The woman’s torso provides no clew to her identity. Only by checking the disappearance of every woman reported to the authorities will we probably get a trace of the murderer.”

County Autopsy Surgeon Wagner concluded from his examination that in life the woman was approximately 25 years old, 5 feet 7 inches tall and likely weighed 135 pounds. Her hair was brown or blond. The woman’s vital organs were delivered to County Chemist Abernathy for analysis–he was going to test for poison. However due to the extreme measures the killer, or killers, had taken to conceal the identify of the corpse it seemed improbable that the woman had met her death by poison. The consensus of the experts was that she had been shot to death or killed by a blow to the head. A head which they had been unable to locate. bundle into river

Based on the river flow it was determined that the torso had been dumped into the water no further north than the Ninth Street Bridge. The limbs had probably been thrown in at the same location but they wouldn’t float as the torso had done. The Sheriff’s Department planned to drag the river for the missing body parts.

After further examination of the torso, the medical examiner deduced that the murderer had some surgical skill because the removal of the limbs and the head had been accomplished by someone possessing a knowledge of human anatomy, and a very sharp instrument–perhaps a scalpel.

Following Captain Bright’s plea dozens of reports of missing were received. A few other, more sinister events, were also reported. A female informant said that she had seen two men and a young woman in a black touring car drive to the edge of the river bank at the Florence Avenue Bridge. The men got out of the car carrying an unidentifiable object to the river while the girl remained at the wheel–then the trio sped off.

limbs sought Gas station attendants and car rental agencies were put on high alert and asked to report any suspicious characters and in particular any blood stains they found.

The first real clue in the case came about two days after the discovery of the torso when a virtually new, size six, green leather shoe with a yellow ankle strap and a turquoise button was found on the river bank near Compton. In retrieving the shoe Deputy Sheriff Allen sank waist deep into the muck and had to be rescued by a half-dozen men who tugged him to safety.

As with any gruesome crime the scene attracted looky-loos. Several deputy sheriffs were kept busy shooing away crowds of morbidly curious sightseers. It was feared that one of them would get caught in the quicksand, as Deputy Allen had–or that someone would find a significant piece of evidence and walk off with it.

Since it was believed that the the limbs and head of the dead woman had been removed by someone with a modicum of expertise in dismembering a body, Captain Bright began to investigate a couple of local physicians. One unnamed doctor was placed under surveillance and another medical man, a shady character who had run off with an 18 year old girl, was being sought for questioning.

Captain Bright and his homicide squad continued to hope that the torso would finally be identified, but it wasn’t looking good.

NEXT TIME: Will Captain Bright and the Sheriff’s homicide squad finally identify the victim?

Cops Behaving Badly: The Death of Stanley Beebe, Conclusion

Posted on October 5, 2014 by Deranged

Because it’s been a few days since we last visited the Stanley Beebe case I think that a brief synopsis is in order.

In December of 1942 Stanley Beebe was arrested for public intoxication. He was taken to LAPD’s Central Station where he later alleged he had been badly beaten. In a death bed statement to his wife, published in the L.A. Times, Beebe reiterated his claim. He died about ten days later of injuries that the coroner had determined were the result of a savage beating.

The Beebe case was a political hot potato–corruption and abuse by the cops terrified and enraged the citizens and just a few years earlier, in 1938, Angelenos had ousted Mayor Frank Shaw in a corruption scandal. Shaw was the first U.S. mayor to be recalled and the city was still reeling from the fallout of that national embarrassment.

The investigation into Beebe’s death was deftly stonewalled by a monumental lack of cooperation from LAPD. Finding the truth was going to be an uphill battle all the way, especially since people were being threatened if they didn’t drop the inquiry.

We’ll pick up the tale from there…

*******************************************

Deputy City Attorney Everett Leighton’s wife received a telephone call threatening her husband with death if he didn’t back-off the Stanley Beebe case. But it wasn’t just high profile city government types who were being threatened. Raymond Henry, 42, of 915 S. Mott Street was in jail when Stanley Beebe was allegedly beaten. If the D.A.’s investigators were looking for more info on Stanley’s case it wasn’t going to come from Raymond Henry. However, Henry did have a story to tell. He said that there had been another case of police brutality in the jail at approximately the same time.

death threat There was an alley leading into the booking office and Raymond said he had seen a man dressed in khaki work clothes lying there and he appeared to have been beaten. Henry received a mysterious telephone call from a man claiming to be a cop; but unlike the call Everett Leighton’s wife had received Henry’s unknown caller made him an offer. The mystery man said he’d like to meet with Henry and offered to “pay all his expenses for a couple of days”. It was clear that someone wanted Raymond out of the way so he couldn’t testify about what he had seen.

In mid-February 1943 Chief Horrall ordered several LAPD officers jailed for their parts in the death of Stanley Beebe: Compton Dixon, James F. Martin, John M. Yates, E.P. Mooradian, McKinley W. Witt and Leo L. Johnson. The case became even uglier when it appeared that the police report had been falsified. A copy of the report showed Beebe’s occupation as machinist, he was an accountant; and his address was “transient” — yet the telephone call he’d been allowed to make had been to his wife at their apartment.

Every politician from Los Angeles to Sacramento sought to make political hay out of the issue of police brutality. Newspapers continued to report on new and increasingly alarming allegations of abuse of authority. One former prisoner said that he had been beaten while handcuffed and that large quantities of water and brandy had been forced down his throat.

It was LAPD officer Compton Dixon who was finally accused of manslaughter in Beebe’s death. Compton didn’t fit Stanley’s description of his attacker, but there were several points on which Stanley had been understandably vague in his death bed statement to his wife. It was very possible he had incorrectly described his assailant.

Compton was indicted for Stanley’s murder on March 4, 1943, but he was immediately released on $10,000 bail when his Defense attorney Samuel Rummel and prosecutors stipulated that even if it was proved that Compton had beaten Beebe to death, it could possibly amount only to second-degree murder.

Because second degree murder carried a penalty of five years to life they decided he could be released on a bond.

Rummel’s reputation as a mouthpiece for crooked cops and local gangsters was well known, and deserved. Sam was friendly with gangster Mickey Cohen among other bad guys, but rubbing elbows with crooks isn’t a smart move. Rummel lived the high life hanging out with Cohen and various corrupt policemen, he was even part owner of a couple of Las Vegas casinos, but it all came to an end when he was shot gunned to death in the driveway of his Laurel Canyon home during the early morning hours of December 11, 1950. His slaying remains unsolved.

Sam Rummel dead in his driveway. Photo courtesy of LAPL.

Sam Rummel dead in his driveway. Photo courtesy of UCLA Digital Archive.

Two rookie officers had testified at the Grand Jury hearing that they’d witnessed Stanley’s beating. They were quite clear in their statements; but when it came time for them to testify in open court they were both suspiciously vague. In fact each of them said they had seen Stanley and they’d seen a foot on his stomach, but they just couldn’t be sure whose foot it was!

One by one, police officers who had previously admitted that they’d seen Compton Dixon beat Stanley Beebe retracted their statements. One of them, Leo Johnson, said that the statement he’d made at the LAPD training center on February 14th was made under duress:

“That statement is false. It was not prepared by me and not written by me. Words were put in my mouth and the statements are untrue. I don’t ever remember seeing Dixon place his foot on anybody’s stomach.”

Officers with amnesia and revised statements should have been expected in Dixon’s trial, but there was one courtroom shocker that knocked the wind out of some of the observers.

Deputy District Attorney Robert G. Wheeler, who handled the original investigation into the fatal beating, testified that after completing his inquiry he was of the opinion that Mrs. Maxine Beebe, widow of the dead man, could have murdered her husband!

When asked by Rummel on what facts he had based his conclusions, Wheeler responded:

“Only that Beebe was under her control from December 20 to December 27, and her evasiveness during the inquiry”.

I told you Sam Rummel was a mouthpiece for crooks.

Compton Dixon was questioned by Rummel about the alleged crime, quoted here verbatim from the L.A. Times:

“Did you strike Beebe?” Rummel asked.

“I did not,” Dixon replied with a firm voice.

“Did you kick him?”

“Never.”

“Did you jump on him?”

I did not.” Dixon said.

The case went to the jury and they deliberated for seven days before becoming deadlocked: 8 to 4 in favor of acquittal.

It was a disgusting miscarriage of justice. District Attorney Howser issued a statement in which he said the failure of the Los Angeles Police Department to solve the murder of the prisoner was due to:

“…concealed evidence and a misdirected investigation by members of the same department who were afraid disclosure of the truth would involve a member of members of the department.”

Dixon still had to face a police trial board–he had been suspended from duty since February. The LAPD board of rights concluded its investigation in July 1943 and they found Compton Dixon not guilty of conduct unbecoming an officer for refusing to testify before the grand jury. The board said that Dixon had been charged with manslaughter and the natural right of self-preservation, as well as his constitutional rights, superseded the general duty of an officer to testify before inquisitorial bodies.

get out of jail free card Dixon was returned to duty and his back pay was restored. He retired in 1946 and because he had spent 20 years or more at a jail duty station he was presented with silver keys (that wouldn’t actually turn the locks) to the main doors of City Jail. It didn’t matter that the keys were phonies–Dixon didn’t need the real thing, he’d been given a “Get Out of Jail Free” card in 1943.

None of the officers implicated in the various brutality cases being investigated at the time were punished, and no one was ever held accountable for Stanley Beebe’s death.

The Devil in Orange County-Update and call to action

Posted on October 4, 2014 by Deranged

One of the things I never expected to happen when I began this blog in December 2012 was that I would hear from so many victims, and perpetrators, and their families. I have corresponded with people whose family tree was forever altered by a crime from as long ago as the 1920s.

I’ve found that most of the family members who contact me are seeking an open ear–someone who will listen and not judge. Often I am asked to provide information about a decades old incident and I gladly share my research notes.

The internet has made it nearly impossible for families to keep secrets–someone doing a quick search of a popular genealogy site may discover a long forgotten crime involving a relative and seek answers.

Stephen Hurd

In “The Devil in Orange County” I wrote about my peripheral involvement in one of the most infamous crimes in the county’s history. I suggest that you read the posts for an in-depth examination of the crimes, but briefly the circumstances are as follows:

On June 2, 1970, Stephen Hurd, 20, and Arthur “Moose” Hulse, 16, and several of their companions, were involved in two back-to-back violent homicides. The first was the brutal hatchet slaying, by Hulse, of 20-year-old Jerry Wayne Carlin, a gas station attendant working the grave yard shift. Carlin left behind a young widow. He never had the chance to learn that his wife was pregnant.

The next day 29-year-old Florence Nancy Brown, stepmother to four children, was car jacked at a freeway off-ramp by Hurd, Hulse and a few of their co-horts. She was taken to a field and stabbed over 20 times. Her body was buried in a shallow grave near Ortega Highway. Hurd later revealed that he had returned to the make-shift burial site and mutilated Brown’s corpse by removing her heart which he then used in a Satanic ritual. Stephen Hurd died of a brain hemorrhage in prison nine years ago.

Arthur Hulse is currently incarcerated at Vacaville, but apparently not for much longer unless Governor Brown vetoes his release. At a hearing on September 26, 2014, Hulse was granted parole and is scheduled to be cut loose in approximately 120 days. He was not supposed to have been eligible for parole until 2015. What the hell happened?

There are individuals who deserve parole–they earn it by taking responsibility for their previous actions and by taking steps to become a productive member of society. Nothing that I have read about Arthur’s years in prison has suggested that he has done anything to make himself suitable for parole.

I mentioned that I’ve heard from victims and families of violent crime and this morning I received email from Jerry Wayne Carlin’s widow. She is rightfully horrified that Arthur Craig Hulse will be paroled unless Governor Brown takes action within the next few weeks.

I hope that her letter will move you, as it has me, to contact Governor Brown and ask him to veto Hulse’s parole.

With her permission I am reprinting her email to me. I have withheld her current surname at her request.

My name is Patricia ______. My first husband, Jerry Wayne Carlin was murdered on June 2, 1970. As you can imagine, my life was changed forever on that horrible night.

I’m writing to let you know that Arthur Craig Hulse had a parole hearing on September 26, 2014 and was granted parole. I was notified by the District Attorney, Scott Simmons, of the impending hearing on September 22, 2014, when the DA’s office was notified. The parole hearing had been moved up one year without notice to the DA or myself. I was asked by the DA to write a letter to the parole board, which I did.

It has been 44 years since Jerry’s murder. There has not been even one June 2, that I haven’t stopped and remember what happened on that horrible night. I gave birth to Jerry’s son, Jason, in 1971. All my son has left of his father is a 5″x7″ picture. When I was told of what happened to Jerry that night, I wanted to die. I took a overdose of every pill in the medicine cabinet but, by the grace of God, the police realized what I had done and got me to the hospital. I was told that I was pregnant. I knew I needed to be strong for my baby and for Jerry Wayne. I got on with my life and Jerry’s son grew and is now a Grandpa.

Although life went on, always in the back of my mind, was the thought, that someday Steve Hurd and Arthur Hulse could be released. Hurd died in 2005.

Now Hulse has been given a parole date. The Governor of California has the authority to overturn the parole board’s decision. He will review the case within 30 days and if the decision is not overturned, my worst fears will be realized, and this animal will be released in 120 days from September 26, 2014. I will be writing to the Governor to request he overturn this ruling. I have contacted the Orange County Register, because they have been following this case for more than 40 years. Incidentally they also were unaware of Hulse’s parole hearing. I do not know if they will publish an article about this person’s parole.

I’m writing a letter to the Governor’s Office and hope that more people who learn about this will also. The address is:

Governor Edmund G Brown
State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 95814

This may be the last thing I can do for Jerry Wayne and his son. If you have any way of helping get the word out about this horrible decision, I would be so grateful.

Life in prison should be just that. Is 44 years enough for hacking a innocent person to death? I will live the rest of my life, knowing what happened. There will be no parole for me or my son. Arthur Hulse should remain in prison for the rest of his life.

Thank You for your time.

******************************************************************

I cannot even imagine the pain that Patricia and her son have endured over the years, and of course Jerry’s loss continues to be felt by Patricia’s grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

It’s easy for you to contact Governor Brown via EMAIL. I suggest that you select “Have Comment’ for the purpose of your communication, and for topic “Parole-Governors Review”. Also select “Con” for your position on the pending parole.

I hope you’ll join me in writing to Governor Brown, it will take only a few moments of your time but may result in years of peace for Patricia and her family.

Below you will find the email I have sent to the Governor–feel free to cut and paste it.

Governor Brown:

I am writing to urge you to veto the parole of Arthur Craig Hulse (#B33433) due to the heinous nature of his crimes. On June 2, 1970 he murdered 20-year-old gas station attendant Jerry Wayne Carlin with a hatchet and the next day he was an accessory to the car-jacking and stabbing of 29-year-old wife and mother Florence Nancy Brown. Mrs. Brown was stabbed at least 20 times and her body was mutilated postmortem.

Hulse was denied parole in October 2012 because he was considered a danger if released and, additionally, he had never completed any drug or alcohol treatment program during his years of incarceration. In fact he was informed at his 2012 hearing that he would not be considered for release again until 2015.

It is unclear why his parole hearing was moved up and it is a mystery how he became eligible for parole after such a short amount of time, particularly when he had done nothing to earn his release in the 44 years prior to his September 26, 2014 parole hearing.

It would be an injustice to the victim’s families if he is paroled. Hulse also poses a possible danger to any community into which he may be released.

I thank you for your consideration of this request.

Sincerely,

Joan E. Renner

Cops Behaving Badly: The Death of Stanley Beebe, Part 1

Posted on September 24, 2014 by Deranged

From the 1920s through the 1950s political corruption, police pay-offs and rumors of police brutality were part of life in Los Angeles. Countless books (read any of James Ellroy’s novels), newspaper articles and angry editorials have been written on the topic.

There were many instances of malfeasance in the city. From the framing of city councilman Carl Jacobson, a vice crusader, on morals charges by political enemies in 1927, to the “Bloody Christmas” beatings of prisoners by LAPD officers in 1951 the city was up to its eyeballs in excrement.

On December 19, 1943 Mr. Stanley H. Beebe, a 44-year-old certified public accountant with a job in the war industry, was pulled off of a streetcar at First and Hill for public intoxication. He was booked by Sergeant J.E. Martin then transferred to Lincoln Heights Jail. His wife Maxine turned up and paid the $10 fine–Stanley was kicked loose.

Maxine was horrified by Stan’s condition. He had a couple of shiners and a large hourglass-shaped bruise (which looked like a shoe print) on his abdomen. He couldn’t stand up straight and she had to help him into the taxi that took them to their apartment at 1819 N. Kingsley Drive. Stan told Maxine that he had been kicked in the stomach by one of the officers and that he had been vomiting and in excruciating pain ever since.

The day following her husband’s release Maxine phoned the Police Department to make a complaint–she reported what her husband had told her, that he had been beaten severely by officers while in custody. Her complaint went nowhere until Stan died of a ruptured bladder, which had resulted in peritonitis, at General Hospital on December 29th and his widow took her complaint higher up the food chain to the District Attorney and the Coroner.

With the news of Stan’s death, Detective Lieutenant Lloyd Hurst was tasked with investigating Maxine’s complaint. Every officer who admitted to having seen Beebe the night of his arrest stated that the man had not been assaulted while in their custody. LAPD wasn’t going to be solely responsible for the investigation into Beebe’s death, however. District Attorney John F. Dockweiler assigned Deputy District Attorney Robert G. Wheeler and Investigators Charles Ebbets, Everett Davis and Kenneth Gillie to check out the allegations.

Dockweiler told newspaper reporters:

“Police brutality, if any exists, cannot be condoned in this community. I have ordered a thorough investigation into the death of Mr. Beebe to determine the truth of his charges that he was fatally injured by police officers while under arrest.”

The 1943 grand jury would review the case as soon as it was impaneled.

D.A. Dockweiler pressed Chief of Police Horrall for his department’s cooperation in the investigation of Beebe’s death. Horrall (who would be involved in a vice/corruption scandal just a few years later) pledged LAPD’s full cooperation.

LAPD Chief C.B. Horrall inspecting Detective Division c. 1947. [Photo courtesy UCLA Digital Collection.]

Coroner Nance weighed in with his findings in Beebe’s autopsy. He stated that Stan had died of peritonitis the result of a ruptured gall bladder. To head off any attempts to blame the deceased’s death on a diseased gall bladder, Nance made it crystal clear that the organ had been healthy until it was damaged by an external blow–and there were plenty of bruises to prove his assertion.

Nance said:

“I intend to find out who kicked or struck this man in the abdomen. The police and District Attorney have promised me full cooperation and I have deferred the inquest until

I have their complete list of witnesses.”

He continued:

“Whatever happens, I will not close this case until I am satisfied that every bit of available evidence has been made available at the inquest.”

The D.A.’s investigators questioned more than 60 men who had shared the drunk tank with Stan on the night of his incarceration. Jail trustees were also grilled.

Otto Schalinske, the Central Jail turnkey, was summoned to Wheeler’s office for questioning but he didn’t go alone, he was accompanied by Chief Horrall and Vernon Rasmussen, chief of the police homicide detail. There was no way the conversation among the men could be kept secret and portions of their meeting was printed in theL.A. Times:

Wheeler spoke with Schalinske:

“Were you the officer who removed Beebe from the chair in the lieutenant’s office after he had telephoned his wife?”

“I am,” Schalinske answered. “I removed him gently and did not harm him.”

“Did you hit Beebe in the jaw when he remonstrated against being confined in the jail, and when his chair overtunred kick him in the abdomen?”

“No,” Schalinske replied. “I just took him to the tank.”

Wheeler was quick to point out that question the officers didn’t mean that they were guilty of anything–he was simply seeking the truth.

Wheeler admitted that he was troubled by the fact that the entire investigation was “pigeonholed by the police for more than a week after Beebe’s death, despite the pleas of relatives for an active investigation.”

Investigators were also trying to find out what had happened to the $40 that Stan supposedly had in his wallet shortly before his arrest.

One of the policemen questioned, Sergeant R.C. Kucera, had visited Beebe at General Hospital and could bear witness to the number and extent of the man’s injuries which included two discolored eyes, a black and blue mark two inches in diameter on the center of his abdomen, abrasions of the left groin and a black and blue mark the size of a half dollar on his throat.

So far the investigation seemed to substantiate Maxine’s assertion that Stan had been badly beaten by cops; however the most damning piece of evidence was Stan’s death bed statement. It was reprinted verbatim in the L.A. Times and I’m reprinting it here because I think it is important to hear the incident described by Stan in his own words.

On this Christmas Eve–December 24, 1942–a statement to the best of my memory as what happened the night of the 199th as long as I could remember, recorded by my wife in a question-and-answer form–

Q:When did you get on the Hill St. trolley?
A: About 6:30 to 6:45 at my usual place, Seventh and Hill Sts. I was feeling kind of sick as the car was crowded and the air was bad, so I stood near the door trying to get some air.
Q: Then what happened?
A: Every street the car stopped I leaned out of the door and got a few gulps of air–some comments were made about blocking the roadway and I answered back–more words were said and then I commented about these people who should be doing things for the country and didn’t.
Q: Then what happened?
A: The conductor asked a darked-haired man of small build to take me off the trolley for making a disturbance.
Q: Who was this dark-haired man?
A: At first I didn’t know but he showed his badge and said he was a sergeant of the police and that I had better come with him to the police station as I was not in apparently good condition.
Q: Did you resist?
A: Oh, no! I told him this was a free country. We were fighting for freedom overseas and we should maintain it here. I certainly want to maintain it here and want to go with him at once.
Q: Then what happened?
A: I went into the police station with him.
Q: Can you describe the station house to me?
A: Oh, yes, you come into the door and on the right side there is a door about 8-10 feet from the entrance. On the left side there is a long counter–I should say about 25-30 feet long.
Q: Was there anybody around when you came in?
A: Yes, behind the counter there was a man sitting and I believe there was a phone but I can’t remember.
Q: Did this man say anything to you? And can you describe him?
A: He didn’t say much. He made some comments and said something to my escort.
Q: Up to this time did anyone touch you or harm you in any way?
A: No!
Q: Then what happened?
A: I was taken into the room I told you about at first on the right-hand side. My escort spoke to the man sitting at the desk there.
Q: Please tell me about the room!
A: When you walk in the room is on the right-hand side. There is a small roll-top desk and a swivel chair. Next to that is a window. In the diagonal opposite corner of this desk is a table-top desk with some phones on it. It was one of these phones I used to call you. Next to this desk is a door which was closed. And that’s all that impressed me except that the air was bad and hot and the room very small.
Q: Then what happened?
A: I called you on the phone and told you the circumstances and you spoke to the blond man who was sitting at the desk.
Q: Do you know his name?
A: I was told but it is not a usual name so I didn’t remember.
Q: Do you remember the name of the man who brought you in?
A: I believe it was (censored) or (censored). The man at the desk began to speak to me in an uncivil tone and in language which doesn’t or didn’t seem necessary or warranted. He would not let me say anything and said I was to be arrested, fingerprinted and jailed.
Q: What happened then?
A: I told him I had committed not crime, was never arrested and neither were any of my antecedents and that at 44 I wasn’t going to start a record.
Q: Then what happened?
A: At this point (censored) or (censored) came in and the man who was using toughy methods, he took a swing at me and hit me in the side of the jaw. I was kind of stunned but I (two words undecipherable) going to take a swing at him and missed him and accidently hit (censored) for which I am very sorry.
Q: Then what happened?
A: They wanted to take me back somewhere and I wouldn’t get out of the chair as I said it was my civil right to speak. At that point the big man took another swing and hit me in the eye. I was holding on to the chair with both arms and would not let go. He turned the chair over with me in it and kicked me in the chest twice with his shoe-toe. Then he and (censored) took me by my arms and hands and started dragging me back to the back of the building through a corridor. At this point the big man said, “I like to fix up a guy like you.” As they was dragging me I was trying to get up but I couldn’t and the big man kept kicking me in the side of my stomach. Finally he became so incensed that he stamped his whole foot on my stomach. After that I am quite vague. I do now I received a few more blows, one in the eye. Not the (undecipherable) one and a kick in the groin. Also a few more punches inthe face and they did something to my throat but I can’t tell you what, as I was in too much agony. I know I stood up before another man and they took my fingerprints to, but after that stomach blow I was out on my feet. Finally I was taken somewhere else where there were a lot of men around who also were arrested. I was in agony and one o f the m en gave me a place to sit. We must have sat quite a while then we were taken in a van to another place. I could hardly walk and some of the other poor devils helped me into the van.
Q: Then what happened?
A: When we got to the other place I asked for a doctor and the watcher or guard said he would get one.
Q: When did he come?
A: He never came although I asked for him for separate times.
Q: Then what happened?
A: I could hold no water on my stomach and I had diarrhea. Gosh, I was so thirsty!
Q: Then what happened?
A: Then, thank God. I saw you in the other room and I knew that soon I could get home home to bed and some care.
Q: Is there anything else you want to say?
A: Yes, darling, please try to do something for someone else so no one person has to go through what we are suffering and let’s not tell mother anything (as we wouldn’t have her Christmas spoiled for anything.) It doesn’t matter for me as I am a goner.
Q: Please, Stan, must you put this in?
A: Absolutely, and be sure and leave it there as I am going to read this statement all through and sign on the very last line to be sure that you haven’t left out the end as that is very essential.
(Signed)
STANLEY H. BEEBE

A parade of police and civilians who were in Central Station during Stan’s alleged beating were questioned. The police officers who were interviewed said that they hadn’t seen or heard a thing that was out of line.

If Stan’s statement was false then he had managed to erode the public’s trust in their police department and, additionally, sullied the reputations of members of the LAPD for no good reason.

But what if Stan had told the truth? If his statement was true then no citizen of Los Angeles could feel safe in the presence of the people who had sworn to protect and serve them.

Newspaper accounts suggested that a Blue Wall of Silence was being constructed–it was going to take committed investigators to discover the truth.

NEXT TIME: The investigation into Stanley Beebe’s death continues.

Justice Denied, Part 2

Posted on September 3, 2014 by Deranged

Doris Dazey’s parents, Dr. and Mrs. Walter B. Schwuchow, had spent the four years since their daughter’s death investigating their former son-in-law, Dr. George K. Dazey.

In 1935 Doris was found in the garage of the Santa Monica home she shared with George. She was wearing a night gown and her face was only inches away from the car exhaust–she expired from carbon monoxide poisoning. The authorities ruled her death a suicide, but there was no note and seemingly no cause for her to have taken her own life. Her parents never believed that she would kill herself, not with a four month old child depending on her, so they undertook an independent investigation of the circumstances surrounding her demise.

In bits and pieces the Schwuchows began to assemble a picture of their daughter’s marriage to Dr. Dazey, and it was very different from the public face the couple presented to the world. After speaking with Doris’ friends, and her former neighbors, the Schwuchows learned that her marriage to George was not ideal; in fact Doris had been contemplating divorce even though she’d been married to George for only a year.

As soon as George got wind of the Schwuchow’s statements he issued an immediate denial regarding their accusations:

“We were always happy, never quarreled. Sometimes Doris thought I was working too hard, but you couldn’t call that a quarrel, even when she protested my professional labors.”

“Once in a while she complained that she felt she was not doing her share because of ill-health, but I said we could keep all the servants necessary to aid her.”

If George had murdered Doris and then staged the scene in the garage, what was his motive? Doris had been an actress–she played the lead in “Ramona” for several years in the annual Hemet pageant–what if Doris planned to return to her career sans husband? She’d consulted with attorney Russell Parsons about a divorce, but it wasn’t clear if she had talked to George about it. If she had spoken with George he may have decided that one expensive alimony payment was enough–he was still paying off his first wife. In fact his ex- had taken him to court for back alimony and they’d had an acrimonious courtroom encounter not long before Doris died. It may have been enough sour George on another divorce and drive him to murder. Even though he made a bundle as a physician supporting two ex-wives, one with a child, would have been a financial burden.

The money motive was a strong one, but then the Schwuchow’s revealed a secret that upped the ante even further and provided Dr. Dazey with a very compelling motive for murder. They said that Doris had told them the baby boy she’d had four months before she died may not have been George’s child.

George pooh-poohed the notion:

“Our boy was born two months prematurely. I am a physician and know a premature baby when I see one. The boy is in splendid health and looks just like me.”

Even if the baby was George’s as he contended, Miss Frances Hansbury, a nurse and personal friend of his, said that he had bragged to her about having committed “the perfect crime”. Oh, and then there was a former watchman, Roland Seal, who said that on the fatal day he saw Dr. Dazey carrying what he thought was a woman’s body into the garage.

Dr. Dazey continued to deny any responsibility for Doris’ death and said that the Schwuchow’s were trying to frame him:

“Dr. and Mrs. Schwuchow have been trying to get the boy for themselves and because I won’t let them have him they are stirring up all this trouble.”

A grand jury was convened to delve into the circumstances of Doris Dazey’s death. The D.A. posited that the forty-one year old doctor had killed his wife in a domestic dispute. Seal, the former watchman, said that he had heard screams coming from the Dazey residence on the day Doris died. It was around dusk, he said, that he saw the physician carry the limp form of a woman from the house to the garage.

If we take Frances Hansbury’s and Roland Seal’s statements at face value they beg the question: why the hell didn’t one of them ever go to the police?

District Attorney Buron Fitts was satisfied with the case against Dr. Dazey, in fact he believed it might be strong enough to seek the death penalty. Dazey was indicted for murder.

George had no intention of giving his accusers the last word:

“Doris was the best wife any man could want—why in God’s name would I want to kill her?” Not long before I found her dead, apparently a suicide from monoxide poisoning in our garage, a boy was born to us and we had everything to be happy about.”

Dazey continued:

“Why should she take her own life I do not know. There is a far-fetched possibility that someone else may have done her harm, but the idea is so remote and I can think of no reason for it that I scarcely give credence to the thought.”

The doctor dismissed the accusation of his former nurse, and occasional dinner companion, by saying:

“As for Miss Frances Hansbury, who says I boasted to her of the ‘perfect crime,’ I can say nothing except that she was a friend–or I thought she was–and am at a loss to understand her action.”

“I knew Miss Hansbury about four years before my wife died. I went out with her once or twice socially before marrying Doris and I think that once after I found my wife dead. She is a nurse and I had employed her. Our relationship was friendly, but also professional.”

As for the watchman, Roland Seal, Dr. Dazey seemed to be completely mystified by his involvement in the case:

“Roland Seal is a man I have never met, nor ever talked to to my knowledge. Just what his interest in the case is I may never know, but he is not telling the truth when he says he saw me carry the body of my wife–or any woman–from my house to the garage on the day Mrs. Dazey met her tragic death.”

Dr. Dazey’s trial began in February 1940. The prosecution called its two star witnesses to the stand to lay the foundation for the case against him.

Roland Seal testified that:

“On the day Mrs. Dazey was found dead in the garage of her home I had occasion to pass her house several times. Once I heard a scream, and just at sunset I saw Dr. Dazey carry a scantily clad woman from the house to the garage. I paid no attention, thinking she was ill, and he might be taking her to a hospital. Since then a friend of Dr. Dazey’s warned me that the physician would ‘take care of me’ if I talked.”

Interestingly, Seal’s memory seemed to improve with each retelling. At first he’d stated that he’d seen Dr. Dazey carrying something that he thought may have been a woman’s body into the garage. In court he said that it he definitely saw observed Dr. Dazy carrying a woman’s limp body and that she was “scantily clad”.

Miss Frances Hansbury was also an interesting witness for the prosecution. She testified that she’d known Dr. Dazey for nine years and she still thought of him as a friend. She said:

“Dr. Dazey once confided in me he had committed the perfect crime. Then, apparently fearful I might talk out of turn, he threatened my life and said he would ‘frame’ me as a dope addict. I feel very sorry for Dr. Dazey and never would do anything to hurt him. But I was in fear of my life and was forced to leave here and go to New York City.”

Dr. and Mrs. Schwuchow reiterated what they had always believed: “We feel now as always that there was no cause for our daughter to take her own life. Beyond that, we have nothing to say.”

And Russell E. Parsons, Doris’ attorney (who became Deputy District Attorney in the years following her death) said:

“While a private attorney, Mrs. Dazey consulted with me about marital difficulties she said she was having with her husband. Naturally, I cannot disclose publicly the nature of our conversation.”

Even as he was preparing to face a jury on a murder charge, George Dazey went to court to battle his former in-laws for custody of four-year-old Walter who may, or may not, have been his biological son. Juvenile Judge W. Turney Fox denied the Schwuchow’s petition to have the child declared a ward of the court. There was sufficient evidence that Walter was devoted to his stepmother, Hazel Dorcas Dazey, and that it was in his best interests to let him stay where he was–Hazel was awarded custody of the little boy while George sorted out his legal problems. Dr. and Mrs. Schwuchow were given the right to take Walter for a visit every other weekend.

Would George Dazey’s murder trial go as well for him as the custody hearing had? Maybe. If Hansbury and Seal were the D.A.’s best witnesses it would likely be an uphill battle to put the doctor in prison.

NEXT TIME: Dr. Dazey’s murder trial.

Justice Denied

Posted on August 27, 2014 by Deranged

In January 1923 Dr. George Kendall Dazey married Miss Frances French of Santa Monica. Frances was a graduate of Marlborough Girls’ School and, according to the wedding announcement in the Los Angeles Times she had “a wide circle of friends both in Phoenix and Salt Lake, as well as in this city.” Dr. Dazey was originally from Forth Worth, Texas but had found his way to San Francisco which is where the couple was going to live following their honeymoon. The couple didn’t put down roots in the bay city though because sometime between 1923 and 1926 the Dazey’s returned to Southern California and settled in Santa Monica, not far from Frances’ family.

George’s medical practice was successful enough to allow him to invest in an exclusive beach club, Las Olas, that was going to be built on a stretch of beach midway between Venice and Playa Dely Rey. The total cost for the site, structure, and furnishings was estimated to be approximately $350,000 (equivalent to $4.6 million in current dollars). It would have been tasteless to report on the amount of money each man ponied up to earn a seat on the board of governors, but George must have kicked in a bundle because he was the chairman.

Part of the reason for Dr. Dazey’s success was he treated celebrities. Among his famous patients was actress Mabel Normand. Dazey was in constant attendance at Normand’s hospital bedside as she recovered from bronchial pneumonia during the early months of 1927.

George’s success as a doctor meant major lifestyle changes for the couple–they moved from Santa Monica to Beverly HIlls and lived in a large house on Moreno Drive. But George and Frances’ marriage fell apart and in September 1931 she filed for a divorce. According to Frances, George had been living with a woman in a Santa Monica apartment. Frances wanted a share of $150,000 community property ($2.3 million in current dollars), custody of their child, and $1000 (equivalent to $15,400 in 2014 currency) a month for support. She said George could afford it–he made $60,000 a year (that’s about $1 million dollars today).

In April 1935 Frances returned to Los Angeles from Honolulu to try to collect more than $750 in back alimony from George. She hadn’t managed to get the $1000 a month she’d asked for, but she did get $100 every month. One hundred dollars doesn’t sound like much now but in 1935 it had the same buying power as $1700–a fortune during the Great Depression when the average annual salary was $1500.

Frances figured George was good for the dough because he was living in luxury with his second wife, Mrs. Doris Dazey, a former actress. A superior court judge ruled against George’s request for a reduction in alimony payments and also cited the doctor for contempt for failing to deed a piece of real estate to his ex. George claimed that he had been ill and besides he had to support his second wife.

Wah, wah, wah.

However the judge did let George off the hook for the attorney fees that Frances had incurred while trying to get her money.

Presumably Frances took the next cruise ship back to Hawaii. George stayed in Los Angeles and tried to maintain his second wife in the style to which she had become accustomed.

On October 3, 1935, just months after his court battle with Frances, George’s second wife thirty-one year old Doris was dead. Doris and George had been married for only a year and they had a four-month old son. George said he found her body on the floor of the garage at their home on Twenty-third Street in Santa Monica. Her face was only eighteen inches away from the exhaust pipe of the car.

An autopsy was performed and it was determined that Doris had died of carbon-monoxide poisoning. George said that his wife was subject to fainting spells. Her father, Dr. Walter B. Schwuchow, corroborated George’s statement.

It was suggested that Doris may have committed suicide, but nobody who knew her believed that for a minute. Captain Greer of the LAPD said: “It is possible that she had a fainting spell while stepping from the car to open the (garage) door.”– and that was that.

Doris’ death came only a few months following George’s court battle with his ex-wife Frances. I have to wonder if Doris’ death solved any financial problems for him. There was no mention of life insurance in the newspaper reports. Some of the Dazey’s neighbors said that they had heard arguments and screams coming from the doctor’s home on the night of Doris’ death, but there was insufficient evidence to make a case.

Dr. Dazey buried his wife and resumed his life and medical practice–he even remarried in March 1938. But four years of innuendo and rumor finally caught up with him. In December 1939 he was charged with Doris’ murder.

Justice had been delayed–would it be denied?

NEXT TIME: Strange burns on the victim’s face and a motive for murder.

Til Death Us Do Part

Posted on August 7, 2014 by Deranged

In late March, 1953 the Sheriff’s Department received a tip from a man named Francisco Rodriguez. Rodriguez claimed that his friend, retired Pasadena antique store owner Francisco Mariani, had asked for his help in finding an ex-con who would be willing to commit a murder. Mariani wanted to be rid of Grace, his wife of only four months.

Rodriquez didn’t want any part of a murder so, without saying a word to his pal, he ran right to the Sheriff’s Department and spilled the whole story. Rodgriuez seemed credible to the deputies, but they needed to investigate further before any arrest could be made. Lt. D.H. English assigned Sgt. Clarence Serrano to go undercover as an ex-con without a conscience who was willing to do anything to get his hands on some cash.

Rodriguez introduced Mariani to the false hitman. Serrano said he’d take the job but he objected to Mariani’s low-ball offer of $500 to do the deed. The two men haggled for a while and finally agreed that it would cost $1500 to end Grace’s life.

The widower-to-be had an elaborate plan all worked out and he explained it to Serrano in minute detail–he even supplied one of his old neckties to be used as a garrote. Mariani said that he would hide a large sum of money in the home on Concha Street where Grace was to be permanently dispatched. The hitman would ransack the house following the murder so that it would appear that the crime had been a robbery gone wrong. Mariani thought he was smart when he asked Serrano to provide him with proof that he’d earned his fee. Mariani said he’d be satisfied that “the job had been done” only when Serrano brought him the expensive ring that Grace always wore.

Once Serrano and Mariani had sealed the deal the Sheriff’s deputies had no choice but to take Grace into their confidence. She was disbelieving at first, after all she and Francisco were still newlyweds–why would her new husband want her dead? Despite her misgivings, she turned the ring over to Serrano.

Mariani was playing cards at a Gardena gambling house when Serrano strolled up to him, handed over Grace’s ring and said, “It’s all done”. The suspect took the ring and then handed Serrano five $100 bills in partial payment for services rendered. He’d promised to may the rest of the money when the insurance company paid off on claims for three platinum and diamond rings that the “killer” was supposed to take.

The next time the rotund little man looked up from his cards he was he was surrounded by a group of deputies who summarily cuffed and arrested him. It was hours before he realized that he had been betrayed and that the hitman was actually Sgt. Serrano of the the LA County Sheriff’s Department.

Unwilling to come clean about the murder-for-hire plot, Mariani went into full denial mode saying: “It’s all a lot of lies. . . none of it is true. I know what to say in court.”

Mariani had another surprise coming. In addition to plotting the murder of his wife he was suspected in the death, just a few months earlier, of his sister-in-law, Miss Emeline Gertrude Sullivan, 73. Emeline’s death was thought to have been caused by complications from several heart attacks she had suffered in the couple of days before her demise. Mariani had bragged to Rodriguez that he’d laced the woman’s eggnog with strychnine and that she’d died within an hour. He was proud of his “perfect crime”.

One thing is for sure, Mariani didn’t know how to keep his mouth shut and he had made a huge mistake when he chose Rodriguez as his confidante. Francisco Rodriguez had not only dropped a dime on his buddy for the murder plot and the poisoning; the year before he had cautioned Mrs. Mabel Dorr to be careful of her new suitor, the suave Puerto Rican businessman, because he intended to bump her off, sell her property and make her the first link in a chain of Bluebeard slayings. Dorr took Rodriguez’ caution to heart and dropped Mariani like a hot rock. She later said about her brief association with Mariani: “All he had on his mind was money, money, money.”

Grace was so horrified by the plot to kill her that she immediately began divorce proceedings. The ink was barely dry on her four month old marriage license when she appeared in Pasadena Superior Court to request a divorce.

Grace was pursuing the divorce from her husband, but she still had to deal with the allegations against him for the poisoning of her sister. She agreed to have her sister’s remains exhumed for testing. As the exhumation went forward more damning evidence about the murder plot was being revealed. Sgt. Serrano had worn a wire and had recorded Mariani haggling with him over the price to be paid for his wife’s murder.

The former antique dealer didn’t miss a beat in his denials. He smiled when deputies played the wire recordings for him. He said: “Somebody make joke? Somebody imitated my voice. That’s not me.”

The D.A. didn’t buy his denials and a formal complaint charging Francisco Mariani with solicitation to commit murder was filed by Deputy District Attorney John Loucks in Pasadena. Bail was set at $50,000.It seemed like everything was wrapped up–Mariani would face trial and Grace would win her divorce. But then the unexpected happened. Grace withdrew her request for a divorce. She had decided to stand by her man!

Would the fact that he had Grace’s support make any difference in the outcome of the solicitation case? Had Francisco Mariani poisoned his sister-in-law and why did he want Grace dead?

Next time: More revelations, and 160,000 reasons why Mariani wanted his wife dead…

Deranged LA Crimes ®

True 20th Century tales of murder, mayhem, political corruption, and celebrity scandal

Category Archives: Homicide