Evil Friendship (16 page)

A
UGUST 30, 1956

“Tour verdict must be unanimous,” the Judge told the jury. “At no time during this trial has it been denied that the accused did indeed commit the crime. The question that must be decided is whether or not they knew they were killing Mrs. Louisa Edlin. You have heard doctors testify that they
were
and
are
of sane mind, and
did
know the nature of their act, and you have heard doctors testify that they were
not,
and are’
not
now of sane mind, and had, therefore,
no
appreciation of the reality of their murdering this woman.”

The Judge continued to review the evidence. He told of the girls’ untruths to Mrs. Tullett at Southwark Park, of Mary Drew Edlin’s signed confession of guilt, and of Martha Kent’s original false statement, followed by a second statement admitting guilt. He reviewed the defense’s claim that the girls were suffering from paranoia of an exalted type in a setting of
folie a deux.
He reexamined the Crown’s claim that the murder was premeditated, and that the motive was an intelligible one; that the girls were sane and the partners of an evil friendship. He instructed the jury to bear in mind that the crime of murder consists of the killing of a person by an unlawful act, meaning to cause the death of the person killed.

The Crown’s case was conducted by Mr. Thomas P. Baird. Mary Drew Edlin was represented by Mr. Conrad Reynolds, and Martha Kent by Mr. E. V. Curtis.

“There is no dispute about the fact of the murder,” Mr. Curtis said in his summary, “You must concern yourselves wholly with the evidence as to the mental health of these two girls. I am not going to review all of the evidence, but simply touch on pertinent points. These two girls met late last year here at Chillam. Their friendship was formed immediately, even though neither girl had ever had a close friend prior to this. Their friendship was as immediately intense as it had been instantaneous. One of the most important diary entries is the early one in January of this year, in which Mary Drew Edlin says,
‘Moly and I are one person, and the world is our puppet. Mother thinks we are too close, so the hell with mother.’
Their disastrous relationship is already in full swing. Later on, they were subjecting one another to torture and violence, combined with lovemaking as characters out of their novels. At the Kent home they roamed about in the night. They had plans to go abroad, to have a chateau in France, to sell their novels to Hollywood.

“The girls thought there was more behind an incident in Mr. Sawyer’s apartment at the Kent home. This was part of the backdrop to their lunacy, developing simultaneously in their minds. They were convinced that they could persuade Mrs. Kent to let Mary Drew Edlin stay with them in America, if they could simply raise the money for her passage. Only one thing, to their poor, unrational minds, stood in their way — Mary Drew Edlin’s mother. They thus set about quite calmly to plan the most brutal and clumsy killing.

“Dr. Mannerheim had the advantage of having interviewed Mary Drew Edlin before the tragedy. She has asked the court to realize that insanity is too complicated for oversimplification; that the court must appreciate the fact that lunatics do not
always
behave as raving candidates for the padded cell. Thus, while Dr. Evans claims he cannot see any delusional insanity involved here, can he, we must ask ourselves, honestly believe that a girl who writes of ‘polishing off mother’ in her diary, then
does
the murder without any qualms about being accused of it — and there are none recorded anywhere in her writing — can Dr. Evans honestly believe this is just a filthy-minded little girl bent on evil? Does he believe that Martha Kent, who called Mary Drew Edlin on the morning of the crime to suggest pushing Mrs. Edlin down the staircase, so they wouldn’t have to go all the way to Southwark Park, is also just another adolescent delinquent?

“You have heard the evidence, heard the diary entries and the testimony of Drs. Mannerheim and Evans, and it is for you to simply search your mind and heart and ask yourself, could any girl do such a thing, in such a way, to her own or her best friend’s mother, for such an ill-planned venture as running off abroad together — never mind any other obstacles — could any girl do this and be in her right mind?

“I ask you to return a verdict of not guilty on the grounds of insanity!” Mr. Curtis ended his plea.

• • •

Mr. Conrad Reynolds, also speaking for the defense, then asked the jury this: “It has been contended here by the Crown that these girls were not sick. They cared only for one another. Both doctors for the defense
and
the Crown admit they practiced overt homosexuality. They wrote letters to each other daily, saw each other daily, telephoned each other daily, made love as characters from each other’s novels, wrote of visiting an imaginary man called ‘Horrible’ for the shocking purpose of watching one another perform intercourse with the alleged ugly fellow. Their school reported them as having a
significant relationship.
They wrote of a Palace of Torture. They spied on and lied about one parent’s relationship with a house guest. Now, just these facts alone, I should rather imagine, would be enough to make any parent want to send her daughter to a doctor. If you were to have a daughter, and to be aware just of these facts alone, would you think she needed punishment, or medical attention?”

Mr. Reynolds again reviewed the psychiatrists’ finding, asking the jury to realize that there is a tendency for “Crown doctors” to approach a case in a “not exactly impartial manner … After all, they are employees of the Crown!”

He ended by saying that even if it could be proved that quite normal youngsters were capable of behaving as the Edlin and Kent girls did, up until the time of the murder, the fact of the murder cannot be discounted. “It is one thing to say they acted like any other highly imaginative adolescents might,” he said, “and another to round out the story with the fact of the brutal murder of Mrs. Edlin, described in Mary Drew Edlin’s diary as ‘polishing off’ and ‘the joyous forthcoming event I’ ”

• • •

Mr. Thomas Baird gave the concluding address. He asked the jury to remember that insanity is a disease that renders its victims unsound in mind; that is, unable to know right from wrong. The murder, Baird contended, was planned very carefully. There was argument between the girls over whether or not the rock would do the job. There was a weighing back and forth as to whether or not Southwark Park was the right place. Their motive was clear-cut: to rid themselves of the one person who most strongly objected to their close relationship, who had in fact always objected most strongly. Would a person of unsound mind, incapable of knowing right from wrong, have been capable of such exacting detail as throwing the ring’s stone on the path to get Mrs. Edlin’s attention; choosing a secluded area in Southwark Park on a weekday afternoon when this area was not usually frequented; selecting an egg-shaped rock that was symbolic of the Druid’s egg; and frequently and consistently recording the plans in daily diary entries!

Mr. Baird ended his address by saying, “I do not contend that the Edlin and Kent girls are healthy in mind; they are filthy in mind, depraved, and thoroughly evil in mind, but they are sane. They knew that murder was contrary to the law. If they hadn’t, they would not have planned it so carefully, picked such an isolated area, and then told their fantastic lies, until they were trapped by the police into admitting the truth. This was an evil deed; the rotten fruit of an evil friendship. You have no choice but to find the accused guilty of the murder of Louisa Edlin. Mary Drew Edlin and Martha Kent are incurable, yes … but they are incurably evil, not incurably insane!”

• • •

The jury had retired at 12:01 and had taken an adjournment for lunch.

It was reported that as police matrons waited to take Mary Drew Edlin and Martha Kent in charge, an attempt at passing notes was made between the girls. The notes were seized; their contents were not revealed.

Thus ended the most sensational murder trial ever to take place in this area, a murder case as shocking as the infamous Leopold-Loeb case that took place in America in the early nineteen-twenties.

W
EERDALE
, A
UG.
30. — A verdict of “guilty” was returned by the jury in the Edlin-Kent murder trial this afternoon. The girl prisoners were sentenced to be detained at Her Majesty’s pleasure. When the foreman of the jury returned the verdict at 4:25, and the “guilty” verdict was read, the Edlin girl glanced quickly in Martha Kent’s direction, then seemed to snicker with embarrassment. Martha Kent showed no emotion, but kept her head lowered, her eyes averting the crowd’s curious stares, as the pair were led from the dock.

A
UGUST
30, 1956

THE END

Serving as inspiration for contemporary literature, Prologue Books, a division of F+W Media, offers readers a vibrant, living record of crime, science fiction, fantasy, western, and romance genres. Discover more today:

www.prologuebooks.com

This edition published by

Prologue Books

a division of F+W Media, Inc.

4700 East Galbraith Road

Cincinnati, Ohio 45236

www.prologuebooks.com

Original Copyright © 1958 by Fawcett Publications, Inc.

Copyright Renewal © 1986 by Vin Packer

All rights reserved.

Cover Art ©123RF

This is a work of fiction.

Names, characters, corporations, institutions, organizations, events, or locales in this novel are either the product of the author's imagination or, if real, used fictitiously. The resemblance of any character to actual persons (living or dead) is entirely coincidental.

eISBN 10: 1-4405-3699-6

eISBN 13: 978-1-4405-3699-1