Breathe No More My Lady

they had never heard Matt Anthony threaten to kill his wife except on the day of her death. Miss Fitzgerald, who was not present at the time of the death threat, but who—as their maid —was with the Anthonys every day for about two months and often heard them fight, also stated under oath she had never heard Mr. Anthony threaten to kill his wife. On the morning of July 25th Matt Anthony said to his wife, in the presence of witnesses, 'I'll kill you!' Now these witnesses, Mr. and Mrs. Hunter, have also said that at the time they did not believe his threat, that they thought it was only a phrase, a manner of speech. It seems fairly obvious to me that when you have heard a man and his wife have numerous arguments over a period of years and never hear him threaten her with physical violence, and that man suddenly says, 'I'll kill you!' that's a threat, not a manner of speech! But evidently the Hunters did nothing about this threat, they didn't believe it because it was said in a moment of anger. But when is a real threat made except in anger? Certainly a killer doesn't walk up to his victim and make small talk with, 'I'll kill you!' In this ease, whether the Hunters thought or didn't think Matt Anthony was actually threatening his wife, can we doubt it wasn't a threat when a few hours after he said, 'I'll kill you!' he actually did kill her?

“What sort of man told Francine. Anthony, 'I'll kill you!'? Mr. Clair has stressed that Matt Anthony is no ordinary man. I agree. By his own admission Matt Anthony is an expert on ways and means of murder. He has stated he knows more about murder than most police officials. He is a man who, by his own admission, said under oath, plots and thinks about his writing 24 hours a day, and for the past 10 years he has written only about sex and violence. One only has to look at him to realize he is physically capable of violence. There are various kinds of violence. A war novel might be full of violence, for example, but remember this: for the past 10 years Matt Anthony has only written and thought about criminal violence! This was the type of man who told his wife, 'I'll kill you!' Can we even doubt that he meant it, that this was not a clear, outspoken threat?

“Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, it is the State's contention that Matt Anthony with his vast knowledge of murder, would not and did not make an idle threat. He was sick and tired of Francine Anthony's objecting to his wild spending and wild living. She had shown him up in front of an old friend by asking him to tell the friend to leave. Why did she do this? It wasn't anything personal, she never knew the college professor; she wasn't trying to pick and choose her husband's friends. No, indeed, she merely felt the man's presence in the Anthony home would jeopardize Matt Anthony's future.

“So it is the State's contention, and one we have proved, that when an expert on ways of murder threatens to kill a person, he means to kill. We believe from the time Matt Anthony shouted at his wife, 'I'll kill you!' he was thinking of ways and means to kill her. Mr. Clair has stated that since Mr. Anthony is the only actual witness to the killing, we must take his word. On the contrary, that is all the more reason to doubt his word. A man on trial for murder is not worrying about perjury.

“Then what is the true story of what happened in the boat? The State contends that Matt Anthony, having decided beforehand to murder his wife, deliberately put on the underwater apparatus and swam out to the boat, knowing he was doubly safe—he was swimming underwater so his wife couldn't see him, and since he owned all the land surrounding the bay, there wouldn't be any witnesses to the crime. That he suddenly climbed into the rowboat and deliberately struck this frail woman with all his might, knowing full well his fist had sufficient power to kill her. Francine Anthony may have been dead before her head ever hit the side of the boat—it is medically impossible to pinpoint death time down to a matter of seconds. Then Matt Anthony deliberately tied his dead wife's shoe lace around a duck board and broke the lace—to make it all look like an accident. Matt Anthony then swam back to shore, underwater, dressed, and fooled the Hunters, sleeping on the lawn, about a difference of three quarters of an hour in the time—to establish an alibi for himself. All this was child's play for an expert in criminal tactics, a man who as the defense has said, created people and whole cities out of his typewriter—and who also killed and murdered and maimed people with this same typewriter.

“Matt Anthony knows the law, that's part of his business. He felt he was playing it safe. If his wife's death was called an accident, fine. If the police were suspicious of his yarn, as in this case where Detective Kolcicki saw through the lie, why then Matt Anthony would sign a confession full of a cock and bull story that he and his wife argued over an aqua-lung and he struck her. He thought the most he would get would be manslaughter—a few years in prison. Since we have been told he works so hard at writing, perhaps Mr. Anthony even considered a few years in prison a wonderful investment, give him material for a dozen or more books.

“Members of the jury, it didn't work! Despite his being an expert, when Matt Anthony went up against Detective Kolcicki, it was the old story of an amateur against a professional. In less than an hour Detective Kolcicki had his confession. The defense has asked why it wasn't a confession of first degree murder. I'd like to ask, who says it prove and cry out— isn't a confession of first degree murder! This wasn't a full confession. Matt Anthony admitted he killed his wife, it was then up to the District Attorney to prove premeditation, and I think we have. Granted that since there were only two people involved and one of them is now dead, there is no way we can take Mr. Anthony's mind apart and give you the actual thoughts. But there are other circumstances involved and these allmurder!

“Can anyone believe a man would kill his wife over an aqua-lung? Especially a man of Matt Anthony's size—he could have pinned his wife's arm with one hand. Can anyone honestly believe—according to the defense's story—a man would strike his wife merely because she protested skin diving might strain his heart? Even if we accept the defense's claim that Francine Anthony's death was an accident, why would Matt Anthony have lied about it at first, immediately establishing an alibi? An accident—I would insult your intelligence if I asked you to believe that! A man thinks of alibis only when he knows he's guilty. In the course of my job I have come into contact with murderers. No man would kill if he thought he would be caught. But a murderer is arrogant, certain he can outwit the police. I'm talking now of an ordinary murderer—consider the arrogance of an expert, a man who has out-witted the police hundreds of times— on paper. Here was the big time crime writer about to pull the wool over the eyes of some 'hick' cops, sure he could hoodwink a 'yokel' court and—”

“Your Honor,” Jackson roared, springing to his feet, “I have never interrupted a summing up before in my life, but I must object to Mr. Wagner's hitting below the belt. He has made one unfair generalization after another. He has put words into my mouth I've never said or thought of. Now he's off into a dream fantasy of what went on in the defendant's head. At no time in this trial has the words 'hick' or 'yokel' been uttered except by Mr. Wagner.”

Wagner still stood with his back to Jackson. He looked annoyed. So did the jury. Matt shook his head slowly, as if he couldn't believe what he was hearing, then Matt started writing.

Wagner slowly turned and faced the judge, who said, “Mr. Clair, in summing up a lawyer has the right to interpret the evidence. You did that in your summing up. The court is perfectly capable of reprimanding anyone violating courtroom procedures. Continue, Mr. Wagner.”

Jackson made a slight bow toward the judge, sat down. Wagner turned back to the jury—I don't think he'd moved a step since he started summing up.

“Let us examine the claim that the defendant was 'temporarily insane' at the second he struck his wife. What a convenient form of insanity! We have not heard any testimony that Matt Anthony was ever mentally unstable before is his life—although he has lived an adventurous life and been in trying situations. You have heard noted doctors state he was insane at the moment of striking his wife, and that he wasn't. The State's psychiatrists have proved he knew the difference between right and wrong. Now the science of the mind is not as exact as the science of