URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Carrie Brown : Murder In The East River Hotel
  HTML https://carriebrown.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: General Discussion
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 6630--------------------------------------------------
       Fuller, Berbenich, and Blood 
   DIR By: HowBrown1953
       Date: March 10, 2026, 6:44 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       While the following resolves nothing in the case, it is
       interesting that Paul Fuller, an attorney with Coudert Brothers
       law firm, seems to be
       arguing for and, at the same time, against blood being found up
       on the fifth floor of the hotel.
       Pardon for clemency presented to Governor Odell in early
       December 1901.
       Submitted by attorney Paul Fuller, of Coudert Brothers Law Firm,
       Manhattan
       New York, December 2, 1901
       Before His Excellency Benjamin B. Odell, Jr., Governor of the
       State of New York.
       Application For The Pardon Of George Frank, Otherwise Known As
       Amer Ben Ali
       Another element in the case which added to the absence of the
       key weighed in the balance against the prisoner was the presence
       of blood spots between the room where the woman was murdered and
       the room occupied by the prisoner. These according to the report
       made by the District Attorney who conducted the trial, consisted
       of three drops of blood in the hallway, and spots or daubs of
       blood on the paper of the hallway and on the panel of the
       prisoner's door. It may be noted here that three drops of blood
       and daubs or spots easily made with as many more drops is an
       unlikely record to be left behind him by an assassin groping in
       the dark after mutilating his victim with what the District
       Attorney described as 'myriad' knife wounds covering every part
       of the body and limbs., perforating the intestines, and
       according to the inference meant it to be drawn from the
       analysis of the nail cleanings, plunging his hands into the
       intestines of his dead victim in such a manner that the filth
       under his nails retained twenty-four hours later traces of
       intestinal fluid and of partly digested food. Apart from the
       intrinsic improbability of such a result, there is the further
       significant fact that the night clerk Fitzgerald who discovered
       the murdered woman does not testify to the presence of these
       blood marks. Their presence, it is stated, was a revelation of
       the police scrutiny that followed. We now have the testimony of
       two men of experience in the investigation of the crime,
       reporters of the Evening Sun at the time of the murder and
       specially detailed to attend to police work, who were the first
       or among the first to visit the scene of the murder and who
       examined the ground in search of clues, and these men attest
       under oath that in their careful examination and search for a
       clue they saw no blood spots where these were afterward reported
       by the police. No motive, surely no reasonable or adequate
       motive can be suggested for this solemn attestation by men whose
       standing depends on the good opinion of the community, other
       than the desire to see justice done to a helpless prisoner. And
       there is one significant circumstance which corroborates their
       positive recollection. No blood spots are reported on the knobs
       or panels of the door of the murdered woman's room, and yet it
       is inferred against the prisoner that in the brief transit
       across the hall to his own room, blood dripped on the floor, he
       daubed the walls in his groping and soiled the panels of his
       door on both sides, in opening it and again in closing it, while
       in unlocking and locking the door of the room in which the
       butchery has just been perpetrated no sign of blood was left
       behind.
       Another inference which must be drawn from this story in order
       to fasten the crime upon the prisoner is that after committing
       the fiendish crime he quietly crept back to his own room and
       remained there until morning when he could have walked out into
       the street beyond reach, as did the last known companion of the
       murdered woman who was seen with her at ten o'clock that night
       and has never been heard of since.
       The affidavit of Berbenich suggests how the blood spots came to
       be there.
       There could have been a woolly mammoth in room 31, and
       Fitzgerald would probably have not seen it.
       There have been many crime scenes in which the victim was
       murdered with by a knife with a minimal amount of blood
       eventually being found on the perpetrator. Locard's Exchange
       Principle states, "Every contact leaves a trace".
       There was blood found on Ali, which we won't go into here.
       At first, Fuller scoffs at the blood claimed to have been
       found....and yet at the end of the paragraph, reminds Governor
       Odell that Henry Berbenich's affidavit offers a suggestion as to
       how the now-existent blood got to those places.
       #Post#: 6631--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Fuller, Berbenich, and Blood 
   DIR By: HowBrown1953
       Date: March 10, 2026, 7:49 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Affidavits filed by the 11th-hour, decade late, reporters
       declared that they had seen no blood.
       Up until the time that these affidavits were filed, the position
       of the organized pardon campaign(s) was to not
       refute the verdict or discount the blood evidence ( on the floor
       and in either room), carefully
       avoiding the question of blood being absolutely found on Ali's
       body and material found under his nails.
       However, here in late 1901, Fuller, speaking for the pardon
       effort, now refutes the blood evidence, giving his reasons,
       but at the same time stating that if blood was found, it was
       left by reporters ( the Berbenich affidavit) ostensibly
       placed to create a sensation.
       Sounds a lot like a man wanting his cake and eating it, too.
       Whether or not blood was found at the places the police said
       that they found blood, isn't the bottom line.
       What was the bottom line, IMHO, is that the Damon story and key
       gave the pardon campaigners some leverage
       in 1901 and that their refutation of the blood evidence was
       established on shakier ground, otherwise why bring
       up Berbenich's explanation in the first place?
       Damon's story and key, in a major way, allowed the pardon
       campaign crew to bring up issues such as Fitzgerald not
       testifying to seeing blood: the police still looking for C.
       Kniclo....which would have been standard operating
       procedure in 1891, if only to glean information from him on the
       night in question, and not necessarily as a suspect
       after April 30th: and of course, the blood issue.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1