This appendix provides statements relating to the telecast entitled “The Disappearance of Aimee,” released first as a Hallmark “Hall of Fame” show in November, 1976. Hallmark at first reacted defensively when the numerous errors in the story were documented, including the undeniable fact that the entire last eleven minutes of the dramatization was made up completely out of the whole cloth. Bryan Putman, Vice President of Advertising and Public Relations, wrote me on November 24, 1976, “We and our agents were assured by both the National Broadcasting Company and the producing company, Tomorrow Entertainment, that the incidents de-picted in the script were factually accurate.
“Itis my understanding that the legal staff at NBC prepared a 65-page document to that effect.
“Be that as it may, and in view of the fact that we simply are not in a position to respond to the points enumerated in your letter of November 19, am asking that Tomorrow Enter-tainment and NBC reply in detail to your letter. You will be hearing from these organizations shortly.” The National Broadcasting Company (NBC) never did submit any docu-ments to me, in spite of repeated proddings from both myself and Hallmark. Sally McGraw, Director of Audience Services did reply to a complaint by Olive G. Cooksey with a letter which proved to be a clone of the production company, Tomorrow Entertainment's correspondence to me. Never at any time did NBC or Tomorrow Entertainment dispute any of the scores of errors of fact which were charged against the production nor offer to honor the request from Hallmark to submit the alleged 65-page document purporting to show that the incidents depicted in the script were factually accurate.
The President of Tomorrow Entertainment in two letters to me virtually conceded the flagrant inaccuracies, misrepresent-ations, and anachronisms| called to Hallmark’s attention. He claimed that should “understand that far from discrediting Mrs. McPherson, the film depicted a remarkable valiant and courageous woman who stood up to her accusers and won.” McGraw’s letter to Cooksey contained an identical quote. Would not this circumstance indicate collusion? Personally, have never met anyone who drew from this film that conclusion, although in fact, Aimee Semple McPherson certainly did stand up to her accusers and win at the time.
Apparently Hallmark likewise was unconvinced by To-morrow Entertainment's alibis because future letters be-trayed a very apologetic tone. By December 17, 1976 William S. Johnson was writing Durella Lane, 370 Montebello Avenue, Ventura, CA, 93003, “The writers of the show ignored the very effective output of her career and focused instead on the events of her time and the controversy of that time. Hallmark reworked the script several times so that we would not take a position on the charges made against her during her lite. We had hoped to be neutral and undramatic.” Inthis Hallmark failed completely. An evidence of the show's bias against Mrs. McPherson is the fact that all of the witnesses shown in the depiction of the preliminary hearing were prosecution witnesses called to testify against the evangelist. Not one witness called by the defense was shown onthe screen. How viciously the script writers defamed Mrs. McPherson was demonstrated during the dramatization of the testimony by Joseph Ryan. After Ryan's outburst against the evangelist which was accurately represented. denouncing her as a “hypocrite and a fake,” the show depicts Mrs. McPherson jumping to her feet and yelling the same epithets at Ryan. Page 1246 of the transcript of the court record, however, shows that Mrs. McPherson made no response whatsoever (cf. lines 25 & 26).
Hallmark's William Johnson continued his reply to Mrs. Lane's letter complaining about the show, “We agree with you. We missed our own high standards. We offended you and others. And, we are sorry. We ask forgiveness.”
Nevertheless this production continues being shown, without Hallmark's auspicies, on television stations around the country.
Mrs. McPherson's kidnapping earlier became the focus for a monograph, “The Vanishing Evangelist,” by “Lately Thomas” (a nom de plume) and figured prominently in the same pseudonymous author's book, “Storming Heaven.” Both of Thomas’ works are referred to extensively in this book. Robert Bahr’s, “Least of All Saints,” is not noticed because it admittedly is a “speculative biography” and most of the obvious speculations are utterly incredible.
There is no way that an unbiased investigator who examines not only the evidence the media trumpeted against the evangelist but also the massive evidence available in support of her story, can entertain for a moment the idea that Aimee Semple McPherson was the woman with Kenneth Ormiston at the Carmel cottage. The presentation in this book proves that she was not that woman.
The facts that are given in this book are documented and their sources are identified. Most people have never heard anything but the media's regurgitation of the rumors, inneuendoes, and misrepresentations about the episode. However, the facts speak for themselves. This book proves that Aimee Semple McPherson told the truth. The verdictis in. Her life and ministry have stood the test of time.
Raymond L. Cox, Th.D., F.R.G.S. Salem, Oregon
Clipping from Lawrence Journal-World Jul 16 1926
Salinas. Cal., July 16—(AP) — Dennis Collins, an attendant at the Salinas garage, today denied that he had told any one that he had positively identified Mrs. Aimee McPherson as a visitor to the ga-rage following her recent disap-pearance. He said that he had (been showh a‘photograph of Mrs. ‘McPherson but could not identify {the photograph as that of the ga-tage visitor.
Collins said that he told Assistant District Attorney Joe Ryan of Los Angeles that the woman who came to the garage seemed much younger than the ‘woman in ‘the Thotograph, although there were other marked points of resem-hlance. He did identify Kennth G. Ormiston, however, as the man who accompanied the woman to the ga-ivage. Ormiston now is being, Sought.
Exact newspaper clipping unknown but shows difficulty in properly identifying the evangulist in "the wild" even by trained professionals
MRS, SEMPLE MPRERSON ISLOGATED AT EDMONTON BY CANADIAN AUTHORITIES
‘United Press Dispatch) Chief of Potice James A. Davin. EDMONTON, Albert, Canada,’ The telegram, signed by Inspestor Middicton, International detee-June 5. — Some doubt le Belg Bere 11, said the revialist arrived, |today as to whether the woman yi, Cyigary, yesterday in um asito-found here ig Aimee Semple Mc- mobile, The message Was as fol-Pherson or another woman from lows: Los Angeles, “Almes Semple McPherson ar Selma Argue, sister of Pastor /rived Friday vin Calgary, The Argue, who ts officiating at the|car. California leense No. D-25-McPherson temple in Los Angeles,|121, a Studebaker, was followed looked at the woman and said she/by a car, California license Nu. Dv Js not the missing evangelist. 24-686. She is staying at Coronca hotel, She ts positively identified LOS ANGELES, June 5. —/by three operstors, Mra, MePher~ Almoe Semple McPherson, missing;on was known by sender while in evangelist, has been found at Ed-|Toronto. Wire instructions, In+ monton, Canada, according to a/spector Middleton, ftaternationsl telegram received here today by} detectives.”
ad else after being interviewed.
Lodi News-Sentinel "Truth be Told " (Info Ad)- Nov 20, 1976
‘Foe many years publicity-secking writers have been articles sbout the kidnaping of Aimee Semple Mc-
Pherson. Their stories, almost stways based upon, the exaggerated, fictional and ynresearched material of fs jot authors, gerve only to compound the distortions and inac-. curacies of earlier compositions. In most instances the source of the writers’ material has been over-dramatic and publicity--baiting newspaper articles, Like the childhood game, each time the story is toid, a litte more fiction is added and more of the truth deleted.
‘To set the record straight, let's return to the people who wert there, who were involved, let's review the truefacts.
First, may we recap the prevailing political situation then darvoot tate City ul ecdinenion. High in administrated circles were corrupt officials. ‘Throughout the City gangland comiitions
1 pall ing.
, Aimee Semple McPherson publicly took 4 firm stand against these prevailing conditions. Over Rad:> station KFSG, she constantly decried and revealed these deplorabie situations. As. 4 result, she was considered a very serious threat by these undesirable leaders of crime and vice, It was common knowledge that they desired to “get rid’ of her. In spite of threats she persisted in her efforts to gee Los Angeles cleaned up..
Public, as well as court records, prove that her efforts were potin vain. A recall election removed these leaders from office, Legal action sent many to prison, including the very ieaders who prosecuted Aimee Semple McPherson. It’s time that the
. truth be told. What are the facts?
‘On May 16, 1926 Aimee Semple McPherson and her secretary pitched a tent on the sands of Ocean Park beach. While Sister worked on her Sunday message prior to 9 swim (she was an expert swimmer) - the secretary went to phone the Temple. Upon her return Sister was missing.
- Earlier a cal) had come to Angelus Temple from professedly distraught parents desirous of having Mrs. McPherson pray for adying child. The callers were advised of Sister's whereabouts.
‘The couple appraached the evangelist on the beach and begged that she go to their car and pray for the child. This was a plea Sister could never resist, for children held a special place in her heart, an any who grew up under her ministry well remember.
At the car, the door was flung open-and Sister forced inside. A cloth was pressed to her mouth, Probably it was wet with ghioroform. The auto sped away.
Meanwhile (8 Temple authorities supposed Sister had drowned. They dismissed as pranks ransom demands. A memorial service was held. But no body was found.
Then late in June an exhausted woman arrived.acrogs the border from Agna Pricia, Mexico into Douglas, Arizona, end Proved to be Aimee Semple McPherson, Subsequently sho told a Story of abduction which she was calted upon to repeat scores af, times and pressed Io change, But she protested, will take this Story to my grave. It is the truth!"
Instead of bunting for the kidnapers, etficers tried to pick flaw in Sister's story. They concocted a tale that she had spent same of the time she was missing with @ former KFSG radio
Deputy District Attorney Ryan, armed with & sheaf of Photographs of the Evangelist, endeavored to persuade wit-eases that Mrs. McPherson was in fact the woman who oc-. cupted the Carmel cottage. Geveral testified concerning his attempts to badger them into identifications, for example, Henry C. Benenict, owner of the Carmel cottage, who swore, Ryan tried his d-ndest to get me to say that 1 could Identify, ber, and I aaid I could sot.” -
The Los Angeles District Attorndy who directed the case ‘against Mrs. McPhereon was noted for a pasaton In pele Hany Prosecutions, Indeed, as he prepared to go to trial against McPherson he was ehaken by a ecathing rebuke by California's Governor Richardson because the Governor had been calied Upon to issue his sixth pardon to § convict convicted by Keyes whose innocence subsequently had been established.
. Thpteatimony against Mra, McPherson collapsed in.a babel of contradictions, meanwhile, a parade of witnesses teatified In court that the woman at Carme) was not Aimee Semple Mc-Phergon. Jesse Wilhams testified that be delivered 6 telegram.” Ap the cottage on May 28, 1926. Tho district altorney pointed out ‘Jara, McPherson and ashed she wan the woman who signed for
1A-3
the message. He stared at het for g moment, then growled an eloquent, ‘Naw’! William McMichsel, 3 carpenter who worked at the property line of the cottage and saw the woman in question several times at cloze range, when asked in court to evangelist, “Never’saw her before in. my life,’? The Marshall of Carmel, Mr. August England, testified that he had been as close as eight feet Co the woman end thet Mrs. Me. Pherson was “positively not the woman.'"
Meanwhile, other witnesses furnished expert testimony tending tocorrgborate Sister’s sccount of her ordeal and escape in Mexico. Lt. Leslie Gatliff and officer O.E. Patterson of the Douglas, Arizona police department, and Deputy U.S. Marghall Sims of Arizona, testified they saw tracks, presumably the evangelist's, throughout the area Sister stated she treked to freedom when she stumbled into the little Mexican town of Agua Prieta. and sought shelter and help in the first respectable looking house she encountered, it was the Gonzales Family who very likely saved her life. There follows the affidavits of Mr, Gon tales and Douglas Police Officer, G. W. Cook, who Gas on duty at the Police Station when Mrs, McPherson reached Douglas from Agua Prieta. These affidavits are presented became of press-circulated rumors that Sister arrived in Douglas in 9 physical condition not compatible with her story of her desert wanderings. it is noteworthy how many Douglas people went out of their way to demonstrate their faith in Sister McPherson,-as the following testimonial. voluntarily preparad by these Arizgnang at the time indicates;
APFIDAVIT OF R. R. GONZALES ESTABLISHING TRUTH OF HER EXHAUSTED PHYSICAL CONDITION UPON REACHING AGUA PRIETA.
“My name is R. R. Gonzales. I live in Agua Prieta, Sen.,” Mexico. I am fortytive years old.
1A-4
“On the night of June 23, A.D. 1926, at about 1:50 AM. 9 woman came to my house in sald town and called out helio three or four times, I then told this woman to cpme into the.’ house, I asked ber what she wantad, if she wanted te’ telephone and she replied, ‘Where Is the police station?" I. did not know whoshe was, She was very mych excited when she came into the house. 1 went to put my clothes on amd? when § returned she had gone out of the bouse and went out looking for her and found her lying on the ground: sm-
‘conscious of fainted, in the gate, with her feet inside gnd her head out is the street. My wife was with this woman at the time and toi me where to find her. J thought she was dead at the time, she was cold. I got 3 flash light and Jonked her over, saw that her eyes were moving and myself and wife picked her up, carried her into the house end put her in bad. I did pot know who this woman was at that Hime but alace then she visited my home and she was the same woman that calls herself Aimee Semple McPherson and ber pictures were in all of the papers. When this same womsa came over tosee my wife 9 few days later her mother and # Douglas, Arizona officer waa with her.
“Alter carrying this woman into the house and putting her to bad and realizing her condition, myself and wife rubbed ber acms and bead with alcobol, A little later she showed some life and my wife gave her 9 drink of water. I asked her from where she came and she answered, Los Angeles, Calif,,, Tt asked her if she had @ husband and she replied not now, and she said she had two children. 1 asked her where she
4 came from, I coyld not understand -very well, but she aaid she had walked geome distance, severa] milan; ahe had been jn a car with two men gnd g-woman by the name of Resa. She told me 9 lot more but 1 could not understand everything she told me. After ba her head with aicenel, and giving her water she much revived. The Presiento of Agua Prieta lived just across the strest frem me and at about three (3) o'clock A.M. 7 called sad Presidente and he came over to my house. I asked him-what we ehould do with this woman and be said hunt some American wha could talk ‘Mexican good and bring him there. I went, also the President, to saloon owned by Panny oF known as the “Gem Saloog", I found a fellow
Ia-5
named Anderson who drives a car for hire and he went to my bome with us. Anderson could not speak Spanish so we could learn no more about this woman and we figured it was the best thing to send her to Douglas, Arizons. We put her in the car and she thanked us for what we had done and the driver took her away for-the American side. This was near four (4) o'clock A.M., June 23rd, AD, 1926. R. R. GONZALES. Sabseribed and swom to before me, at Douglas, Arizona,
. > this the 14th day of July, A.D. 1926. WM. C. JACK et - WNotary Publis ig and for Cochiag
* My commission expr July Dv1926.
-Srounty of Arizons.,
AFFIDAVIT OF G. Ww. COOK, POLICE ‘OFFICER
"“G. W. Cook, being first dyly sworn, says that on the early Torning of June 23, 1926, he was the police officer in charge of the police station of the City of Douglas, Cochise County,
John Anderson, a taxi driver, brought Mrs. McPherson to said Police Station in his car; that affiant then and there observed her condition and that in affiant's opinion she was then in a state of complete physical exhaustion; that because of her said condition afflant immediately took said Mra. McPherson to the Calumet & Arizona Hospital at Douglas, Arizona; aifiant further states that he examined the condition of the clothing and shoes, which Mrs. McPherson was wearing at the time she was brought to said Police Station, immediately after the same were taken from her by the night nurse at said Calumet & Arizona Hospital; that affiant has examined the country directty east of the town of Agua Prieta to the mountain known as ‘Nigger Head,’ a distance of approximately nine miles; and that the clothing and shoes of a person walking from said ‘Nigger Head Mountain’ to the town of Agua Prieta would notshow any more wear than those worn by Mrs. McPherson at ReteehEee enn ee. + “(Signed) G. W: COOK." JTESTIMONIAL FROM REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS » OF DOUGLAS
1A-6
“Tnis was not gotten up with the purpose of a large of names, but those of representative citizens.
countercharges regarding the truth of Mrs. Almee Semple McPherson's story with regard to her abduction and sub-sequent reappesrance in Douglas, believe: «
“That the statements of Mrs, McPherson with regard to and her consequent walk into Agua Prieta, Sonora,-Mexico, as a consequence of her being forced to flea on foot, are true,:
“That there has been no iota of proof adduced here that would in‘any way tend to disprove any of the statements made by Mrs. McPherson regarding her reappearance, and that 43 citizens of Douglas, in which city she appeared, and iaterested in righteousness and truth, we again affirm our
(Signed):’ A. E. Hinton, Mayor. Geo. ©. Buxton, Prea. Southern Arjooah Tratfc Asan. Fred D. Hubbell, Pres. Douglag Chamber.of Commerce,, - Rex Rice, Rice Company, ca blisher nt Peet
Albert Stacy, Mgr. Bassett Lumber Co. H, H, Jonnson, Gludebaker Dealer.
W. F, Thompson, Special Agent, Standard oll Company, Many, Dentist. sa RL. Hoyal, Jeweler, "| oye
1A-7
“Sister McPherson swore she had heen kidnaped, “Had I gone away willingly, I would not have come back,” she told the Grand Jury. "I would rather never have been born than to have Caused this blow to God's work,” Later she told reporters, "As God s my judge, 1 ¢m innocent, Ae expect to mest my God, my story is true.” And her story was never shaken. At the time mast Californians, according to journalist H. L. Mencken, delleved her. Ant no wonder! Those who testified against her proved to -be most untrustworthy characters, At one time witnesses ' placed her in 16 places at once! The case against Sister sounded lixe a modern Babel, as God seemed to confuse the tongues of ber attackers. Each told a different story. The “star witness’? changed her tale so often she got the reputation ax “the hoax woman.” Investigation revealed she had been committed to @ Utah insane asyium for ungovernable lying. The district at-torney who prosecuted (persecuted would be a better word) subsequently was stntenced to San‘Quentin over =: in his office which thetotiduct & the McPherson case brought to light, The careers of both investigators who tried to link Sister with the Carmel cottage were ruined in shambles. But Sister’ work continued. The conspiracy collapsed. The case against bar had to be dismissed because the witnesses kept changing their stores. “‘Extra! Aimee Wins! ‘Case Dismissed!” the newsboys. aoe Headlines blared, “Mrs, McPherson Cleared!”
On that night in early January, 1927, a scene took place in
Angelus Temple which surely never occurred in any church before. As Sister swept down the rampart 2 tumultuous ovation which continued, somé say, for more than twenty minutes @feeted her. Thunderous applause glmost always hailed her entry into the Temple. But this time horns of all descriptions, whistles,, tambourines, ever tincans, made one sound to cheer the vindicated evangelist. Tt was the only time is her career that Aimee Semple McPherson failed to control a crowd. Her gestures for silence were long ignored.
From 4 legal standpoint Aimee Semple McPherson stand fully vindicated by the District Attorney’s dismissal of all charges against her. This conclusion was at the time eloquently urged by a distinguished jurist and lawyer, Jacob B. Denney, ex-judge of the 58th Judicial Circuit of Indiana and a member of the California Bar, Here is Judge Denney’s statement:
1A-8
“The vindicatlod of Mrs. McPherson could not be more” complete. It is infinitely’ stronger than if it had besa determined by 4 jary after hearing all the evidence and resulting in an absalyte acquittal. A jury passing on the case *-would naturally ‘be supposed to be unbiased and to give au-wnprejudiced decision. But in the present case, the State eff California,. with all its machinery, power snd prestige,”
- spent many thousands.of dclinca ts tis vegan of On truth of the charges which it had made against this woman.
“In addition to the ordinary investigation which is made -by state olficials; this case, by reason of its having excited -ational interest, Was given special attention; for more than half 9 year Ure entire resource of the State of California was.’ devoted to the unearthing of evidence against Mra.Me-Pherson; special agents were employed in great numbers ta” trace down every remote rumor that might throw light om. the case. ans in Fae.
“All of this evidence collected’ was reviewed by the of ficers themselves, most interested in procuring 3 & conviction and naturally supposed to be highly hostile to the defendant. * This tribunal themselves determined that there was not without a singlejl beng ied by the defendant ip derqwn defense.”
Had the aficers coeentrated Sar eterie in aviola etek prem og gaata aeartai telatively short time. ocet.
‘The Lps-Angeles' newspa pers had a vested interest in’ cident today ee ee ee Clippengs, + ce wat es.
1A-9
There is no reasonable alternative, wheo all the evidence is weighed, lo Mrs. MePhersen's account of her ordeal It hap pened as she described it Not one point of her story was ever refuted The Internationa! Chureh of the Foursquare Gospel would prefer that the incident be jeft buried in the archives of the past, for our message ls JESUS CHRIST and pot the par who have never beard the truth quacerning the kideaging, explanation has bees prepared” for distribution. It dams eat profess to answer al! the Queslions broachable about the in cident, but it dos embrace the salient iasusa)
Captured text of news article Charge Aimee facts withheld cT-1
Madera Tribune, Number 64, January 18, 1927 Charge Aimee Facts Withheld p. 4
It having been charged by those of an impartial mind interested in the Aimee McPherson case that the entire facts have not been given to the public, it is desired by neutral parties in Madera that the following from the Angeles Sentinel as given to the people of Madera: In an interview with Constable 0. A. Ash of Douglas, Arizona, a special staff correspondent of the San Bernardino Dally Sun, in-a recent issue, reports that Constable Ash denounces the prosecution and the Los Angeles press. He declares that “honest facts concerning the case of Aimee Semple McPherson have been withheld from the public’’ and that Los Angeles newspapers had deliberately misinformed their readers regarding important phases of the evangelist's kidnapping story.
CT-2 The Daily Sun story follows: “The constable stopped in Redlands this morning to visit his aunt and uncle, the Rev. and Mrs. Geo. Garner of the Citrus avenue M. R. Church, South, before continuing his return Journey from Los Angeles, where he testified on behalf of Mrs. McPherson, “In the first place,” Constable Ash stated, "there is no such place as the desert with scorching sands, prickly cactus and the kind of brush that would tear clothes and scratch shoes; that is.there is no such region in the district where Mrs. Mc-Pherson was said to have made her escape from the famous shack of Agua Prieta. I don't know why the public has been misled concerning the topography of that country, because that so-called Sonora desert is the other extreme. It-is-grassy country, ideal pasture land, with plenty of springs of water. The altitude of that misnamed 'desert is 5000 feet.
“And. 'Aimee’s shack’ has been found,” he continued. “I have seen the five-gallon oil can which was used by Mrs. McPherson: cut her bonds. -Her hands and feet were not bound with rope, but with strips of cloth similar to bed ticking. “Los Angeles newspapers certainly can lie. While eating my lunch in Los Angeles the other day I purchased a newspaper which gave a full account of the testimony of M. R. Irvine, a photographer from Douglas. But Irvine had not yet been on the witness stand and didnot get to testify until two and one-half hours after I read his alleged testimony in the paper. Furthermore, In several instances when I answered ‘yes’ on the witness stand, I was quoted in the newspapers as saying ‘no.’ Witnesses have-been misquoted in many instances.
Ct-3
“Great concern is roused because of the report that Mrs. McPherson had hiked 20 miles across the wild desert without scarring her shoes and tearing her clothes into shreds. Please observe that the shoes I now: have on have not the slightest scratch, yet I walked days and nights over the grassy country search of Mrs. McPherson's trail. Mrs. McPherson's ankles were swollen from the long walk she took. I noticed the swelling, I also saw holes in her stockings, though the newspapers denied this. One pocket was torn from her gingham dress, too. When I testified in Los Angeles on Tuesday and Wednesday I wore a silk-finished-alpaca-suit which contained no blemishes, despite the tact that I had worn it constantly two days and two nights when I-finally arrived at the shack which the evangelist had described to me.”
“In my opinion, the shack is about 18 miles from Douglas. The evangelist guessed she had walked 20 miles. The maximum temperature reached the day Mrs. McPherson walked across the grassy country was 96 degrees; at least, that’s what it was in Douglas. “John Anderson, the cab driver who brought Mrs. McPherson across the border at the request of the mayor of Agua Prieta, did not heed the mayor's order to take her to the hospital because the woman ina semi-conscious condition continually called for the police. Therefore, Anderson took her first to the Douglas police station. That is how I-learned of the case immediately. I had been a police officer or a deputy sheriff since 1899, and-I-am now serving my second term as constable. “I know the border country well and I have had
CT-4 considerable training in tracking. So when I heard the evangelist’s story I organized party to search for the shack and hunt for the kidnapers.
"Accompanied by an Indian and Leslie Gatllff, lieutenant of the Douglas: police department, I-backtrailed Mrs. McPherson following her tracks along a fence which runs due east from Douglas toward Niggerhead mountain. After going nine miles we followed the woman’s tracks south along the Galardo ranch fence for another nine miles. During this latter stretch there was a distance of nearly two miles where the trail could not be found because of cattle tracks. Our first trip was-a failure. “Then, on August 18 that was after Mrs. McPherson had returned to that region to help offices hunt the cabin where she had been held prisoner found the shack that the evangelist and the other officers failed to find. Lieutenant Gatlitf was the first to spy the place.
The shack was really a miner's cabin at the abandoned San Juan gold and copper mine. “In this shack we found the can which has been opened with canopener, and-we- could see that the rough edge had been used to cut the bed ticking strips which apparently had- bound the woman’s- wrists and ankles. Incidentally, I saw the marks made on Mrs, McPherson’s wrists by these strips, although the Los Angeles papers denied there were any marks. There was no furniture of any kind In the house when we visited It. “In conclusion I might add that California certainly has some prize winning liars.”
Ci-5:
The San Bernardino Sun correspondent goes on-to say that Constable Ash, together with his uncle, the Rev. Mr. Gardiner, spent ig half an hour in the Redlands office of the
San Bernardino Sun, describing the evangelist’s case as he saw it.
He admitted that he knew little concerning the pastor and her work but he is confident she is the victim of much misrepresentation. The Douglas constable is aman of middle age, appears sincere and truthful, and he proudly displays the emblem of the Masonic lodge.