Why are you here and why am I doing this?

Why are you here and why am I doing this?

If you're like me, THIS is as close to crime as you want to get.

You want to maintain a safe distance and delve into it when it's convenient for you; not when some lunatic knocks on your door in the middle of the night, runs you off the road or approaches you in a parking lot.

Maybe you are a Murderino?

I'm someone who resolves every New Year's Eve to NOT be the victim of a crime.

Some of the crimes I'll describe here aren't horrific or even result in death, but they're still situations to be avoided. Who wants the drama or the paperwork associated with a non-violent crime? Not me.

I know I'm not the only one who's interested in reading about crime & criminals. I hope to use this blog to share that interest with others.

My process is to find something in an old newspaper, news broadcast or my own memory that grabs my attention and delve deep. I research the cases and people using newspaper and magazine archives, genealogy sites plus court or prison documents (when I can afford them). Lately the way I write the stories has changed. I'm starting to show the effort I've made to track down specific details. I also seem to be posting less frequently. This can be attributed to the fact that I'm now concerned with the As Close to Crime YouTube channel as well as my habit of falling deeper and deeper into rabbit holes with each new entry. I'd rather have quality than quantity, so I've come to terms with the lessening output.

I try not rely too heavily on other websites or books but I credit people when it's appropriate. In fact, if my main source of information is someone else's book, I'll just recommend the book. This was the case with "The Bobbed Haired Bandit."

Don't expect too many Top 10 lists from me. I instead prefer to select the more obscure crimes that some visitors to this blog have either never heard of or haven't thought about in awhile.

I also like to give attention to not just those who break the law but those who uphold the law. So you can expect to see some of that here.

There's a companion YouTube Channel for this blog, called As Close to Crime, where I occasionally post clips related to particular blog entries or just random clips concerning criminal activity. I'm never going to post an entire commercially available film.

Be sure to subscribe to the channel or this blog.

Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Ouija board. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ouija board. Show all posts

Thursday, October 22, 2020

That's a lot of raisins

Nothing ruins a night out like coming home to discover your home has been burgled. Such was the situation, on November 15, 1919, for Clara and Albert Yost.

Missing from their Lockport, Illinois home was a small sum of cash, a suitcase containing old clothing and some groceries, including salt, sugar, potatoes and 25 pounds of raisins. 

That's a lot of raisins.

Why would anyone, other than a commercial baker, have 25 pounds of dried fruit on hand. 

Could it have something to do with the passage of The Volstead Act on October 28, 1919?

Prohibition, soon to be the 18th Amendment to our Constitution, had been proposed before Congress on December 17, 1917 and was due to go into effect on January 17, 1920. President Wilson vetoed the Volstead Act but the US Senate voted 65 to 20 to override his veto.

The Volstead Act, known more formally as The National Prohibition Act, defined the laws prohibiting the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within the United States and its territories. 

Illinois was soon to be "a dry state." 

The consumption of alcohol wouldn't be illegal but once your stash ran out, you'd be unable to legally buy any more. 

However, the Volstead Act did allow individuals to make wine and cider, up to 200 gallons, but not beer in their homes.

Not that we know the Yosts were planning to manufacture cider for personal consumption but it certainly seems possible. However, it's immaterial. No matter what was stolen, they were victims of a crime.

Following a Thanksgiving dinner shared with friends, the Yosts consulted a spirit board about a great many things. Someone in the group suggested they ask Ouija about the burglary. 

With no major breaks in the case, after leaving it in the hands of the police for 12 days, why not turn to a Ouija for clues?

 
The planchette hesitated initially but soon the Yosts had their answer. 

F-R-A-N-K-W-A-L-T-E-R.

This was unbelievable. Frank Walter was a friend and neighbor.

 

Mr. Yost asked Ouija if Frank had acted alone. N-O

Was Frank's wife Lydia with him? Y-E-S

This was hardly proof-positive so nobody contacted the police but the planchette had most assuredly driven a wedge between the two families.

News of what was revealed by Ouija began circulating in Lockport but the Walter family remained unaware of the rumors. 

For Lydia, the first sign of trouble in the friendship came weeks later when she decided to run for the position of Oracle in the Royal Neighbors of America. 

The RNA, founded in 1895 as a Ladies Auxiliary of the Modern Woodmen of America, is still in existence.

Members, then and now, devote themselves to goods works and female empowerment. 

"Royal" symbolizes the nobility of their work and "Neighbors" signifies neighbors helping neighbors. These days, the organization specializes in Scholarships, Insurance and Annuities.

Their logo, unchanged since 1894, is a flower with 5 petals. Each petal stands for individual qualities the members hope to embrace - Faith, Endurance, Courage, Modesty, Unselfishness. The center spot represents Morality.


Lydia expected her friend and lodge sister Clara Yost to support her fully in the upcoming election but what she got instead was a worthy opponent .... in and out of the organization. 

Clara won the election and Lydia soon heard the rumors being circulated about her and Frank. Lydia was outraged and demanded a public apology. 

"Apologize for what?" was Clara's position. It was the Ouija Board and not the Yosts that called Frank and Lydia Walter thieves. There would be no apology.

Lydia wouldn't let it go. Not that she wasn't open to the idea of the supernatural or alternative thinking; Lydia herself was a member of a local Spiritualist Society but she felt she was the victim of slander. 

Rather than wait for an apology that was never coming, Lydia Walter hired an attorney and sued her former friend for slander and defamation. 

She was seeking $10,000 in damages. That's $130,140.00, in today's money.

The lawsuit, announced in early 1920, wouldn't be put before the judge and jury until April 1921.

Lydia's lawyer, State Representative and fellow Lockport resident, William R. McCabe, threatened to call Ouija as a witness and potential jurors were asked if they believed in messages received through this medium. 

Judge De Selm, 1914
Circuit Court Judge Arthur W. De Selm ruled that belief or disbelief in Ouija wasn't a factor in the men's ability to serve as jurors.

 After all the testimony was heard, Judge De Selm's instructions to the jury included the following directive, "If there was malice behind Ouija's declarations, the defendant must be found guilty. But, if Ouija manifestly was in a jocular humor and merely jesting, the defendant must be found not guilty."

Over the course of two hours, the jury cast three ballots. The first being 9 to 3 in favor of the defendant, the second 11 to 1 and the third unanimous for her. 

The trial was over and Clara Yost was deemed not responsible for Ouija's actions.

Lydia Walter announced her intention to appeal the verdict. 

On April 29, 1921, Judge De Selm granted Lydia Walter's request for a new trial. 

Unfortunately, I've been unable to find out if she went ahead with the second trial or let the matter drop. Perhaps there was an apology?

In 1936, after years of investigating corruption within the state, Lydia's attorney William R. McCabe (1884-1958) left politics and his law practice behind him when he purchased The Joliet Spectator, a weekly newspaper. 

McCabe's editorial stance made him more than a few enemies.

In fact, on April 16 1938, Deputy Sheriff Leahm Kelly assaulted McCabe on the street in protest of an article McCabe published calling for his removal from office. 

One day earlier, bricks had been thrown through the Spectator's front windows. Leahm Kelly denied there was a connection. 

A much more serious and anonymous attack occurred on April 7, 1947 when McCabe was severely beaten and left for dead. He never fully recovered.

McCabe's partner in publishing (each owing 48 shares of the newspaper) was a woman 25 years his junior - Amelia "Molly" Zelko. 

Molly's long association with McCabe began in 1927 when she was 17 years old and she was hired on as McCabe's secretary. 

In 1936, Molly followed him into the newspaper business. Molly was, by all accounts, a tenacious reporter/editor who, just like her mentor McCabe, took a hard stance on corruption and made enemies.

Molly mysteriously disappeared the night of September 25, 1957. 

Popular opinion holds that Molly had been targeted by mobster Sam Giancana.

Rather then take you down the very deep Molly Zelko rabbit hole myself, I  strongly recommend the 8 part "Who Killed Molly Zelko?" podcast series, co-produced by the Joliet Area Historical Museum and Joliet Public Library.

Here's a link - https://www.thespectatorpodcast.com/podcast

We can never know how seriously either the Yosts or the Walters took their consultations with the spirit world. Occultism was very popular in the early 1920s. 

Was it, for any of them, merely a lark or did they legitimately have questions for loved ones on the other side? It's impossible to know.

Lydia Walter may have begun dabbling in spiritualism as a way to communicate with her brother Otto E. Lundstrom who had been shot to death by his morphine-addled wife Alberta Lundstrom aka Vera Lee on January 17, 1909. 

Alberta's sentence for this crime was rather slight considering she'd killed a man - only 18 months, of which she served 16 months before being released. It was generally accepted that having kicked her drug habit, she could live a good life outside of prison walls. 

 Did Lydia consider turning to Ouija for answers in July 1922 when her 17 year old daughter Marie was "lured away" from home by a mysterious stranger?

The article to the left indicates "everything would be forgiven if Marie would come home." 

Sounds like an elopement.

Is their daughter, Marie Louise Walter, who so readily performed at social functions in and around Lockport, Illinois as early as 1914, and who delighted her mother's guests with "an impromptu program of instrumental and vocal music," the same Marie Walter who later partnered with Edw. F. Williams and Madeline Smith to form the Marie Walter Company, which was actively touring the country in the early 1920s?

I'll be honest in saying that I don't know. It's certainly plausible but I'm not sure.

This is another situation were I'll let the readers decide for themselves.

Here are a few pictures from the company's press kit.

 

Compare the woman in these photos with the one picture of the missing Marie Walter.

In photo 1, Marie would be the woman pictured twice and not sitting at the piano. I believe that woman is Madeline Smith.

Those two photos show Marie Walter and Edw. F Williams.


Whatever drama swirled around the Walter family in 1922 when Marie disappeared, there is a Michigan marriage certificate for Marie Walter and a Frank Schmidt, dated June 23, 1933, which states that they each had been married once before. 

Frank's age is listed as 56 and Marie is 29. 

The Schmidts were still together in 1940, according to that year's Census, and living in St. Louis, Missouri with their 7 year old daughter. Elaine.

Lydia Walter (44 years old during the trial) died on November 3, 1927, at the age of 50. Her husband Frank died on January 13, 1934, he was 74.

Clara Yost (35 years old during the trial) died in January 1959, she was 73. Albert lived the longest, dying on January 27, 1968 at the age of 92. 

Molly Zelko's body has never been found. 

It may interest you to know that on October 13, 1946, former Deputy Sheriff Leahm Kelly was gunned down in his driveway, in full view of his wife and 4 year old daughter. 

On April 2, 1947, Leahm's brother Dennis Kelly was ambushed and shot but survived. He wouldn't be so lucky 6 years later. 

On March 5, 1953, Dennis Kelly was taken out by 2 shotgun blasts to his body, followed by 2 shots to his head with a .45 caliber handgun.

Both brothers were described as "jukebox kingpins" and it was well-known that the mafia was trying to control the coin-op business in Illinois. At the time of his murder, Dennis was also a business agent of the Joliet local 714  AFL bartenders union.

All of this and more can be found in the "Who Killed Molly Zelko?" podcast. 

Here's that link again -  https://www.thespectatorpodcast.com/podcast


Monday, September 21, 2020

"Had I stayed with my Bible and left the Ouija board alone, I would have been all right today."

 

May Murdoch didn't want to believe the information she had recently received about her husband of 26 years.

She couldn't allow herself to believe it - the news was too heartbreaking. 

Also, it did seem very out of character. May and Robert had hardly had a fight in all of the years they'd been married and surely she'd have some sense of trouble in her marriage ... if there was any.

However, according to May's reliable source, Robert was cheating on her with another woman ... a much younger woman named Anna Baker. Furthermore, Robert was planning to force their 18-year-old son Bruce to marry this woman to cover up his own infidelity and Anna's delicate condition.

The shame upon their family might be something she could eventually withstand but when 51-year-old May learned her 47-year-old husband had intended to murder her with an axe, Mrs. Murdoch felt she had no choice but to prepare for the worst and take precautions. And if May had any doubts about what the future held, she couldn't help but notice that Robert had just purchased of a large quantity of lime. Okay, so they were ranchers with substantial land but she had been told very specifically that Robert was going to kill her and bury her body in a manure pile.

And so it was that on March 17, 1923, May Murdoch shot her husband 4 times with a .38 caliber handgun.

May would later claim to not know how the gun came into her hand nor could she recall the moment when she squeezed the trigger but 4 bullets found their mark following a quarrel on the front porch of their Biggs, California home. 

The first shot pierced Robert's chin, another his right shoulder, the third his right side, and the fourth struck him in the back. 

A bleeding and frightened Robert staggered some 300 feet to the home of James and Eva Frost and said his wife had shot him. The Frosts, who had heard the gunshots less than five minutes earlier, transported Robert to the Oroville Hospital.

May's actions were as surprising to Robert as the news of his homicidal intentions had been to May; Robert had no idea he was skating on thin ice with his wife. He was unable to understand her actions and told police "I think the woman is insane. She lost her mind." 

According to Robert, he and May had the house to themselves as their son Robert was in town seeing a movie. Feeling amorous, Robert made a move towards his wife but she recoiled. Thinking her playful, he chased her around the room and finally out on to the porch. 

May wasn't playing hard to get, she was terrified. The end was near. 

Only the day before May had changed her will, leaving the bulk of her estate to her son Bruce, to be held in a trust until he was 21-years-old. May's sister Stella and two of her nieces were to receive $300 each. Her husband was to get nothing and May specified she was leaving a curse upon the whole Murdoch family who "have made a life of hell for me." 

When Constable Barney Demes arrested May the day after the shooting, she was quick to tell him "If you had done your duty three months ago this wouldn't have happened."

May was reminding Constable Demes of her request three months prior to have Robert arrested because of his affair with Anna Baker. 

Demes did actually look into May's allegations at the time of the complain but he found no evidence to support her claims. 

In fact, Demes was unable to prove the existence of Anna Baker despite May providing an address for the woman. Constable Deme and Mrs. Murdoch drove to the specified location and found the information to be false. Nobody at that address had heard of Anna Baker.

From his hospital bed, Robert made a statement to police before blood poisoning claimed his life on April 1, 1923. 

I'm not sure he ever fully comprehended what had caused the rift in his marriage or if he knew that his wife was getting all of her information from a Ouija board.

That's right - the Ouija board which May had purchased in November 1922 as a Christmas gift for her son Bruce had been the cause of all this trouble. 

As May would later testify, "Had I stayed with my Bible and left the Ouija board alone I would have been all right today." Truer words were never spoken.

To most of us, it seems silly that anything revealed through the use of these "talking boards" could be believed 100% but Ouija boards, seances and spiritualism were all the rage in the early 1920s. 

May Murdoch wasn't the only one to place her faith in the occult or to make irrational decisions based on what the Ouija revealed.

                              

While Robert may have been unaware of how unbalanced his wife had become or how seriously she was listening to the spirit guides, the signs were there. Testimony given during May's trial, which began on June 12, 1923, revealed the woman's state of mind during the months prior to Robert's death.

Bruce told the jury that fear had compelled his mother to hide all of the axes, hammers and hatchets where Robert couldn't find them. 

Mrs. Eva Frost, testified that May told her she would "get her husband if he don't get me first." 

Eva had even been present on several occasions when May used the Ouija board and she'd even rested her fingers on the planchette as it revealed answers to questions May had written on pieces of paper but not spoken aloud. Without the questions, the responses meant nothing to Eva.

The District Attorney, William Rothe, refused to accept May's temporary insanity defense despite not being able to provide the jury with a clear motive for the crime. Rothe and Assistant D.A. Clinton Johnson charged May with murder and intended to seek the death penalty. 

As usual, the defense and prosecution lawyers brought forth experts in the field of mental health to give their learned opinion(s) with regards to May's sanity. They essentially cancelled each other out. 

Dr. J. O. Wilder, who appeared as a prosecution witness, later submitted a bill for $696. He was on the stand for one hour but had spent 4 days in Butte studying Mrs. Murdoch. The inflation calculator tells me that's $10,579.12 in today's money.

Neighbors and merchants who had dealings with May prior to the shooting took the stand and claimed to have noticed nothing different in the woman's behavior; she seemed as rational and steady as she always had been.

May's daily diary was delved into by the prosecution team and passages were read aloud but this revealed neither dementia nor her motivation for the crime. 

The Murdochs seemed to be living normal, borderline boring lives. May testified that it was her habit to write her diary entries every evening following dinner. The March 17th entry was no different from the others in tone and yet less than three hours later, May would shoot her husband.

There were only two instances when the Ouija was mentioned by May. The first was when she purchased it in November 1922 and then months later when she instructed Bruce to take an axe to the board and destroy it. 

A holographic (handwritten) last will and testament drawn up by May on April 24, 1923 as she sat in a holding cell at the Butte County jail, was witnessed by Mary A. Barkley, May's cellmate and Butte's first female bootlegger. 

This document was entered into evidence alongside May's March 16th will as further proof of the defendant's state of mind. I'm not sure how the defense team thought this would strengthen the temporary insanity plea other than to prove May was lucid before and after she shot Robert.

May's first will begins with the words, "If anything happens to me ..."

The April 24th document begins "Believing myself to be sound in mind and innocent in the sight of God of any crime, I this day bequeath whatever property I own at my death to the following:"

The division of property, as stipulated on April 24th, is only slightly different from the will May had written 5 1/2 weeks earlier. 

May no longer bequeathed specific sums of cash to her sister and nieces but rather all of the furniture, some belonging to her own mother, Phebe Hudson Standley, which May had left behind in Ohio before making the move to California with Robert some time between 1900 and 1904.

May asked, as she had in March, that Mr. Bernard Lucas be appointed her son's guardian and administrator of the estate until Bruce reaches the age of 21.

The jury heard from the dead man indirectly when stenographer/Deputy Clerk Miss Jean Howe took the stand to read Robert's official statement to police. 

Robert believed May to be insane when she shot him and said he didn't blame her. That's not to say Robert felt he deserved to be shot, just that he didn't think May was in her right mind when she shot him. Robert even tried to cover for May and at one point claimed to not know who shot him.

May didn't deny shooting Robert, which made things easier for the prosecution, but she maintained that she wasn't sure how the gun got into her hand and she couldn't show police where she had hidden it afterwards. The spirits had played a part in all of this. 

May claimed to not have experienced a lucid moment from the time the gun appeared in her hand until the police came to interview her. A thorough search of the Murdoch home and premises had been conducted but the weapon was never found.

While in the courtroom, May could be seen clutching her well-worn Bible. She was dressed in black and appeared composed for the most part. 

Extreme emotions were on display when May openly sobbed as a potential juror, Mr. J. R. McDonald, asked to be excused because of his close friendship with the victim and later more tears were shed during her own attorney's closing argument. 

However, during the District Attorney's closing argument, May fainted when he called a murderess and she had to be carried from the courtroom.

On June 16th, four days after the trial began, the verdict was in. 

After deliberating for 5 hours and 15 minutes, the jury of twelve men found May Murdoch guilty of manslaughter. 

Eight ballots were drawn before the verdict was reached. The first vote had six jurors leaning towards acquittal on the grounds of temporary insanity and six jurors willing to convict, but not on any specific charge.

Manslaughter wasn't as satisfying as the first degree murder conviction the District Attorney had hoped for but William Rothe left the courtroom convinced May would serve the maximum sentence of 10 years. Boy, would he be disappointed.

As explained in the June 18, 1923 edition of the Oroville Daily Register, "Under the indeterminate sentence law of California, the Superior Court merely goes through the formality of pronouncing sentence, which is set by the statute and in the case of manslaughter is not less than 1 year and not more than 10 years. The actual time the prisoner must serve is set by the State Prison Board after the convicted person has been incarcerated for one year."

 May Murdoch arrived at San Quentin Prison on June 23, 1923 and she was paroled on September 7, 1925.

 

Upon hearing the news of May's release, William Rothe angrily told the press, "It is but little use to send murderers and other convicted criminals to the penitentiary if the prison board is to release them in such a short time after they arrive there."

Despite his disappointment with the State Prison Board, William Rothe was having a good year. 

On August 20, 1925, William married Miss Jean Howe. Remember her from the trial? Jean had been the one to read Robert's statement to the jury. 

In between the Murdoch trial and her wedding, Jean Howe became the Butte County court reporter.

William would eventually become a judge for the Chico Judicial District Court. He and Jean were together until his death in 1971, at the age of 80. Jean would survive him by 26 years and pass away in 1997 at the age of 96. They had two children.

As requested by May Murdoch in both of her wills and later in a petition to the court, Bernard F. Lucas, was appointed the administrator of her husband's estate and farm. 

On April 11, 1923, the value of these holdings was estimated to be $10,500 (or $159,598.77, in today's money). The land alone was worth $7,500 (or $113,999.12, in today's money). 

In October 1923, Lucas was assigned guardianship of Bruce's interests.

On December 9, 1925, Bernard Lucas was found guilty on four counts of falsifying entries in the records of the Sacramento Valley Bank located in Biggs, California. He received a sentence of 20 years and was shipped off to San Quentin.

                                     

Owing to the fact that he was incarcerated, Lucas was unable to fulfill his obligation to the Murdoch estate and a petition was filed to have him removed as administrator. Fair enough. 

In her affidavit, Mrs. Murdoch stated that Lucas had never filed an account of the affairs of the estate, the value of which was dwindling under his care. In less three years, the value had depreciated by $695.66 ($10,215.51, in today's money).

The Murdoch family's request was granted and, on May 3, 1926, Esther B. Marshall replaced Lucas as administrator. 

Barney Lucas was paroled on July 24, 1929 and discharged 2 years later. 

Despite his criminal record, the 1930 US Census shows Bernard Lucas employed as an accountant with a bank. He died December 8, 1939 a the age of 46.

In a strange turn of events, one that not even the Ouija board could have predicted, in 1933 Constable Barney Demes was shot and killed by one of his best friends.

This shooting was as much of a surprise to all involved as the events in the Murdoch house ten years earlier had been. Maybe more so.

On March 11, 1933, William B. Hurd, 65 years old, entered the Boulware Bros. Pool Hall through the front door on B Street at 9:50 AM, he grabbed a piece of chalk and drew a puzzle on the blackboard. He, apparently, was well-known for this love of puzzles so this wasn't too much out of character.

The drawing consisted of three squares, supposedly representing houses, and below them, he drew three circles representing tanks. The object, Hurd said, was to connect the three houses with pipes without crossing any lines. 

Hurd then walked out the back door and within minutes returned with a .38 caliber handgun. Without saying a word, Hurd shot his good friend Barney Demes, 73-years-old, in the stomach. 

Another of Hurd's friends, Mike Wagner, 74-years-old, was shot in the groin.

Afterwards Hurd sat in a chair, thrust the muzzle of the gun into his own mouth and pulled the trigger. Hurd died instantly.

Amazingly, Demes and Wagner managed to walk out the front door under their own power. 

One of six witness to the whole thing, Fred Pearne, escorted both victims to the Demes house on C Street. Wagner made it to the hospital first and would survive but Demes would not be so lucky. 

The single bullet struck Deme low in the abdomen, perforating his bowel in six places then it went through the right hip bone and lodged in the large thigh muscle. He lost a large amount of blood and according to D. E.A. Kusel, Deme was "virtually pulseless" when placed on the operating table. He was pronounced dead at 2:10 PM.

An investigation into the incident revealed William Hurd had been suffering from depression the last six months and many of their mutual friends believed he "wanted to take Demes and Wagner with him." 

Hurd's former mother-in-law, Fanny Dick, said William had often told her "Mama, when I go, I'm not going alone." 

Two months prior to the shooting, Hurd had shown up at the Dick family home to collect all of his photos, saying he wanted to send thto his mother.

Friends remembered William Hurd as a man who "liked to work puzzles and read poetry" but they might have done well to also remember that when Williams' much younger wife Inez filed for divorce in 1920, after 8 years of marriage, she cited "extreme cruelty, claiming that he had choked her and that he used inhumane and vulgar language persistently." Linett was only 19 when she married the 41-year-old William Hurd.

Barney Deme's wife Frederika filed for the $5,000 widow's benefit but her claim was denied by the Industrial Compensation Insurance Company. It seems Barney was not killed "in the line of duty" despite the fact that a Constable is considered to be on call 24 hours a day. Barney was simply killed because he was William Hurd's friend.

I have been unable to find a death date or final resting place for May Murdoch. 

Robert and May's son, Bruce Nelson Murdoch, died on December 26, 2001 at the age of 96. Zella, his wife of 58 years, died on March 23, 1991. She was 85.

Naturally, when I read that Bruce wasn't home at the time his father was shot because he was in town seeing motion picture, I wanted to know which movie.

Assuming Bruce was in nearby Oroville on March 17th, 1923, this is what was playing in both theatres -