The trial date finally arrived. Defence Attorney O'Hara was up against District Attorney Max Walsh, the toughest and smartest DA in the state. The trial was held in the city where the crime had taken place.

The whole situation was rather overwhelming to Charlie, who had been in court only for petty crimes, usually something he had really done and he would plead guilty, receive his sentence and serve his time. But this time, there was a jury and O'Hara had told him that the trial could be lengthy. In the next few weeks, the following statements and witnesses were heard in the courtroom:

Walsh began his opening statement by painting Charlie as a habitually homeless man, without ties (and implying without morals) who with malice and aforethought, wilfully and deliberately did commit murder in the first degree. He stated that he intended to show that the motive was jealousy of the relationship between his former girlfriend, Sonya McGuire and the decedent, Edmund Eddington. He averred that state's evidence would prove his case against the tramp.

O'Hara's opening statement showed Charlie in a different light, a man who had tried to be a responsible citizen, holding down a job, when he happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. He said he would prove that there was a friendship without jealousy between Edmund and Charlie, and that Charlie's moral character would be testified to by witnesses. And evidence would prove Charlie innocent.

The prosecution called their witnesses.

Sonya McGuire stated that she had seen the defendant bending over the decedent holding the bloody knife in his hand. She gave a recap of her actions that night. She gave witness to Charlie's character, stating that the day she had met him, he had been running from the police. She also spoke about his skills as a pickpocket.

Detective Will Johnson described the dragnet that had been put out for Charlie and how he had eluded the police for nine months.

The police officers who investigated the crime scene showed photos of the decedent's wounds and stated that the knife found next to the body was indeed the murder weapon. As they were showing the enlarged photos of the decedent's wounds, Sonya left the courtroom in tears. Also entered into state's evidence were the evening clothes Charlie had been wearing that night. They were found in the sub basement of the theatre, folded in a corner of the damp cellar. The vest had blood stains on it, looking as if it a bloody hand had been wiped on it. The murder weapon also had Charlie's fingerprints on it. Both the blood on the vest and the murder weapon were the same blood type as Edmund Eddington's.

Members of the opera company and orchestra testified as to the good character of both Sonya and the decedent. They also said that before Edmund came into the picture, Charlie had been Sonya's beau.

District Attorney Walsh called his witness Raoul Thibaut.

Raoul Thibaut, the tenor, a very tall man, looked to be in his early thirties. He had brown hair and blue eyes. He stated that he did not know Charlie except by sight, and that whenever he had seen Charlie, Charlie had always seemed totally focused on Sonya to the exclusion of everyone and everything else.

Raoul was then cross-examined by Attorney O'Hara.

"M. Thibaut, if you would be so kind, please sign your name on this card." He handed him a blank index card. The tenor signed it and handed it back. He handed Raoul another blank card and a scissors.

"Objection," said DA Walsh. "Is there any relevance to this?"

"Mr. O'Hara?" asked the judge.

"I am laying a foundation that will be used later."

"Overruled. But, please stick to the subject, Mr. O'Hara."

"Yes, Your Honour. Now, if the court will indulge me a bit longer, M. Thibaut, please cut this second card in half." The tenor gave O'Hara a strange look, but took the scissors and cut the card in half.

"M. Thibaut, may I assume you are right-handed?"

"Oui, Monsieur."

"And how tall are you?"

"I am six feet and two inches."

"Thank you, M. Thibaut."

Martina was called next by the prosecution.

Martina Soubrette, the contralto, a tall, slim dark-haired woman about thirty years old, was dressed in a mauve suit and a large matching hat with flowers. She wore pearls around her neck. Her hands were enclosed in a pair of light mauve gloves, showing off her long slim fingers. She ascended the witness stand in a stately manner.

Martina stated that Sonya had a good reputation with the company, but that Charlie had been seen sneaking about in places in the theatre in which he had no business being, thus proving that he knew his way around the opera house.

O'Hara cross-examined the contralto.

"Mlle. Soubrette, I would ask you to do the same thing that I asked of M. Thibaut. Please sign your name on the first card, then take the scissors and cut the second card in half."

The contralto complied.

"Would you say you are right or left-handed?"

"I am right-handed, Monsieur."

"Then tell us, Mlle. Soubrette, how tall are you?"

"I am five foot and ten inches," she answered.

The defence then called their witnesses.

Ed McGuire testified as to Charlie's character while working in the hardware store. He stated that Charlie was completely honest and trustworthy, did a good job at the store and had stayed at his home for about six months without incident. In fact, he had become a friend. Charlie had good relations with the customers outside of a little teasing and clowning, but never emotional outbursts or anger.

Ed glanced at his daughter Sonya, sitting next to the defence attorney. Her face was reddened and she looked angry. She wouldn't even glance over at her father.

Carol the waitress stated that Charlie was cooperative and trustworthy at the diner, completely honest and never gave cause to be disciplined. He never got angry with uncooperative customers or anyone else, and was not prone to emotional outbursts.

The usher who handed Charlie the note stated that the note, in an envelope addressed to Charlie, had been found in his own jacket pocket before the performance. The envelope gave instructions to give it to Charlie at intermission. Because he knew who Charlie was and where he was sitting, the usher delivered it to him.

Charlie had told Attorney O'Hara that he wanted to testify and so he was called next. Charlie related again the story of that terrible night and stated unequivocally that he was innocent. He told why he had run and what had ensued in the next few months. He stated that he had turned himself in, albeit, nine months after the crime had been committed.

O'Hara went through the same card signing and cutting with Charlie as he had with Martina and Raoul.

"Tell me, are you right or left handed?"

"Left-handed, sir."

"And how tall are you?"

"Five foot six, sir."

DA Max Walsh cross-examined Charlie.

"Your finger prints are on the murder weapon. How do you account for that."

"I picked it up, sir."

"Why did you do that?"

"I dunno…I just did."

"How do you account for the blood on your clothes, the white waistcoat found in the cellar?"

"I wiped me 'ands off on me clothes. I did it wit'out thinkin, after I touched the knoife. Then I lef' the evenin' clothes in the cellar, after changin' into me street clothes. I did not want to take them wi' me…"

"Why did you run from the law?"

"I was scared."

"Why were you scared if you hadn't committed the crime?"

"I been in gaol before…scared o' the police." After Charlie said that, he was sorry…it hadn't sounded good.

"So, what was your reaction to seeing Eddington laying on the lounge floor?" asked Walsh.

"Shock. I was shocked. I didn't know wha' t' do."

"So you just stood there wondering what to do? Why didn't you get help or call the police like a responsible citizen?"

O'Hara stood up. "Objection. Badgering the witness."

"Sustained," said the judge.

"I'll put this another way. Did you know he was dead?"

"Yes. I seen dead b'fore."

"Did you check to find out if he was breathing or had a pulse?

"No….I just knowed 'e was dead. Just by the look of 'im."

"Are you a doctor or medical practitioner, that you can tell if someone is deceased without examining them?"

"It just 'appen'd so fast…"

"Objection. Badgering the witness again," said O'Hara.

"Overruled. The witness will answer the question."

"No, I ain't no doctor."

"That's all the questions I have for this witness," said Walsh.

"The witness may stand down," said the judge and Charlie took his seat.

O'Hara called his detective next.

Charlie's note and also the one found on Edmund had been entered into evidence. Detective Tom McShane showed enlarged photographic blowups of the notes showing how the two notes were actually written on the same typewriter. The notes were identical except for the handwritten signatures. The notes both read: Please meet me in the lounge during intermission. I have something important to ask you about Sonya. The signature on one was "Charlie" and the other "Edmund." He had samples of Charlie's handwriting and also Edmund's and showed that the real signatures were quite different from that on the notes. He pointed out his conclusion that the notes were typed on a typewriter that was located in the theatre's office and that the notes were signed by the same hand, unknown at this time.

Detective McShane went on to show the court several things about the photos of Edmund's wounds. He had a diagram of a body and the wounds were marked on the frontal and dorsal sides. He stated that the height of Edmund Eddington was six foot one. By the placement of the wounds, the one on the back was the first one inflicted, by someone embracing Edmund, but not having a lot of strength in their hand. It was on the left side of Edmund's body, and was at an angle showing that the person would have to be right handed. This was not the blow that killed Edmund, but it was the one inflicted by the knife found next to him.

McShane pointed out three other wounds in the decedent's chest, any one of which could have killed him. Apparently, the first blow was on his back, by someone embracing him. As he fell to the floor from the pain, another knife was used to stab him from the front, three times. McShane showed the difference in the size and shape of the wounds, indicating two knives. Why would a murderer use two knives, unless there were two murderers and the second knife had not as yet been found.

Another point was the height of the murderer. While the frontal wounds, being inflicted when the decedent was laying prone, did not tell anything about the height of the murderer, the dorsal wound did. It was calculated that the person inflicting the first wound have had to be between five foot eight and five foot eleven. And again, the frontal wounds were inflicted by a right-handed person with considerable strength.