Testimonial Contradictions: The First Officer

Several persons loom large in the legends and orthodoxies of Marilyn Monroe’s purported murder: Robert Slatzer, Jeanne Carmen and Peter Lawford, for instance, and just to mention three. Another person who also looms large is Jack Clemmons: he was, and still is, a very large gear in the conspiratorial machinery. He, like Slatzer and Carmen, offered his perceived to be expert opinions on and off camera during faux documentaries; and his opinions, more often than not, have been represented as fact; and therefore, for the most part, they have persisted unchallenged. Likewise, conspiracist authors interviewed Jack Clemmons an almost innumerable number of times while composing their soon to be published orthodoxy featuring the mayhem generated by evil politicians, betrayal and murder. The lineage of Jack Clemmons’ testimony can be traced in retrograde from the year of his death, along the limbs of an expansive family tree, all the way back to its beginning as a seedling in Frank Capell’s The Strange Death of Marilyn Monroe, published in 1964, thirty-four years prior to Jack Clemmons’ 1998 death.

Donald Wolfe, for instance, evoked Jack Clemmons’ name ninety-seven times, Jay Margolis and Richard Buskin, fifty times, and Anthony Summers, twenty times; but the only conspiracist in that group who presented Jack Clemmons with any type of reality and honesty was Anthony Summers, who at least mentioned that Clemmons, along with Frank Capell, became edgeways with the law […] for conspiring to libel Senator Thomas Kuchel (Summers 660). Neither Wolfe nor Margolis and Buskin mentioned that important fact; and Wolfe especially noted that he felt a special sense of gratitude to a remarkable man who became a true friend in the course of my research—Jack Clemmons. Wolfe proclaimed Jack Clemmons to be a man of integrity, […] a rare breed in pragmatic times. Had the Earth ten more men like Jack Clemmons, it would simply be a far better world, that is, according to Donald Wolfe. By the time Wolfe published an updated edition of The Last Days of Marilyn Monroe in 2012, Jack Clemmons had departed Earth for eternity fourteen years earlier. He’s gone to the place where all men are honest, Wolfe asserted, and it’s the world’s loss (Wolfe 626). Now, my purpose here is neither to ridicule Jack Clemmons nor to ridicule Donald Wolfe’s feelings for or his heartfelt thoughts about his deceased friend; but the insinuation that the former LAPD sergeant was the planet’s only honest man, finally in a better place, one populated by only honest men, was and remains thick with accidental irony, as thick as a damp fog lingering over a chilly southern bog on a chilly winter morning.

As I have already noted herein more than a few times, both Robert Slatzer and Donald Wolfe interviewed Jack Clemmons and presented the first officer’s testimony in their respective murder orthodoxies; but unlike Anthony Summers’ forthright assessment of Jack Clemmons, Slatzer and Wolfe failed to mention several important details regarding the first officer: 1) his part in the Senator Thomas Kuchel criminal libel scandal; 2) his association and shared ideology with the radical anti-Kennedyite, Frank Capell; 3) similarly, his association with Robert Slatzer; and 4) his lack of any credible investigative expertise based on either education or experience.

Since Jack Clemmons was the first LAPD officer to enter Marilyn’s hacienda on the morning of August the 5th, and also the first police officer to question the three persons present, his testimony has been used exclusively to establish: 1) the appearance of the scene, meaning the condition of Marilyn’s bedroom and the position of her body; 2) the testimony of Eunice Murray, doctors Engelberg and Greenson, how the three witnesses answered questions and testified otherwise; and 3) the prevailing demeanor of the three witnesses. During the years following her death, Jack Clemmons also offered his own opinions and beliefs about what happened to Marilyn and why, even though he was not the investigative detective assigned to Marilyn’s case. The LAPD assigned that task to Sgt Robert E. Byron.

The question that develops immediately is this: to what, then, did Sgt Byron testify?—but before proceeding to that testimony, I hasten to note here: Sgt Byron did not make an appearance in Frank Capell’s 1964 political diatribe; and the LAPD detective did not make an appearance in Norman Mailer’s novel biographical novel, either. Evidently Robert Slatzer was disinterested in Sgt Byron, so disinterested in fact that Marilyn’s feigned weekend husband did not interview the official investigative detective. Slatzer evoked Sgt Byron’s name a few times in The Life and Curious Death of Marilyn Monroe and The Marilyn Files; but not in relation to anything significant.

Now, on to the sergeant’s revelatory testimony.

According to Anthony Summers’ source notes, Sgt Byron agreed to participate in one interview, which occurred sometime during 1986, no firm calendar date provided. Sgt Byron testified that his ringing telephone awakened him at 5:00 AM on August the 5th. That telephone call delivered a startling message: Marilyn Monroe was dead. Neither Sgt Byron nor Summers identified the messenger. After dressing, Sgt Byron drove to Fifth Helena Drive. Milton Rudin, Marilyn’s attorney, Dr. Engelberg and Eunice Murray were the only individuals present when the sergeant entered Marilyn’s hacienda at 5:45 AM: Dr. Greenson had already departed. Dutifully, the sergeant questioned those present. There was a lot more they could have told us, Sgt Byron reported to Summers, then also commented: I didn’t feel they were telling the correct time or situation. Sgt Byron had a feeling that Mrs. Murray was being possibly evasive by repeating a well-rehearsed story: That was her story, and that was it. The preceding are the only opinions offered by Sgt Byron. Summers admitted that, fundamentally, Sergeant Byron himself refused all comment on the Monroe case […] (Summers 585). That Sgt Byron, the lead investigative detective, would assume a position of silence regarding Marilyn’s death is not at all surprising. His function, in 1962, was to investigate the possibility of criminal activity, to search for evidence, not to offer opinions, personal proclamations or unsubstantiated speculations—and certainly not to do so twenty-four years after the fact.

I must note at this point: it is unclear whether Sgt Byron or CMDR G.H. (Capt) Armstrong offered the opinion and assessment regarding Eunice Murray’s evasiveness. The assessment appeared in a report dated August the 10th in 1962, written by CMDR Armstrong, a report that only mentioned Sgt Byron. This follow-up report memorialized interviews with various persons obviously conducted by CMDR Armstrong. Those interviews apparently occurred on Monday, August the 6th in 1962. The commander reported:

Note: It is officers (sic) opinion that Mrs. Murray was vague and possibly evasive in answering questions pertaining to the activities of Miss Monroe during this time. It is not known whether this is, or is not intentional.

In my opinion, the preceding evaluation is a curiosity, along with Sgt Byron’s assessment of Mrs. Murray’s unwavering story. Firstly, how can an individual be unintentionally evasive; and why wouldn’t Mrs. Murray maintain or stick to one story, particularly if the story she told that morning was the truth? At any rate, neither CMDR Armstrong nor Sgt Byron observed any visible indications of violence or criminality at the scene.

During his one 1986 interview with Anthony Summers, Sgt Byron reported to the author, that after the investigation began, sources in the LAPD alleged that Robert Kennedy visited Marilyn during that August Saturday. Sgt Byron did not reveal the identities of those sources; but they were spreading false information to be sure. Still, according to Anthony Summers, determining where Robert Kennedy actually was on August the 4th in 1962 or determining if the attorney general actually visited Marilyn that day, exceeded the parameters of Sgt Byron’s investigation; therefore, Sgt Byron never attempted to determine or confirm Robert Kennedy’s weekend itinerary, an obvious oversight that allowed room for all manner of speculation and innuendo.

According to Donald Wolfe, Sgt Byron arrived at 12305 Fifth Helena shortly after 5:30 AM on August the 5th; but Wolfe deviated from Summers’ accounting of the individuals who were in Marilyn’s hacienda when Sgt Byron entered: present were Milton Rudin, Dr. Engelberg, Mrs. Murray, Norman Jefferies and Pat Newcomb. Wolfe repeated verbatim Summers’ direct quotations of Sgt Byron’s testimony.

Sgt Byron’s testimony, as recounted by Jay Margolis and Richard Buskin, proffered only one deviation from the testimony proffered by Summers and Wolfe. According to the Margolis and Buskin account, Summers asserted that Milton Rudin and Dr. Engelberg withheld material information from Sgt Byron; however, that specific assertion does not appear in my copy of Summers’ Goddess.

Obviously, and perhaps for understandable reasons, over the years following Marilyn’s death, the official investigative detective offered only a small amount of testimony; he did not offer any personal grandiose assessments of the scene at 12305 Fifth Helena, Marilyn’s appearance or the position of her lifeless body; and he did not conclude that Marilyn was a victim of homicide. Perhaps that is the reason, the only reason, why Robert Slatzer did not interview the LAPD detective: the conspiracist author knew that Sgt Byron would neither provide sensational testimony nor affirm the fantasist’s assertions and allegations that Marilyn had been murdered by a lethal injection.

Just as August the 4th became August the 5th, at 12:00 AM, Sgt Jack Clemmons arrived at the West Los Angeles Police Department. He was the senior sergeant on duty that unusually slow Saturday night; but after a few hours at work, he received a telephone call from a man who announced that Marilyn Monroe had committed suicide. Sgt Clemmons was incredulous; and after the caller repeated the amazing announcement that Marilyn Monroe was dead, the policeman checked his watch: the time was 4:25 AM, a time he putatively recorded in the station’s log book. Still concerned that the report of Marilyn Monroe’s suicide just might be a hoax, Sgt Clemmons obtained the address, walked to his cruiser and drove the short distance to 12305 Fifth Helena Drive. At 4:35 AM, he entered Marilyn’s modest hacienda.

Over the years, the preceding remarkable story has become accepted fact, due to repetition, even though Jay Margolis and Richard Buskin asserted that Sgt Clemmons did not arrive at 12305 Fifth Helena Drive until 4:45 AM; therefore, in the Jay Margolis and Richard Buskin scenario, Sgt Clemmons must have entered Marilyn’s living room at approximately 4:50 AM or later.

Sgt Clemmons spoke about that legendary telephone call on a several occasions. In 1974, he testified to Robert Slatzer as follows:

I was a sergeant assigned to the patrol division. That particular morning I was a senior sergeant on duty, so I was watch commander. The call came directly in to my desk (Slatzer 284: emphasis mine).

The preceding testimony strongly suggested that Sgt Clemmons, that morning’s watch commander, was located in a private office, sitting at a desk, when he received the concussive notification about Marilyn’s death; however, in 1992, the sergeant recalled and  offered a different account to Robert Slatzer.

It was a very dead night, absolutely dead. I don’t think even the station cockroaches were alive. The radio hadn’t let out a peep  for at least two hours. I was having trouble staying awake, so I decided to go out and talk to the desk officer. He was having trouble staying awake, too. I figured we’d help each other stay awake (Slatzer Files 2).

While Sgt Clemmons was in the outer office, talking to the desk officer, a desk phone rang. Since the telephone was right at, his elbow, he grabbed it automatically and identified himself. Obviously, of course, both of the preceding contradictory accounts cannot be the truth, cannot be what actually happened that morning. Which one should we accept?

Certainly, the exact time that Sgt Clemmons received the notification telephone call is more than significant; and the time of 4:25 AM has been accepted as fact. Still, during one of the many television documentaries in which Sgt Clemmons appeared as the expert witness to the events of that morning and the relevant times pertaining thereto, he testified that he received a phone call at approximately 3:45 AM from a doctor who told me that Marilyn Monroe had died from an overdose of sleeping pills. Of course, it is entirely possible that the sergeant merely misspoke during that one interview; but the time difference between 3:45 and 4:25 is forty long minutes.

Moreover, Sgt Clemmons alternately testified over the passing years that the person on the other end of that telephone call was just a garden variety man, an unidentified doctor or possibly Dr. Ralph Greenson, Marilyn’s psychiatrist. If the sergeant did not know the identity of that caller, a fellow might wonder why Sgt Clemmons never endeavored to learn the caller’s identity―none other than Dr. Hyman Engelberg. Even Frank Capell, in 1964, managed to get the identity of the caller correct.

Once inside Marilyn’s bedroom, Sgt Clemmons immediately noticed the position of Marilyn’s body; and what he observed fomented a considerable amount of commentary. In 1974, he offered this account to Robert Slatzer:

The sheet had been pulled up over her entire body, with just a little bit of her blonde hair exposed. I didn’t disturb the body, for I knew it was dead. There’s a different look about a dead body, so I knew she was dead. Her body was stretched out diagonally across the bed (Slatzer 285).1

Clemmons then offered one of his frequently offered opinions:

It appeared to me that the scene had been arranged … and if I had been the investigating detective, I would have given them a very hard time about arranging the scene because Marilyn did not stretch out in any such fashion and die. She was put in that position after she died (Slatzer 286).

Even though the doctors denied moving Marilyn’s body after its discovery, Sgt Clemmons did not believe them; and evidently the position of Marilyn’s body confounded the sergeant. Marilyn was stretched out, face down, Clemmons noted for Robert Slatzer and later added: I don’t know exactly why they put her face down, but that’s the way they placed her (Slatzer 287). The sergeant testified many times that he believed the position of Marilyn’s body had been arranged. Fourteen years later in 1988, when interviewed by Geraldo Rivera during a television program, Marilyn Monroe: What Really Happened?, which will appear again later in this section, Sgt Clemmons offered testimony similar to the preceding while introducing the descriptive in a soldier’s position, meaning, I assume, that Marilyn’s body appeared to be standing at attention. While noting for Rivera that Marilyn’s body was prone in her bed, four years would pass before the sergeant began to assert that Marilyn’s body was more than just arranged or placed face down. For Robert Slatzer’s 1992 print version of The Marilyn Files, Sgt Clemmons asserted: The star’s face was buried in a pillow […] (Slatzer Files 5). For KTLA’s televised docudrama version of Robert Slatzer’s The Marilyn Files, Clemmons likewise asserted:

I went to the door [of Marilyn’s hacienda] and Mrs. Murray admitted me. She showed me into Marilyn’s bedroom. Marilyn was laying face down on the bed, her hands down by her side. Her face was buried in a pillow. The best way I could describe it, it was a soldier’s position when she was face down.

Photographs taken that morning clearly revealed that Marilyn’s face was not buried in her pillow. While she was lying on her stomach, with a sheet pulled up almost to her shoulders, her head was, in fact, turned and facing to her right. Eventually, Sgt Clemmons offered what can only be called a preposterous statement when he proclaimed to Geraldo Rivera: nobody dies in that position.

His belief that Marilyn’s body had been moved or that the doctors had otherwise tampered with the scene, caused the sergeant a considerable amount of heartburn, which prompted him to wax intellectual about legal issues pertaining to corpses:

It’s not illegal to move a body, but it’s another thing if you destroy evidence. These men were doctors, so it would have been perfectly all right for them to move the body. But in my opinion, it wasn’t all right for them to lie about it. They just weren’t opening up. There was no reason for them to hold back at this point unless they were hiding something. I have a distinct feeling they were hiding something. I wasn’t sure what at the time, but I had an uneasy feeling about the whole thing (Slatzer 287).

In 1992, Robert Slatzer paraphrased Sgt Clemmons’ other concerns with the scene in Marilyn’s bedroom; and the sergeant accused Mrs. Murray of spending most of the morning performing suspicious domestic chores, like vacuuming and cleaning:

[…] Clemmons worried that the housekeeper might have inadvertently destroyed evidence that could shed further light on the star’s suicide. More significant, it is against the law to alter or tamper with the scene of a death. The housekeeper might not have been aware of this law, but Sergeant Clemmons knew that both Dr. Greenson and Dr. Engelberg were; yet, neither of them had asked Mrs. Murray to stop (Slatzer Files 6).

To Adela Gregory, for her 1993 publication, Crypt 33: The Saga of Marilyn Monroe—The Final Word, co-authored by Milo Speriglio, Sgt Clemmons reported that he

immediately suspected foul play. He noticed the bedroom looked “staged.” The suspicious behavior of housekeeper Eunice Murray on Sunday morning, when she had washed clothes and cleaned the house with apparent feelings of terror, also made the sergeant take notice as she claimed she had found Marilyn’s door locked and called Dr. Greenson (2012 KE:22).

Anthony Summer reported in his pathography, Goddess: The Secret Lives of Marilyn Monroe, that the good sergeant testified:

Everything seemed in order—indeed, Mrs. Murray was tidying up in the kitchen and even doing the laundry. Yet something bothered Clemmons. “It’s not evidence,” he said, “but I left with this uneasy feeling there was something I did not understand” (2012 KE, 545).

Clemmons’ germane admission, that his uneasy feeling and his lack of understanding did constitute evidence, has summarily been ignored when evaluating the sergeant’s testimony; and I must admit, to me anyway, the preceding quotations are rather curious and slightly humorous. Why didn’t Sgt Clemmons ask Mrs. Murray to stop if her activities were, in fact, unlawful? And considering the number of police officers present, allegedly both uniformed and plainclothes officers, why didn’t one of them order Mrs. Murray to stop destroying evidence, if, in fact, that was her evident goal; and why was it the responsibility of Dr. Greenson and Dr. Engelberg to ensure that Mrs. Murray was neither violating the law nor destroying evidence? Neither man was a police officer. Moreover, Slatzer had noted earlier in his 1992 publication: Both men were doctors and had the legal right to move the body (Slatzer Files 5); and yet, both Slatzer and Sgt Clemmons asserted unequivocally that tampering with the scene of a death was unlawful. Strange. If California law prohibited altering or tampering with the scene of a death, then certainly that law prohibited moving or relocating the body, which obviously constituted altering or tampering with the scene, constituted a fundamental destruction of evidence. Were Robert Slatzer and Sgt Jack Clemmons simply fabricating suspicious behaviors? Contradictions or inconsistencies be damned.

In Robert Slatzer’s informed opinion, Sgt Clemmons’ trained eyes saw, and his astute perception perceived, several problems with the testimony offered by Eunice Murray and the two aging doctors that morning, problems brought sharply into focus by the demeanor that each witness displayed; but Sgt Clemmons found the demeanor of Dr. Greenson the most disturbing. I felt there was something there that wasn’t quite right. I didn’t like the look on the psychiatrist’s face, Sgt Clemmons testified in 1974. He was disturbed by Dr. Greenson’s look, an inappropriate look that the sergeant would frequently describe as a smirk. That inappropriate smirk indicated to Sgt Clemmons that the doctor was trying to put something over on him. Sgt Clemmons opined that Marilyn’s psychiatrist possibly even felt, since he was a doctor, that a doctor was naturally more intelligent, smarter than a COP (All quotations: Slatzer 285).

Regarding the other two witnesses which Sgt Clemmons questioned that morning, he testified in 1974: The housemaid was scared, walking around on tip-toes, whispering. Of course that is understandable, in a way. Obviously, Sgt Clemmons was not that bothered or disturbed by Eunice Murray’s demeanor; he made allowances for the housemaid, allowances he extended to Marilyn’s internist, Dr. Engelberg, who looked very remorseful. He was very quiet. And that is also understandable. That oddly arrogant Dr. Greenson, though: The psychiatrist had a smirk on his face, and that didn’t look natural to me (All quotations: Slatzer 286).

In 1988, Geraldo Rivera elicited to following testimony from Sgt Clemmons:

But the strangest thing, Geraldo, the strangest thing to me at the time and I will never forget it … was the attitude of Dr. Greenson. The psychiatrist. He was cocky; he was sarcastic; he was derogatory; he treated me with contempt; and he didn’t get under my skin … I simply kept looking at the man and trying to figure out why in the world is this man evidencing this attitude because it doesn’t fit. It just doesn’t fit the scene.

Evidently, during the four years following his testimony to Rivera, Sgt Clemmons’ disgust with Dr. Greenson did not soften. The sergeant continued to criticize Marilyn’s psychiatrist; and in the print version of The Marilyn Files, Robert Slatzer recounted:

Dr. Greenson’s attitude also seemed “out of place” to Clemmons. “He was sarcastic with me. One thing a policeman always notices is attitude. If someone’s attitude doesn’t fit a scene, he begins to ask himself ‘Why?’ Under the circumstances, his attitude just didn’t make any sense. And he had the strangest look on his face, a sort of leer. I kept thinking, ‘What’s the matter with this guy. What is it with him?’” (Slatzer Files 7).

Additionally, during the four years following his testimony to Geraldo Rivera, Sgt Clemmons’ memory developed a prejudice against the demeanor of both Mrs. Murray and Dr. Hyman Engelberg. Accordingly, Robert Slatzer noted:

Once Clemmons’ attention had been drawn to Dr. Greenson’s antagonistic attitude, he noticed that the attitudes of the other two witnesses were also “very much out of place.” There was something he didn’t like about “the way they were acting” (Slatzer Files 7).

Behavior that Sgt Clemmons had previously accepted as normal, considering the prevailing circumstances, had transmogrified by 1992 into suspicious, out-of-place antics. Certainly a confusing alteration that can only be explained by Clemmons’ associations with Robert Slatzer, Frank Capell, Donald Wolfe, ambulance attendant, James Hall and their necessity to transform Dr. Greenson into a heartless, soulless demon capable of having an affair with, and then also capable of murdering Marilyn Monroe.

Photographs taken that morning in August of 1962 clearly depicted Marilyn’s cluttered bedside table. Several objects rested thereon: papers, what appears to a scarf, a mask and a tin of ear plugs; but undoubtedly the many prescription vials sitting there were the most prominent and therefore noticeable objects. Jack Clemmons offered more than a considerable amount of testimony regarding those vials; and his testimony was not consistent.

In February of 1981, during his interview and on-screen appearance for In Search Of: The Death of Marilyn Monroe, Clemmons testified:

When I arrived at the house, Mrs. Murray, who was Marilyn’s housekeeper, showed me in. I met her psychiatrist, who had called me, Dr. Greenson. I was shown the scene, shown the body and I was shown a table alongside the bed. It contained a considerable number of bottles. I was shown one empty bottle that I was told had contained approximately 45 Nembutal.

Regarding the prescription’s quantity, the label on the vial clearly indicated that it had been written by Dr. Engelberg for a quantity of twenty-five.

In 1988, during his lengthy on-camera interview with Geraldo Rivera, the sergeant similarly testified:

Marilyn was laying on the bed, face down. She was nude. A sheet was over the body. Numerous bottles were on the nightstand next to the bed. I was shown an empty bottle, which two, three days before, the prescription had been filled with Nembutal. I was told that Marilyn Monroe had apparently swallowed all the remaining pills in the bottle.

Additionally, when Robert Slatzer interviewed Sgt Clemmons for the 1992 print version of The Marilyn Files, the former police officer asserted that he asked Dr. Greenson how Marilyn had killed herself? Clemmons then recalled:

Dr. Greenson pointed out about eight bottles that had contained various kinds of prescription drugs, mostly sleeping pills. I can still see the man as he stood there. His eyes settled on one bottle closest to Marilyn’s bed. He made a grand gesture toward it and said, “She must have taken all the pills in that bottle” (Slatzer Files 7).

However, four years earlier, again in 1988, during The Reporters Special Edition: Marilyn: A Case for Murder, Sgt Clemmons appeared on-camera and asserted:

Dr. Greenson, he pointed out to me that on … on a nightstand by her bed there was about eight prescription bottles that had contained various kinds of prescription drugs and they were all empty and I could still see the man as he stood there and he goes like this [Clemmons demonstrated by moving his hand, his palm upturned, across imaginary bottles arranged on an imaginary night table]: she must have taken all of these. He directs my attention to these and I walk over and I stick my head over and I looked down and they’re all empty […].2

When Sgt Clemmons appeared on KTLA’s 1992 docudrama, The Marilyn Files, he generally repeated the 1988 testimony quoted above, with a few variations; and he contradicted what he had asserted in The Marilyn Files print version. The sergeant testified on camera:

Dr. Greenson … he pointed out to me that about … on a night stand by her bed there was about eight bottles … of prescription bottles that had … had contained various kinds of prescription drugs, mostly (stammering: sleep sleep) sleeping pills … and they were all empty. And I could still see the man as he stood there and he goes like this [Clemmons once again gestured with his upturned hand]: she must have taken all of these. He directs my attention. And I walk over and I stick my head over and I look down and they’re all empty.

Eight years later, in December of 2000, with Jack Clemmons dead for over two and one-half years, Donald Wolfe testified for his deceased friend during History’s Mysteries: The Death of Marilyn Monroe. Offering rank hearsay, Wolfe asserted: Sgt Clemmons informed the conspiracist author that both Dr. Greenson and Dr. Engelberg together pointed at the empty prescription vials and commented: Marilyn must have taken all of these. Adding Engelberg to empty pill bottle scenario represented a new wrinkle that Sgt Clemmons never pressed into the fabric of his testimony while alive. Yet and remarkably, Wolfe also reported the following Clemmons’ statement pertaining to Dr. Greenson’s testimony: “She committed suicide,” Dr. Greenson said. Then, gesturing toward and empty container of Nembutal on the nightstand, he added, “She took all of these.”

At any rate, we are left to wonder just how many bottles sitting on Marilyn’s bedside were actually empty? According to the accounting of those prescriptions included in Marilyn’s autopsy, only one vial was completely empty: the Nembutal prescription for twenty-five capsules that Marilyn had filled on August the 3rd. I included this information in Section 11: Marilyn’s Botched Autopsy; but suffer me to repeat that accounting here.

From two prescriptions which equaled one-hundred and fifty Librium, fifty 5mg and one-hundred 10mg, which Marilyn had filled on June the 7th and July the 10th respectively, forty-four remained, twenty-seven 5mg capsules and seventeen 10mg.

From a prescription for twenty-five 1½ grain (@100mg) pentobarbital, which Marilyn had filled on the 3rd of August, none remained.

From a prescription for fifty ½ gram (500mg) Chloral hydrate, which Marilyn had filled on July the 25th, ten remained.

From a prescription for twenty-five, 25mg Phenergan capsules, filled on August the 3rd, twenty-four remained.

Marilyn also had thirty-two “peach-colored tablets marked MSD in a prescription type vial without label.” The acronym MSD probably referred to Merck, Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck and Co., one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical manufacturers. The peach-colored tablets were probably MSD’s triangular-shaped Triavil.

Remarkably enough, in his 1974 publication, Robert Slatzer provided the preceding information in the chapter that he dedicated to Marilyn’s autopsy, along with an additional accounting of other prescription vials found in Marilyn’s house that were not sitting on her bedside table, one of which was empty. The initial autopsy report, along with a supplemental report, also provided the same information; therefore, Slatzer knew all of the prescription vials were not emptyand so did the former LAPD sergeant. Nevertheless, Slatzer included Sgt Clemmons’ contradictory and fabricated testimony in his two dubious and specious books.

While Sgt Clemmons drove through Brentwood that Sunday morning, according to Robert Slatzer according to the sergeant, during his brief ten minute drive from the Purdue Avenue police station to the scene of Marilyn’s death, he requested assistance: On his way to the house, he radioed another sergeant to meet him there […] (Slatzer 284). I am compelled to ask: which sergeant did he radio? Slatzer did not reveal the identity of that sergeant; therefore, is it plausible and reasonable to conclude that Sgt Clemmons contacted Sgt Robert Byron? Perhaps. Perhaps not. At any rate, using as a datum the time of 4:25 AM when Sgt Clemmons answered the police station’s ringing telephone, the time at which he radioed for help, during his drive to Fifth Helena, must have been approximately 4:30 AM. On the other hand, using the notification call’s time of 3:45 AM, to which Sgt Clemmons testified at least once, the time must have been approximately 3:50 AM as Sgt Clemmons drove through Brentwood while speaking into his radio; and while he may have been the first police officer to enter Marilyn’s small hacienda that Sunday morning, Sgt Jack Clemmons would not, by any means, be the last.

Like demure Southern Belles who constantly drop their embroidered handkerchiefs, the conspiracist writers dropped many handkerchiefs with various and sundry names embroidered thereon: Sgt Robert Byron, Sgt Marvin Iannone, Lt Grover Armstrong and Lt Marion Phillips, Det Daniel Stewart, Chief of Detectives Thad Brown and his brother, Det Finis Brown, along with the head of the LAPD’s intelligence division, Capt James Hamilton. The parade of police officers who traveled through Marilyn’s modest home that morning must have been virtually endless; but who was doing what―and to whom? When did those policemen arrive and when did they depart during the brief amount of time that elapsed after Sgt Clemmons arrived and before Guy and Don Hockett arrived to collect Marilyn’s body? The multitude of conspiracist’s accounts, those attempting to clarify the activity of law enforcement’s representatives, have been oddly vague and contradictory; but arguably, the arrival and departure of only two of those officers is of any real importance, those officers being Sgt Jack Clemmons and Sgt Robert Byron.

In 1974, our ubiquitous but shady friend, Robert F. Slatzer, recounted the following explanation asserted by the author’s compatriot, Sgt Jack Clemmons:

Clemmons explained that after he was at the house for a while, the other police car arrived. He told them that he had called the detectives, who were on the way, and that they should just preserve the scene from the crowd that would undoubtedly arrive there. Then he left and went back to the station. Later Sergeant R.E. Byron arrived and took over the investigation. Byron was on the day shift, so he didn’t get there until after Clemmons left (Slatzer 288).

According to the preceding Clemmons’ explanation as recounted by Slatzer, the first sergeant departed Fifth Helena Drive before the second sergeant arrived.  However, two additional Slatzerian declarations contained in The Marilyn Files, each of which appeared to confirm a time overlap, are more than monumentally problematic.

In Slatzer’s 1992 print version of The Marilyn Files, he offered the following declaration: During the next ninety minutes, Clemmons was to face even more puzzling inconsistencies he encountered throughout his preliminary investigation into the death of Marilyn Monroe (Slatzer Files 7: emphasis mine). In the preceding Slatzerian version, Sgt Clemmons remained at Fifth Helena for at least one and one-half hours, from 4:35 AM until 6:05 AM, meaning that Sgt Clemmons must have encountered Sgt Byron, contradicting Sgt Clemmons’ 1974 explanation. Still, that contradiction seems minor when compared with what follows hereafter.

Moments later, Clemmons’ relief, Sergeant Robert Byron, who would take charge of the official investigation, arrived. Free to leave, Clemmons climbed into his own car and headed back to the station. He had driven to the scene of Marilyn Monroe’s death through silent, shadowed, nighttime streets. Now, three hours later, Clemmons was surprised to find himself in bright daylight, the streets busy with cars and pedestrians (Slatzer Files 9: emphasis mine).

The preceding statement established that: 1) Sgt Clemmons did not depart Marilyn’s hacienda until Sgt Byron arrived; and 2) the amount of time that Sgt Clemmons remained inside Marilyn’s hacienda was an amazing and lengthy three hours. So, that being the case, Clemmons did not depart 12305 Fifth Helena and return to the Purdue Avenue police station, using as the datum his arrival time of 4:35 AM, until 7:35 AM, a very long sixty-five minutes after the Hocketts putatively departed with Marilyn’s body at 6:30 AM..

Interestingly confusing, to say the least, considering that Clemmons was only inside Fifth Helena for approximately fifty minutes. Even according to Donald Wolfe, Clemmons was at the Monroe residence … from 4:40 AM until approximately 5:30 AM (Wolfe 19). How, then, could Sgt Clemmons have been at Fifth Helena for forty-five minutes and fifty minutes and also have been there for both ninety minutes and one-hundred eighty minutes, certainly an utter impossibility. So Slatzer’s assertions effectively destroyed all timelines previously presented, not only prior to 1992, but also to date. Even if we use the time of 3:50 AM as Sgt Clemmons moment of entry into 12305 Fifth Helena, the time line problems will not be mitigated. Using a three hour stay and that time of entry, the sergeant would not have departed until 6:50 AM, a long twenty minutes after the Hocketts’ 6:30 AM departure.

But wait … there’s more!

Also according to The Life and Curious Death of Marilyn Monroe, Guy Hockett testified that Sgt Clemmons was not on the scene when he and his son Don arrived at approximately 5:45 AM (Slatzer 40). The mortician Hockett even asserted that he inspected and collected items from Marilyn’s bedroom while Sgt Robert Byron observed, not Sgt Jack Clemmons, remarkably an assertion even reported by Robert Slatzer!

Later accountings of that morning’s arrivals and departures by conspiracist writers neither clarified nor corroborated any particular timeline pertaining to the movements of the two sergeants. For instance, according to Anthony Summers, Sgt Byron received the call of notification that Marilyn was dead at 5:00 AM. By 5:00 AM, according to the historically accepted timeline, Sgt Clemmons was already inside Marilyn’s bedroom; and Summers fixed Sgt Byron’s arrival at the scene, according to the sergeant’s testimony, firmly at 5:45 AM. And yet, according to conspiracist author Donald Wolfe, Sgt Byron arrived shortly after 5:30 AM (Wolfe 15). I’m compelled to ask: How much time is consumed by a shortly? Further clouding the waters of time, in Margolis and Buskin’s timeline of events, Sgt Clemmons notified Sgt Byron at 5:25 AM that Marilyn was dead (KE:Timeline). That being the case, then, Sgt Clemmons must have used the telephone in Marilyn’s bedroom while the doctors and Mrs. Murray eavesdropped.

The timeline assertions by Summers, Margolis and Buskin contradict Sgt Clemmons contention through Robert Slatzer that the first officer radioed for assistance while he was en route to Fifth Helena Drive at approximately 4:30 AM. Additionally, according to Margolis and Buskin, Sgt Marvin Iannone arrived at 5:30 AM and dismissed Sgt Clemmons, who quickly departed immediately before Sgt Byron’s arrival at 5:45 AM (KE:Timeline). And yet, according to Slatzer, after Sgt Iannone arrived at Fifth Helena, Sgt Clemmons instructed him to guard the scene and to handle the traffic outside when investigators and the media began to gather (Slatzer Files 8), clearly an insinuation that Sgt Clemmons wielded some type of seniority or authority over Sgt Iannone and also insinuating that Sgt Clemmons remained at Fifth Helena for some amount of time after Sgt Iannone’s arrival. However, with a completely different scenario, according to Keith Badman, who published The Final Years of Marilyn Monroe: The True Story in 2010: At approximately 5.05am, Detective Sergeant Byron and his colleague, Sergeant Marvin Iannone, as well as officers Coberley, McGuire, Curran and Gillis, arrived to relieve Clemmons of his duties (Badman KE:12). Confusing, to say the least.

Evidently, that Sunday morning in August of 1962, according to the conspiracists, the COPs played an adult variation of a child’s party game. In this instance, musical police officers.

Once the news of Marilyn’s death escaped the confines of Fifth Helena’s cul-de-sac and reached the outside world, the paparazzi descended upon Marilyn’s modest hacienda; they snapped more than a few black and white photographs on that August morning in 1962; and police photographers also took photographs for the LAPD. Those grim images created an indelible and indisputable record of Marilyn’s bedroom and its condition, a chaotic state that certainly reflected the condition of Marilyn’s life at that time and possibly also, the condition of her frenetic mind leading to that tragic August weekend.

Throughout this text, I have consistently described Marilyn’s relatively small bedroom as cluttered, meaning disordered and untidy, messy, topsy-turvy if you will, certainly unneat. The area around Marilyn’s bed was cluttered; her bedside table was cluttered; suffice it to say, Marilyn’s bedroom was, well … cluttered. In fact, Marilyn’s entire house, while not as cluttered as her bedroom, was in a condition of slight disarray, not unusual for a house in the process of being remodeled; but Sgt Jack Clemmons, evidently suffering from both myopia and hyperopia, neither saw nor perceived the disarray, the obvious clutter.

During his 1974 interview with Robert Slatzer, the former sergeant did not offer any commentary about the condition of Marilyn’s bedroom, noting only that he was not impressed with her boudoir or her house. It was not the kind of bedroom you expected to walk into … a famous movie star’s bedroom, he critiqued and then added: It was kind of seedy. Frankly, the whole house was. In other interview, the sergeant described the house as cheesy. Sgt Clemmons also added his frequently repeated opinion: It appeared to me that the scene had been arranged […] (Slatzer 286).

My effort to confirm exactly when Jack Clemmons began to distort his testimony pertaining to the condition of Marilyn’s bedroom proved less than successful; but sometime during the early to mid nineteen eighties, the former LAPD sergeant, while continuing to testify that the scene in Marilyn’s seedy and cheesy bedroom appeared to have been arranged or staged, also began to cleverly suggest that the bedroom appeared to have been fastidiously cleaned and picked-up. For instance, in 1988, Jack Clemmons appeared on a television program, already mentioned herein, hosted by Geraldo Rivera entitled, Marilyn Monroe: What Really Happened?. As the former sergeant expounded on what he encountered after he entered Marilyn’s bedroom, a re-creation of that scene, most certainly the scene as described by Jack Clemmons,3appeared on screen; and the condition of the bedroom as depicted by the re-creation had absolutely no similitude with the realities of that morning. Similar fraudulent re-creations would appear in other programs featuring Jack Clemmons. He frequently asserted that the condition of Marilyn’s bedroom and her house was not what the police usually encountered at the scenes of a suicide death.

In early 1992, Jack Clemmons appeared on an episode of Hard Copy entitled, Marilyn: The Last Word. During a testimonial soliloquy delivered during that program, the first officer noted several things about the scene in Marilyn’s bedroom that he found curious and troublesome; but he especially noted: Well, it [Marilyn’s bedroom] was all cleaned up. There was nothing out of place anywhere. Right on cue once again, a re-creation of the bedroom indicated a room with nothing out of place, offering the visage, not of a lived in room, but the visage of an infrequently occupied and expensive hotel room, neither clutter nor disarray apparent, highlighted and reinforced by a bedside table bearing only a few prescription vials, all neatly and carefully arranged around the base of a small lamp, certainly a fraudulent re-creation purporting to represent reality.

Several months later, during August of 1992, thirty years beyond the year of Marilyn’s death, Clemmons appeared and offered his testimony on The Marilyn Files, the KTLA program based on Robert Slatzer’s second literary effort starring Marilyn, the book which shared the program’s name. Clemmons repeated his often told story and noted: The whole place looked very neat. There were no … no loose ends around. The bed itself was very neat. Only the sheet was on the bed over Marilyn’s body. Concerning the remainder of Marilyn’s hacienda, the sergeant reported: However, as I related, the entire house was very neat. The part I saw of it. Everything had been picked up. Nothing out of place.

Within the print version of The Marilyn Files, Slatzer reported: Sergeant Clemmons also saw other signs that the death scene had been rearranged and cleaned up before his arrival. Then Slatzer directly quoted the right honorable policeman: The whole place was very neat, Clemmons asserted and then added: The whole part of the house I saw had been picked up. That’s not characteristic, because when there’s been a suicide, things are usually left laying around the room. Almost nobody is very neat when they are going to commit suicide (Slatzer Files 6). Remarkable, to say the least. Most certainly, Jack Clemmons’ assertion that the bedroom looked very neat was dishonest.

Now wearing a deerstalker cap befitting Sherlock Holmes, former sergeant Jack Clemmons asserted that tidiness, the absence of clutter in Marilyn’s bedroom and her house, proved the absence of a suicide. According to Mr. Holmes, tidiness proved homicide, tidiness proved murder. And yet, as the photographs taken that morning most certainly prove, Marilyn’s bedroom, Marilyn’s house was not tidy.

If asked to write a summary of the preceding topics and text, it would sound like what follows hereafter; and it would begin with a declarative statement followed by the most ancient of questions: Sgt Jack Clemmons was the only police officer of the many involved in Marilyn’s case to offer any substantial testimony, more than just a few opinions and speculations about her case: why?

His involvement in Marilyn’s death, certainly to an odd personal level, along with his freely offered testimony and speculations, must have been motivated by an overarching agenda. Always keep in mind that Jack Clemmons was acutely involved with anti-Communist activities, which included individuals who shared his ideology along with his anti-Kennedy sentiments, men like Maurice Reis, Frank Capell and Walter Winchell. Additionally, he must have perceived his forced retirement from the LAPD, evidently forced by Chief Parker and other upper level LAPD management, as an unwarranted slight that he needed to revenge. His continual denigration of that law enforcement agency’s procedures and honesty, their corruption, along with the denigration of that police force by other former officers, Michael Rothmiller for instance, contributed to the LAPD’s sensitivity to Marilyn’s case, a sensitivity that even I experienced firsthand during a telephone inquiry about several of the photographs taken that Sunday morning in August. What began as a pleasant conversation ended tersely: the LAPD’s job, the officer on the other end of the telephone informed me, did not include commenting on such things.

Admittedly, it is a dangerous strategy to rely on Robert Slatzer as a source for information pertaining to Marilyn, both her life and her death; and even as I wrote this text, I reminded myself that Slatzer was a notorious and well-known prevaricator. Could I rely on the quotations that Marilyn’s weekend husband had attributed to Jack Clemmons? Or were they possibly fabrications? Since Clemmons was one of the very few examples of an extant witness quoted by Slatzer, and considering that the sergeant appeared on KTLA’s broadcast version of The Marilyn Files, I concluded that the quotations attributed to the sergeant by Slatzer had to have been approved by Clemmons. That evident fact rendered the many inconsistencies and contradictions within Jack Clemmons’ testimony all the more remarkable and confounding.

It is apparent, considering Jack Clemmons history, that he was not an honest man, despite the eulogizing by his author friend, Donald Wolfe. Clearly, his testimony during the thirty-two years that elapsed from Marilyn’s death to his death, was fraught with inconsistencies, contradictions and outright fabrication. Additionally, virtually all of his statements over the years were actually just speculations or his personal opinions; and to paraphrase Anthony Summers, Sgt Clemmons personal opinions based on his observations that Sunday morning in August of 1962 were essentially worthless simply because he had no actual training or experience as an investigator or detective of any type, despite Robert Slatzer’s declarations to the contrary (Summers 660).

Considering Sgt Clemmons’ verified dishonesty, should we automatically accept his criticism and his denigration of Dr. Ralph Greenson? After all, the sergeant’s testimony regarding Dr. Greenson’s smirking leer is the only extensive testimony pertaining to the psychiatrist’s reaction to Marilyn’s death and how he conducted himself that Sunday morning; but I must denote here, at least one brief glimpse into a traumatized Dr. Greenson, a glimpse in opposition to Jack Clemmons’ allegations, a Dr. Greenson who apparently behaved differently that morning. According to Keith Badman, Sgt Marvin Iannone testified: While I was there, Dr Greenson was so visibly shaken that he would not return to the bedroom where Miss Monroe’s body lay (Badman KE:10). That being the case, speaking for myself, of course, I find it difficult to fathom and accept, as Jack Clemmons testified to Geraldo Rivera, that Dr. Greenson displayed no remorse or grief over the death of his patient, a lack of empathy and sympathy that neither Rivera nor the former sergeant could understand; but two decades would elapse, leaving Marilyn’s death an erstwhile tragedy, before Sgt Clemmons heard an amazing and controversial story, one that furnished him with the information he needed to deduce why Dr. Ralph Greenson behaved so mysteriously in 1962, that the sergeant felt bewildered. More about that story will appear in the following section.

Accordingly, I consider it wise and prudent to keep the former sergeant’s testimony about Dr. Greenson at least at arm’s length, view it with a healthy dose of skepticism and reasonable doubt. Besides, Jack Clemmons’ belated assertions about Dr. Greenson’s demeanor that morning in August of 1962, along with his assertions about how Eunice Murray and Dr. Engelberg behaved, have no evidentiary value whatsoever regarding how Marilyn actually died, a fact that the Los Angeles District Attorney plainly recognized. During the LADA’s 1982 threshold reinvestigation into Marilyn’s alleged murder, the district attorney’s investigators reinterviewed Jack Clemmons. According to the LADA’s Summary Report, he told the investigators:

Mrs. Murray and the two physicians at the scene “didn’t act natural.” He observed that the housekeeper looked “scared”; that her regular medical doctor looked very “remorseful” and was quiet; and that the psychiatrist “had a smirk on his face and didn’t look natural to [him].” Mr. Clemmons’ conclusions lack evidentiary significance (28).

Allow me to close this section by repeating and evaluating a few of Clemmons’ assertions, even though I have most certainly already mentioned them earlier during the unfolding of this text and even within this section.

Jack Clemmons frequently expressed his puzzlement over the lack of a drinking glass in Marilyn’s bedroom or her nearby bathroom, the absence of regurgitation in the same bathroom or in Marilyn’s bed and the absence of bodily contortions. In 1981, when he appeared on the program In Search Of: The Death of Marilyn Monroe, Clemmons noted:

The other thing that would obviously occurred had the situation been as that had been represented to me was that there would have been vomit from her because you simply cannot swallow that much barbiturates without throwing some of it up later on. It has a very violent reaction in the stomach.

The violent reaction to which Sgt Clemmons alluded would have, as a matter of what is usually discovered at the scenes of suicides, according to Jack Clemmons, caused Marilyn to regurgitate and convulse; and in 1988, the former sergeant asserted to Geraldo Rivera: There was no evidence of a person dying in this fashion. There was no vomit or regurgitation in the room. None in the bathroom. The former sergeant also mentioned to Geraldo: There was not a glass of water sitting by the bed.

Police photographs snapped that morning revealed that Marilyn, in fact, had a glass at her bedside. One of those photographs depicted a policeman’s hand pointing at Marilyn’s cluttered bedside table, indicating the many prescription bottles, along with many other items, resting thereon; and that photograph clearly revealed a glass sitting on the floor to the right of the bedside table and to the left of Marilyn’s bed. More often than not, when that tragic photograph has appeared in either a conspiracist’s book or a newspaper article, a magazine or an Internet story proclaiming a murder orthodoxy, the drinking glass has been cropped. Apparently impounded by the Los Angeles Police Department as evidence, the glass was part of a tumbler set purchased by Marilyn while she visited Mexico during the February preceding. According to biographer, Gary Vitacco-Robles, as of 2016, a Marilyn memorabilia collector possessed eleven of the dozen tumblers that Marilyn purchased. The twelfth and impounded tumbler has never reappeared as far as I know and have been able to determine. Additionally, resting on the floor and to the left of Marilyn’s bed side table, a Mexican water jorum, which Marilyn purchased during her trip to Mexico in February of 1962, can be seen. Upended and placed over the neck of the jorum is a drinking vessel.

In later testimony, when confronted with the photographic evidence confirming the presence of a drinking glass at the base of Marilyn’s bedside table, Jack Clemmons had an answer for what he considered to be the mysterious appearance of that glass: he informed Donald Wolfe that the glass must have been placed on the floor by Marilyn’s bed after he departed. The duplicitous police officers dispatched by the LAPD, namely Chief Parker, planted the drinking glass as a part of the massive cover-up following Marilyn’s murder, the coordinated and concerted effort to protect the Kennedy clan in general and Robert Kennedy specifically; and regarding the absence of vomit at the scene or a contorted Marilyn, as I have already noted, occasionally victims of suicide by barbiturate overdose will vomit or convulse; but according to my research, the large majority do not. Additionally, the LADA’s 1982 Summary Report effectively refuted the allegations that vomit and contortions should have been found at the scene of Marilyn’s death, if she was a victim of suicide. In short, Marilyn neither vomited nor experienced convulsions, meaning, that her reaction to swallowing a large quantity of barbiturate filled capsules was, in fact, the majority reaction.

I have already posed the question regarding the lack of a formal report written and filed by Sgt Clemmons; and neither the sergeant nor his willing scribe, Robert Slatzer, knew how to handle that glaring omission and dilemma. For instance, according to the scribe, many questions disturbed Sgt Clemmons; and after departing from Fifth Helena, the disturbed sergeant returned to the police station to write his report; but then, later in the same publication, the scribe asserted that Clemmons, the first officer on the scene of Marilyn’s death, never prepared a report (Slatzer 312). Still, in The Marilyn Files, Slatzer referenced a report that Sgt Clemmons allegedly wrote (Slatzer Files 9). Either the first officer on the scene prepared a written report or he failed to do so: both situations cannot be factual. If he wrote and filed a report memorializing his observations, personal opinions and feelings about the scene that Sunday morning, why has it never surfaced? In a way, though, we have his written report, in the considerable amount of testimony he gave and the opinions he offered during the thirty-two years following Marilyn’s death; and his testimony was never consistent.

The position of Marilyn’s body in death and the condition of her small bedroom that morning was all the evidence, the proof Sgt Jack Clemmons needed: Marilyn Monroe did not commit suicide. He asserted on more than one occasion that no person ever died in that soldier’s position. Even so, Donald Wolfe reported: upon entering Marilyn’s bedroom, Sgt Clemmons noticed that Marilyn’s body lay sprawled across the bed (Wolfe 9), certainly a contradictory delineation in opposition to the rigid, soldier-like position  of Marilyn’s body often described by the first sergeant. Likewise, no person ever committed suicide when surrounded by neat environs, especially a drug overdose induced death. Certainly Sgt Clemmons’ assertions represented statements he could not possibly make or begin to defend: he did not have photographs of every death experienced by human beings since the beginning of human beings, neither homicide nor suicide.

A logical fallacy, his promulgation against suicide based on something as gossamer as a neat bedroom, when logically, based on his testimony, his declarations, he should have concluded, considering the visible evidence of clutter and disarray, should have asserted, based on that evidence, that Marilyn’s death was, in fact, a suicide. The entire foundation of Clemmons’ argument rested fallaciously on a false correlation, not to mention this overwhelmingly simple fact: Sgt Jack Clemmons simply and frequently did not tell the truth.

And in closing, one quick observation.

Each and every publication purporting to be the case closing definitive account, the final word, the final truth regarding Marilyn Monroe’s unfortunate and tragic death are filled with inconsistent and contradictory testimony, vagaries and approximations pertaining to any and all timelines—severe deficiencies, obviously, that are acceptable to the conspiracist writers. And yet, those same writers expect a near mathematical precision, an unreasonable expectation to say the least, from Eunice Murray, doctors Greenson and Engelberg, unreasonable considering the emotions and pressure they must have experienced that morning; but those same accusatory writers lack any semblance of mathematical precision themselves. Needless to say, that certainly is humorously hypocritical.

SECTION 16: A Few of the Murder Orthodoxies