The Onion Field

by Joseph Wambaugh

  “Yes.”

  “And the alcohol induced EEG showed no change at all from the sleep induced EEG, and the sleep induced EEG showed certain spiking consistent with the fact that an operation or a craniotomy was performed, does that indicate to you that the intake of alcohol would not necessarily affect Mr. Powell?”

  “I would have to draw that conclusion, that it might not necessarily affect him.”

  “A person can still have his intelligence, think and plan of his own free will, and do a criminal act and still have some atrophy, mild or otherwise, without the atrophy having anything to do with the criminal act, isn’t that right?”

  “I think that is true.”

  “It doesn’t stop him from becoming a free-willed individual?”

  “No sir, not a mild atrophy.”

  “Thank you. That’s all.”

  The defenders of Gregory Powell then called another medical expert. This one was examined by Public Defender Kathryn McDonald.

  “What is your profession, Doctor?” asked Miss McDonald.

  “I am an otolaryngologist.”

  “What?” said Schulman.

  “In simple terms, an ear, nose, and throat specialist.”

  Then the doctor testified: “I do not think that this mouth wound would likely be a fatal wound. It has not injured a vital structure. The structures that it has injured are not likely to bleed vigorously. I just feel that one could sustain this wound and live. My opinion is that it would not be fatal unless it would … you would have to consider other possibilities or infection or complications.”

  “In your opinion, Doctor, would such a wound be fatal as a result only of hemorrhage?”

  “The structures that are injured here would not bleed enough. I have seen many tongue wounds. They bleed vigorously for a short time.”

  Marshall Schulman was to ask: “Do you know any of the parties involved?”

  “No. I considered it a civic duty if I could testify in this case at my convenience.”

  “You testified that there would be no vessels severed by this bullet wound?”

  “There would be only capillaries.”

  “No veins at all?”

  “No major veins.”

  “And no arteries at all?”

  “I don’t believe it’s necessary …”

  “Please answer my question, Doctor.”

  “All right. I will state again there would be no major vessel severed.”

  “If a bullet goes through a man’s tongue, he is not going to bleed very much?”

  “He will bleed vigorously for a few minutes.”

  “Now the palate is the roof of the mouth. This bullet tract went through the roof of the mouth. Would that not bleed also?”

  “It would bleed, but we cut the roof of the mouth in surgery without concern, in midline.”

  “I understand that,” said Schulman, “but assuming a man is out in an onion field and there’s nobody around to sew him up or stop the bleeding …”

  “I don’t know whether you are trying to bait me into becoming provoked, but this is repetitious.”

  “What would you do if a man came into your office with a wound tract that has been described to you in the hypothetical question, what would you do for him? After taking X rays and determining the extent of the injuries?”

  “The probability is, I would be prone to leave the bullet right there.”

  “You would?”

  “Yes.”

  “It would not be bleeding?”

  “It wouldn’t.”

  “Well, did you know, Doctor, at the scene where this man fell down there was a blood spot found, and did you know when he was transferred to the morgue in Bakersfield sometime later he was still bleeding? You never saw this body, did you?”

  “No.”

  “You don’t know anything about this body?”

  “No, other than the autopsy report.”

  “You have never seen this wound tract?”

  “No.”

  “You have never been a pathologist?”

  “No.”

  “You are an eye, ear, nose, and throat specialist?”

  “No, I am an ear, nose, and throat specialist.”

  “A person is rendered unconscious. I’m assuming he is bleeding and he is on his back, lying on the ground in a dirt field out at Bakersfield shot in the mouth. He would suffocate, wouldn’t he? That would kill him, wouldn’t it?”

  “This is a possibility, if he were unconscious. He might suffocate.”

  “In your entire experience, have you ever seen a wound tract identical to the wound that has been described to you?”

  “No.”

  “I am making a motion to strike all of this witness’s testimony,” said the prosecutor, “on the ground he is not a qualified expert, and he’s incompetent to relate an opinion as to cause of death concerning bullet wounds. He is not a qualified pathologist.”

  Still more defense theories were introduced. Then Gregory Powell took the stand and decided now it was he, not Jimmy Smith, who fired the .32 automatic the one time, leaving the empty cartridge on the ground by the body. The defendants were more than desperate now, and each was forced to discredit the other as much as possible, to show the other to be a complete liar and hope by this to insert a slight doubt. Hoping by this to save one’s own life.

  “As I was alone looking at the dead officer,” Greg testified, “I raised the gun to my temple and I started to pull the trigger. Maybe I was deliberately looking for an excuse not to shoot myself, but anyway, the thought flashed across my mind that Jimmy is going back after Max because he knows she’s got money. And I jerked my hand a little bit. The gun went off, I fired across in front of my face.”

  Schulman hitched up his pants and was hard-pressed to control the sneer when he took Greg on cross examination.

  “Is it your testimony that you fired the .32 yourself when you were putting pressure on your finger in an attempt to commit suicide, but a thought flashed through your mind that Jimmy was going to Los Angeles to get Maxine or the money, and you pulled the gun away and the gun just went off right across your face?”

  “It’s the truth.”

  “Really?”

  “Pardon me,” said Moore. “Your Honor, I will cite the district attorney for his little comment about ‘really.’ It has been going on continually throughout this trial.”

  “Incidentally,” said Schulman, “so there will be no mistakes here, there has been a little baby brought into this courtroom throughout this trial. Held out here and fed. Is that your baby?”

  Pierce Brooks had to grin when Greg gave exactly the same answer as he had when Brooks showed him the Las Vegas Colt, one of the murder weapons.

  “That’s my baby,” said Gregory Powell.

  “That is the child you have a tremendous amount of concern for, I presume?”

  “Yes sir.”

  “That is the child that has been brought here into this courtroom throughout the course of this trial?”

  “I don’t quite appreciate that statement, Mr. Schulman,” said Greg. “The baby is receiving the very best of care.”

  “Really?”

  “Pardon me,” said Moore. “Once again the little remark of ‘really’ crept out. I will once again cite the district attorney.”

  “The objection is sustained. The jury is admonished to disregard the use of the word ‘really’ by Mr. Schulman. The citation of misconduct is denied.”

  “You told the robbery detective, did you not,” said the prosecutor, “that during the time you were committing the robberies you were drinking and having a ball?”

  “No sir, I wasn’t having a ball.”

  “Were you having a ball when you shot the officer down in that onion field?”

  “No sir.”

  “The baby was born in the hospital in Camp Pendleton, wasn’t it?”

  “That’s right, sir.”

  “The charges for that birth were something like twent
y-five dollars and were sent to her husband who is a serviceman overseas, isn’t that right? As a matter of fact, three lovely children were taken away from Maxine, the girl you were so concerned with, by court order. Isn’t that right?”

  “I object to this as being outside the issues,” said Moore.

  “He’s claimed he’s concerned about children,” said Schulman.

  “Right here we have to stop while I cite this gentleman, so called, for misconduct,” said Moore. “He stands in this court making his snide comments through eight weeks of trial and I ask for a mistrial at this time.”

  “Did Officer Hettinger tell you about his family,” asked Schulman when permitted to proceed.

  “I don’t recall him doing so.”

  “The officers didn’t give you any trouble?”

  “No sir, nobody would under those circumstances.”

  “I imagine not, Mr. Powell.”

  “Pardon me, Mr. Schulman is making snide statements again,” said Moore.

  “You were snapping out the commands, weren’t you?” continued Schulman.

  “No sir, I was not snapping out commands,” said Greg.

  “Oh yes, you were thinking about getting home to Maxine? When you came around and shot Officer Campbell right in the face were you thinking about Maxine then?”

  “I have already testified as to what …”

  “Were you thinking about Maxine then, yes or no?”

  “I wasn’t thinking about anything.”

  “Were you thinking about your unborn child then?”

  “I wasn’t thinking about anything, sir.”

  “Were you thinking about Officer Campbell’s wife and family?”

  “I have already testified as to what …”

  “You testified earlier how they finally allowed you to make a phone call. Did you allow Officer Campbell to make a phone call to his wife so she would know he wouldn’t be coming home that night?”

  “I don’t … no, sir.”

  “I object!” said Moore. “You’re getting prejudicial misconduct into the record. I will cite the district attorney for misconduct.”

  “The citation is denied. The objection will be sustained to the question on the ground it is argumentative,” said the judge.

  “When you took the officer’s body and flipped him into the ditch, were you thinking about his wife and family?”

  “I have already stated what my state of mind was.”

  “When you were looking for Officer Hettinger to kill him, were you thinking about his wife? Were you?”

  “I don’t think I was consciously thinking about killing or doing anything.”

  “You felt it needed to be done, isn’t that right?”

  “Yes sir.”

  “That you needed to kill Officer Hettinger?”

  “You used the word ‘kill’ in such a way … but I imagine this is the truth.”

  “I don’t know any other way to use it.”

  And then Gregory Powell, not Marshall Schulman, showed his coolness under fire. “Is there a question pending, sir?” asked Greg calmly.

  “So you remember telling Sergeant Brooks that the Lindbergh Law was mentioned but you don’t recall who said it at the time just before the shooting?”

  “I think I heard that there had been talk about the Lindbergh Law, sir, but I don’t recall exactly what it was.”

  “Well, what kind of stance were you in when the gun went off accidentally?”

  “I was moving sir. I was just stepping around the car.”

  “That accidental shot was real accurate, wasn’t it?”

  “That’s a question? Well, it wasn’t accurate, sir, because it wasn’t aimed at anybody.”

  “Did you say anything to Jimmy or to Hettinger at the time? ‘Oh my God, it was an accident. I didn’t mean it.’ Anything like that?”

  “No sir.”

  “Why not?”

  “I didn’t get a chance. I was stunned and then Officer Hettinger screamed and started running.”

  “Did you think that when you accidentally shot a man that you have to go ahead and kill somebody else to cover it up?”

  “Well, I wasn’t thinking, sir, but being an ex-convict and knowing the kind of trouble I was in, and one officer shot, yes sir, I felt it was necessary to try to get the other officer.”

  “What was Jimmy Smith doing when he was at the circle indicated on the chart?”

  “Well, he was firing a weapon, sir.”

  “Where was Officer Campbell’s body?”

  “I don’t know. I told you that about half a dozen times, sir.”

  “You aren’t losing your temper now, are you?”

  “No sir, I am not.”

  Pierce Brooks sat at the counsel table, watched the witness and agreed that he was indeed not losing his temper.

  “What is your feeling toward Jimmy Smith today?” asked Schulman.

  “I sort of pity him.”

  “And what do you think Jimmy Smith’s feeling toward you is?”

  “I imagine hostility, sir.”

  And that was indeed the truth. During the next recess after the defense rested, Jimmy Smith kicked his chair halfway across the room, but offered no resistance when uniformed deputies ran forward to restrain him.

  “Your Honor,” said Ray Smith, “he wants to call your attention to my incompetence throughout this trial.”

  “If there are any improprieties, you can call them to my attention at the proper time,” the judge said when Jimmy was once again returned to his chair.

  “I don’t want this man to continue!” Jimmy shouted. “This man is only sentencin me to my death, and I haven’t did anything.”

  “The case has been concluded,” said the judge. “The district attorney has started his argument to the jury. I will hear everything you have to say, but that is after the arguments are concluded.”

  “After I’m in the gas chamber, then you’ll listen to me! When it’s too late! After, not before!”

  On August 23 Marshall Schulman addressed the jury:

  “It is just a plain, outright, cold blooded killing. The physical evidence shows you that Officer Hettinger was outright cold bloodedly killed at the scene of the …”

  “Not Hettinger,” said Ray Smith. “You used the wrong word.”

  “Officer Campbell. Thank you. Officer Campbell,” said Schulman. “I think you know who I mean.”

  But Karl Hettinger was to wonder if Schulman’s slip of the tongue was not prophetic.

  When it was Ray Smith’s turn to argue he did it in the way he knew best: intimate, personal, homespun. The old lawyer smiled often, and looked each juror in the eye, addressing the juror as a close friend, and sought to place all blame on his client’s partner.

  “Gregory Powell is, beyond doubt, the most colossal liar you will ever see or hear in a lifetime, and I mean that sincerely. You will have to live a hundred years to see a bigger liar than Gregory Powell.”

  John Moore talked to the jury of many things, not the least of which was his adversary.

  “As the district attorney said to you: ‘The individual who fired the shots into the chest of Officer Campbell as he lay on the ground in Kern County is without doubt a frightening example of a human being.’

  “Mr. Schulman has a trait that is valuable to prosecutors if your only concern is that of conviction. He has the ability by tone or voice or by manner to make whomever or whatever he desires sound dirty or obscene. He can say the words ‘wife,’ ‘mother,’ or ‘baby,’ and if he so desires, they sound dirty and obscene.

  “He repeated the threats to kill that Powell made to a number of employees during the robberies. His tone of voice in reading lines of transcript made your skin crawl.

  “If you had a verdict of kidnapping, and death were to result during that, you would be tempted to find them guilty of murder in the second degree. Mr. Schulman would not like that. Even if it be true, he would not like that.”

  On August 30 an in
cident occurred involving juror number four which both the defense and prosecution thought exceedingly strange.

  “Did you receive certain information from Deputy Sheriff Margaret Decker concerning comments made by one of our jurors?” the judge asked the clerk that day out of the jury’s presence.

  “Yes, I did, your Honor,” said the clerk.

  “Miss Decker, as part of your duties you have been admitting females into the courtroom?” asked the judge.

  “Yes, your Honor.”

  “Do you know Mrs. Bobbick, juror number four?”

  “Yes.”

  “Who started the conversation?”

  “I started the conversation by saying to Mrs. Bobbick that I had hoped that the judge would instruct the jury on Tuesday rather than Friday because I had planned a three-day fishing trip in Mexico. Mrs. Bobbick stated that her husband also had the three-day weekend and she too hoped that it would not go out. By this time we were out of the elevator, and I started to go to my office. Mrs. Bobbick paused and put her hand up to her mouth and stated: ‘I have smelled a rat through this whole thing,’ and that lawyer Ray Smith had either ‘uncovered,’ or ‘brought to light,’ or ‘hit the nail on the head.’ Now, it was one of those three expressions.”

  At 10:00 A.M. Mrs. Bobbick was ushered into the judge’s chambers.

  “Mrs. Bobbick, I want you to feel completely at ease,” said the judge to the frail, middle aged housewife with the darting eyes. “Miss Decker, who is a deputy sheriff, testified under oath …”

  “I would like to be under oath, too, before I say anything.”

  “Yes, I am going to put you under oath. Anyway, the two of you were in the elevator. There were some other people in the elevator. And the two of you just passed the time of day?”

  “She followed me, I think, because she never did that before. But this particular morning, this Miss Decker followed me out and she said to me, well, she said, ‘I think it will be tomorrow. You’ll have to bring your bags.’ And then she said, ‘Oh,’ she said, ‘I don’t know how it will go,’ she said, ‘the evidence is so overwhelming.’ That’s what she said, and I’m saying this under oath. And I thought it was a little bit out of order for a deputy to say that to me, and I don’t know why she followed me out. She never did this before. It seems that there’re other people that kind of follow you out from the courtroom, but I never noticed. I couldn’t understand why she did that. It was impressed on my mind because she did that.