"We have a total of three revolvers here, and I propose to see that those revolvers are kept separate and described in such a way that there can be no confusion. I certainly don't want to have any more weapons brought into the case. I am making this statement, not as evidence, but simply in order to apprise the Court of the situation and in connection with a motion asking the Court to release George Anclitas from further attendance and removing those two guns, which have nothing to do with the case, from the courtroom."

"Now, just a minute," Judge Keyser said. "The Court wants to know one thing. This gun which fired the bullet, Exhibit C-1, has a mark on the front sight where a nail file cut a groove in it?"

"Yes, Your Honor," Hamilton Burger said. "However, I will state that I am satisfied this could not have been the gun which was given to Ellis.

"I think there can be no question but that this witness was the victim of an honest mistake when he stated that this mark had been made upon the front sight of the gun which was given to Helman Ellis. We have proof of that. Helman Ellis remembers the circumstances perfectly, and I expect to show by him exactly what did happen. I had announced that I was finished with the witness so that I could call Perry Mason to the stand, but since Mason refused to stipulate the entire testimony of the witness could go out, and since the witness is in court-having merely been withdrawn from the stand so George Anclitas could take the stand-I now wish to recall the witness, Ellis, to the stand."

Judge Keyser looked meaningly at Perry Mason and said, "In view of the fact that this is only a preliminary hearing, that the Court has called for a night session in order to clear up certain matters, the Court certainly doesn't intend to permit counsel for either side to consume time with any general fishing expeditions. The questions and answers will conform to the strict rules of evidence.

"Now, Mr. Burger, you may proceed. Mr. Ellis, return to the stand, please."

Hamilton Burger, glancing at the clock, looking back at the spectators, noticing the array of newspaper reporters in the front row, smiled triumphantly and said, "Mr. Ellis, do you recall the circumstances under which Mr. Anclitas gave you a revolver?"

"Very clearly."

"Will you state to the Court what those circumstances were?"

"Mr. Anclitas and his partner, W. W. Marcus, had made a bet of some kind about a revolver. I didn't know exactly what the bet was but I did see Slim Marcus-I beg the Court's pardon, I mean W. W. Marcus-pay fifty dollars to George Anclitas and at that time Mr. Anclitas was holding a gun in his hand. I admired the gun and said that I was going to get one for purpose of protection and at that time Slim-that is, Mr. Marcus-reached under the counter or bar and pulled out a gun which was exactly similar and said something to the effect that, 'We have too many guns. We might as well give him one' and at that time George Anclitas presented me with the gun which Mr. Marcus had handed to me.

"That, however, was not the gun which Mr. Anclitas had been holding in his hand when he returned from the barbershop and beauty parlor where he and his partner had been making a bet."

Hamilton Burger nodded and smiled at the Court. "That explains it, I think, Your Honor," he said. "I have no further questions."

"Do you have some cross-examination?" Judge Keyser asked Perry Mason.

"Yes, Your Honor."

"Please be advised that under the circumstances the Court will try to give you all reasonable latitude in cross-examination but will not countenance any tactics to gain time or any questions which may be asked for the purpose of delay," Judge Keyser said. "You may proceed with the cross-examination."

"Are you in love with the defendant in this case?" Mason asked.

"No, sir."

"Were you at any time in love with her?"

"Objected to as not proper cross-examination," Hamilton Burger said.

"Overruled," Judge Keyser announced.

"I think I was at one time. At least I was infatuated with her."

"Is it true that your wife discovered this infatuation?" Mason asked.

"Objected to as not proper cross-examination," Hamilton Burger said.

Mason said, "If the Court please, the prosecution's own witnesses have stated that there was a scene between the defendant and Nadine Ellis. I am entitled to cross-examine this witness on it."

"If the Court please," Hamilton Burger said, "of course we showed that altercation, and if counsel had wanted to cross-examine that witness on that altercation he had that right, but this witness has given no such testimony and therefore this is not proper cross-examination."

"Except insofar as it may go to show bias of the witness," Judge Keyser said, hesitating perceptibly in an attempt to be scrupulously fair.

"What has happened in the past doesn't show the bias of the witness," Hamilton Burger said. "The fact that his wife became jealous doesn't show the witness' bias. The question is, what is in the mind of the witness at the present time? What is his relation toward the defendant? What are his thoughts? What are his feelings? His bias? His prejudice? Or his lack of bias or prejudice?"

"And I submit, if the Court please," Mason said, "that the only proper way to show that is not by asking the witness how he feels but by showing the relationship which has existed between the parties."

"I think that is correct," Judge Keyser said, "but I will not permit a report of an account of an altercation between the decedent and the defendant by way of cross-examination at this time and of this witness."

"I'll reframe the question," Mason said.

Mason turned to the witness. "At a time when your wife and the defendant had an altercation over you, and accusations were made by your wife, were you present and did you take any part in the altercation?"

"Same objection," Hamilton Burger said.

"This question is permissible," Judge Keyser said.

"I make the further objection that it assumes a fact not in evidence."

"But it is in evidence," Judge Keyser said, "not by this witness but by your own witnesses. The objection is overruled. Answer the question."

"I took no part," Ellis said.

"Did you see the defendant on the eighth of this month?"

"Yes, sir."

"At The Big Barn where she was working?"

"Yes, sir."

"Were you present when she was discharged on Tuesday, the ninth?"

"No, sir."

"Did you see her that same night after she had been discharged?"

"I saw her before she was discharged."

"That isn't the question. Did you see her afterwards?"

"I… I don't remember."

"Let's see if we can refresh your memory," Mason said. "The defendant went to the Surf and Sea Motel in Costa Mesa. Did you go there?"

"Yes, that's right. I did."

"And saw her there?"

"Very briefly."

"When did you next see her?"

"I don't remember. I think.-. I don't think I saw her after that until she had been arrested."

"You don't remember?"

"I can't say positively, no, sir."

"This was a girl with whom you had been infatuated and yet you can't remember whether you saw her or not?"

"Sure I saw her but it was after she had been arrested. I can't remember. I saw her so many times that it was difficult to keep them straight."

"You remember seeing her at the Surf and Sea Motel?"

"Yes, sir."

"That was on the night of Tuesday, the ninth of this month?"

"Yes, sir."

"How long did you see her on that occasion?"

"About ten or fifteen minutes."

"Where did you go after you left the defendant that night?"

"Objected to as incompetent, irrelevant and not proper cross-examination," Hamilton Burger said. "This witness is not on trial."

"I have a right to test his recollection," Mason said.