Testimony of Dr William Healy

Monday, August 4th, 1924 10:30 o'clock A.M. Court convened at 10:30 o'clock A.M. Monday, August 4th, 1924, pursuant to adjournment heretofore taken.  Present: Same as before. THE COURT: I must apologize for being late this morning, gentlemen, but I could not help it. I had an engagement downstairs to impanel a grand jury and I went down there. MR. DARROW: Shall we proceed, your Honor? THE COURT: Yes. MR. DARROW: Dr. Healy. DR. WILLIAM  HEALY, a witness called on behalf of the defendants, having been first duly sworn, testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. DARROW,

MR. CROWE: Your Honor, I assume the same questions will asked as to his qualifications and I merely

want to make a formal objection without argument.

MR. DARROW: Q Give us your name.

A William Healy.

Q Where do you live?

A Boston.

Q What is your profession?

A I am a physician and psyochologist.

Q How long have you been a physician and psychologist?

MR. CROWE: Now, if your Honor please, I desire to offer the same objection, based upon the same reasons we advanced to your honor when Dr. White was on the stand.

THE COURT: Same ruling.

MR. DARROW: Q How long have you been in that profession?

A Since 1900, most of that time.

Q Where did you graduate?

A I graduated first from Harvard University and then from Rush Medical College.

Q Rush Medical College in Chicago?

A Yes sir.

Q When did you graduate there?

A 1900.

Q Where did you first locate?

A First I had charge of the women's department of the Wisconsin State Hospital for mental diseases.

Q. How long were you there?

A One year. I was then five years in general practice in Chicago. Then I went abroad and studied for a year in Vienna, Berlin and London. Then I came back and settled in Chicago, and entered into the practice of neurology and psychiatry.

Q How long did you practice in Chicago?

A I became head of the Psychopathic Institute of

the Juvenile Court in 1909, and I was in the practice of neurology privately for about two years.

Q How long were you head of the Juvenile Court in psychiatry in Chicago?

A From 1909 to 1917. Then I became director of the Judge Baker Foundation in Boston, which is a foundation for the study of conduct problems, behavior problems, for the courts, particularly the Juvenile Court of Boston, and for social agencies

.Q Are you such director now?

A Yes sir.

Q What other professional activities have you?

A I am a lecturer at Harvard University and Boston University. This summer I am on the staff of Columbia.

Q How long have you been at Harvard?

A About the last two years.

Q In what line?

A In the Department of Social Ethics.

Q Have you any other position or work in connection with the courts of Boston?

A No, except cases from the juvenile court of Boston, and from some of the outlying courts, which come to our foundation for study.

Q And that has been ever since you have been with this foundation?

A That is what it was established for.

Q About how many such cases have you had for observation in Boston?

A Probably thirty-eight or thirty-nine hundred.

Q What societies if any are you connected with?

A Quite a number of scientific Societies. The American Neurological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Institute of Criminal Law and Crminology, the American Association of Ortho-Psychiatry, and a number of others.

Q Are you connected with any hospitals or institutions?

A Chairman of the Trustees, Boston Psychopathic Hospital.

Q What is their work?

A The studying of mental diseases.

Q How long have you been chairman?

A About four years.

Q Have you written any books on these subjects?

A I have written a large textbook, "The Individual Delinquent" and a book entitled "Pathological Lying, Accusation and Swindling"; a book entitled, "Mental Conflicts and Misconduct"; a book entitled "Honesty"; a small book on "Case Studies of Mentally and Morally Abnormal Types; and last year we got out a series of "Case Studies of Conduct Disorders", mostly.

Q Where were tho books published?

A They are published mostly in this country. They have some English editions too, some foreign editions.

Q During all of this time in your professional career what have you made your chief study? A The study of conduct disorders.

Q Had any special references to adolescents? A Yes, particular among adolescents. I have seen very little of adults, purposely. Neary all of them children and adolescents. Q What age do you count as adolescents?

A Adolescents, the definition of adolescents is from the time of puberty until twenty-one or twenty-two, according to the physiological development of the individual.

Q How is that as to boys, as to being a critical time with them? A I beg your pardon?

Q How in that age as being a critical time with boys?

A It is an exceedingly critical time on account of the many new impulses that come to the individual through his physical life and mental life.

Q Have you testified much in oourt?

A I have actually testified from either side very seldom indeed. I give reports directly to the Judge. Q In Boston? A Yes, and did here too.

Q And you did here?

A Sat with the Judge here for three years, Judge Pinckney and later Judge Arnold. Q You came here from Boston in this matter? A Yes. Q For what purpose? A To study these two boys, the cases of these two boys, Leopold and Loeb.

Q What have you done toward studying them?

A Well, I have studied the boys themselves and I have gone over a great deal of other material, seen a good deal of material in the way of letters and photographs, and I have seen acquaintances and relatives, studied the reports, particularly upon the physical side, of Doctors Bowman and Hulbert; gone into matters connected with the developmental history and family history, and have given a considerable range of psychological tests to each of the two boys; endeavored to get data on their emotional life, and on the alterations,

if any, of their personality.

Q How much time did you spend with them, about how much?

A You mean in actual days? Q Well, figure it any way you want to.

A I began on July 4th and I have seen them a considerable

number of times since. The last time I saw them was on July 27th, that is, in the jail. I have seen them the equivalent, certainly of a number of whole days.

Q And suitable facilities were provided for the study in the jail, were they not?

A They were very satisfactory indeed, very. We had a nice, quiet room there. I was generally alone. Two or three times my colleagues were with me for a little while. Mr Bachrach was present on all but one day, gave very good help in the matter. Very satisfactory conditions.

Q That is Mr. Walter Bachrach?

A Mr. Waltar Bachrach, yes.

Q You may state in your own way about what examination you made to ascertain their mental condition.

A What examination that I made?

A The examinations from which I have drawn any conclusions are concerned with the generial physical observations of the boys, especially with regard to any nervous disturbance.

As I said before, the giving of special mental tests of various sorts; observation of their personality; observation of their emotional life; studies of their correspondence and the correspondence of others to them; interviews with a number of other people concerning their experiences, their home life, and so on, and concerning the peculiarities of their associations. I am afraid that is a good deal of repetition.

Q In the course of those studies you learned the facts of this homicide, in a general way at least, did you not?

A I suppose I had all the facts from what I had seen in the newspapers and heard from Mr. Bachhrach and Mr. Hulbert in Chicago -- from Dr. Hulbert and Mr. Bachrach when they visited me in Boston.

Q You learned, then, before you saw the boys or at different times? You did learn them, anyway?

A Yes.

Q And you took that into consideration?

A Yes, and anything that came out at the interviews seemed to be entirely corroborative.

Q Did you have a certain letter that was written by Nathan Leopolds Jr. to Richard Loeb in reference to some misunderstanding between them and their future conduct that was introdued by the State?

A I read that in the newspapers in Boston. I think I read a copy of it -- yes, I am sure I read a copy of it in your office or at least glanced it over.

Q Did you have any other?

A I have had a tremendous grist of letters, yes.

Q Did you have any that especially throw light on this subject?

A There are some that I think throw a great deal of light.

Q Do you have any here now that have not been introduced in evidence?

A Yes, I have one.

Q This is a letter that you have considered and which you consider throws light on the mental condition? A Yes, throws light.

Q Have you it at hand?

A Wouldn't you rather that we brought that in at its proper place in the study of the case?

Q Yes, I just did not want to overlook it, is all.

A Yes.

Q Perhaps the beet way Dr. Healy would be for you to state in your own way what means you took and what findings you made as to each of them. You can begin with either one of then, whichever is most convenient for you.

MR. CROWE: If your Honor please, before the doctor starts, I do not like to be interrupting him while he is talking but I would like to say that up to date all the statements have been generalities. We have a right to know exactly what the doctor did; what the conversations were; what the acts were, and everything, so that we may know whether he in drawing a correct conclusion from those facts. So I would like to have the doctor be specific in his statements.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. DARROW: That is what we expect him to be, your Honor.

THE COURT: Yes, we expect his to go right on in

logical form and detail everything he did and said so you can be fully advised upon what he bases his conclusion and upon which you may then want to cross examine, and you may cross examine at such length as you desire.

MR. DARROW: He may refer to his notes made at the time I suppose?

THE COURT: Yes, there is no objection to his referring to his notes.

MR. CROWE: None whatever,

THE COURT: You may proceed, doctor; start in at the beginning of the examination of these boys and tell us what you did, what conclusions you arrived at and how you came to arrive at those conclusions.

THE WITNESS: First, let us start with the association between the two boys as a matter of study.

MR. CROWE: Just a moment; by the two boys you mean the two defendants?

THE WITNESS: Yes, I mean Leopold and Loeb.

There is such a mass of material that if my memory fails me on just exactly where I got all my information from, you must pardon me, but I shall endeavor to be very explicit.

As far as I can find out from the account given by the boys themselves and from their relatives, their association began at fifteen years of age. They just barley knew each other earlier, but that is the time they first came together. It is very clear from the study of the boys separately that each came with peculiarities in their mental life which I shall dwell on later; each arrived at these peculiarities by different routes; each supplemented the other's already constituted abnormal needs in a most unique way.

And, in regard to the association I think that I ought to say perhaps at this point that from the accounts that I have received of it, that the crime in its commission and in its background has features that are quite beyond anything in my experience or knowledge of the literature. There seems to have been so little normal motivation, the matter was so long planned, so unfeelingly carried out, that it represents nothing that I have ever seen or heard of before. As judged by their conversation and by their correspondence, their compacts, their quarrels, their deeds, all tend to show a most strange and pathological relationship.

According to the stories of each the idea of their coming together for crime purposes began in a very definite way with their planning of extensive cheating at bridge, which, however, they were not very successful at and they did not continue so they say.

MR. CROWE: Now, just a minute. You are still going into nothing but generalities and opinions. Cheating at bridge. Tell us what they told you about it so that we may krow whether it is as strage as you think it is.

MR. DARROW: Go ahead.

THE WITNESS: I have just stated that they told as their crime began with their cheatings at bridge and their planning to do so. Isn't that the specific sort of statement that you want, Mr. Crowe?

MR. CROWE: Go ahead.

THE WITNESS: Although Loeb had been in delinquencies earlier, according to his very extensive account of these delinquencies, this was the first time --

MR. CROWE: Now wait a minute. I insist that we

find out what thse delinquencies are.

THE COURT: He is going right on to tell you what they are.

THE WITNESS: I will be very glad to tell you, sir.

THE COURT: Go right on and tell us.

THE WITNESS: That this was the first time, evidently, with anyoue else he carried out a serious delinquency and it was an evently action for him as well as for Leopold. Then each of them gave me the account; --

MR. CROWE: Just a moment. What are the delinquencies that they told you?

THE WITNESS: Let me tell it in order. I will come to all that later.

MR. CROWE: The thing that I am objecting to is that this is apparently a speech. I think he ought to testify like the ordinary witness does, your Honor. I can cross examine him on some of the things in his speech, but that is unsatisfactory.

THE COURT: The doctor has prepared himself, I should judge, from the way he is starting out, for this testimony, and he has it in his mind in a certain order, and he is now leading up. Tell us what they said to you, doctor, what Loeb said and what Leopold said.

Instead of saying, "The boys said," state what each one said. Tell us as near as you can what Loeb said and what Leopold said about the crime and then you can give your conclusion later.

THE WITNESS: I will get to that. Both Leopold and Loeb told me that starting with this action and continuing, drinking was also considerable of a bond between them. The criminalistic activities of Loeb previously, according to his own account, began with his stealing in the neighborhood. There was a matter of his getting in at a window, and taking a vase when he was about nine years of age. Prior to that time there was a digging up of some money from the yard next door, that he knew a little boy had hidden.

MR. DARROW: Q This is Loeb you are referring to now?

A Yes. There was quite a little stealing from shops about the city here, pencils, dental floos, all sorts of small articles that he took, so he says, for the purpose of getting the thrill of taking them. For the moment I don't remember anything else that occurred until the time when they joined activities. There may have been something else that will come out later. In

the matter of the association, I have the boys story told separately about an incrediably absurb childish compact that bound them, which bears out in Leopold's case particularly the thread and idea of his fantasy life. For Loeb, he says, the association gave him the opportunity of getting someone to carry out his criminalistic imaginings and conscious ideas. In the case of Leopold, the direct cause of his entering into criminalistic acts was this particularly childish compact.

MR. CROWE: You are talking about a compact that you characterize as childish. Kindly tell us what that compact was.

A I am perfectly willing to tell it in chambers but it is not a matter that I think sbould be told here.

MR. CROWE. I insist that we know what that compact is, so that we can form some opinion about It.

MR. DARROW: I suggest it be in Chambers.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. CROWE: Tell it in oourt. The trial must be public, your Honor. I am not insisting that he talk loud enough for everybody to hear, but it ought to be told in the same way that we put the other evidence in.

THE COURT: It would be public, if there was only one outsider in here. If it Is something that is unfit for publication --

MR. CROWE: There is no desire on my part to bring out something unfit for publication --

MR. BACHRACH: It ought not to be given to the newspapers by this reporter, your Honor.

THE COURT: Oh no. This is not for the papers at all. This will not be given to the newspapers, Mr. Reporter.

The witness then made the following statement to court, counsel and court reporters:

THE WITNESS: This compact, as was told to me separately by each of the boys on different occasions, and verified over and over, consisted in an agreement between them that Leopold, who has very definite homosexual tendencies, which have been a part of his makeup

for many years, was to have the privilege of -- do you want be to be very specific?

MR. CROWE: Absolutely, because this is important.

THE WITNESS: (Continuing) -- was to have the privilege of inserting his penis between Loeb's legs at special rates; at one time it was to be three times in two months, if they continued their criminalistic activities together, and then they had some of their quarrels, and then it was once for each criminalistic deed. Now their others so-called perverse tendencies seemed to amount to very little. They only engaged in anything else, so far as I can ascertain, very seldom, but this particular thing was very definite and explicit.

MR. BACHRACH: So that it need not be repeated, make it clear what the compact was.

MR. DARROW: I do not suppose this should be taken in the presence of newspapermen, your Honor.

THE COURT: Gentlemen, will you go and sit down, you newspaperman. Take your seats. This should not be published. d.

MR. CROWE: Q What other acts, if any, did they tell you about? You say that there are other acts that they did rarely or seldom?

A Oh, they were just experimenting once or twice with each other.

Q Tell what it was.

A They experimented with mouth perversions, but they did not keep it up at all. They did not got anything out of it.

Q And Leopold was --

A Leopold has had many years -- shall I go into this whole subject while we are here now?

THE COURT: Yes

THE WITNESS: Leopold has had for many years a great deal of phantasy life surrounding sex activity. That is part of the whole story and has been for many years. He has phantasies of being with a man, and usually with Loeb himself, even when he has connection with girls and the whole thing is an absurd situation because there is nothing but just putting his penis between this fellow's legs and getting that sort of a thrill. He says he gets a thrill out of anticipating it. Loeb would pretend to be drunk, then this follow would undress him and he would almost rape him and would be furiously passionate at the time, whereas with women he does not get that same thrill and passion.

MR. CROWE: That is what he tells you?

A Surely.

MR. DARROW: That is all I believe of that.

THE WITNESS: That is what he tells me. And of the other part, of course, Loeb tells me himself. That is exactly what they did, and how he feigns sometimes to be drunk, in order that be should have his aid in carrying out his criminalistic ideas. That is what Leopold gets out of it, and that is what Loeb gets out of it.

MR. BACHRACH: Q When in connection with the compact in point of time did they start, with reference to the compact?

A Their criminalistic ideas began on the same day, when they began their cheating at bridge. It was on the day when they first made it out. It was the first time in a berth, and it was when Leopold had this first experience with his penis between Loeb's legs, and then he found it gave him more pleasure than anything else he had ever done. To go on further with this, even in jail here, a look at Loeb's body or his touch upon his shoulder thrills him so, he says, immeasurably. Is that enough?

MR. CROWE: I think that is all.

THE COURT: The press has all of this. They have a copy of it and they know what it contains. There is no necessity of taking it down.

MR. DARROW: Q This letter that was written and introduced in evidence --

MR. CROWE: I didn't hear that.

MR. DARROW: Q This letter that was written and has been introducd in evidence from Leopold to Loeb you consider has more or lose bearing upon this matter you have just been relating?

A You mean the one that has already been published?

Q The one that has been published.

A Yes, I do. Only not specifically, of course, not in detail.

Q No, but bearing on it.

A Not specifically, but it gives a very unfair statement of the situation, and in regard to the association I would say that Dick Loeb insisted to me on a number of occasions that he has never found anything in himself that would lead to his deterrence; he would do it over again; nothing in him to deter.

The Court here held a short conference with the attorneys, out of the hearing of the reporters.

THE COURT: All right, doctor, go ahead.

THE WITNESS: And - on the part of Leopold I have the statement from him that well, yes, he would continue also in this sort of affair, and this sort of association, however, more from an intellectual standpoint. He would get satisfaction of his desires, his own personal gratification, and that would be

enough. Now, if I may, I will go to a discussion of my findings as to Leopold himself.

One sees Leopold exhibiting pretty definite signs of nervous instability, frequently shows greatly exaggerated use of the muscles of the face, exhibiting many nervous gestures, ready flushings and pallor. I also see signs in him of great nervous energy, and I may say at this point that I should agree with the Bowman and Hulbert report which I presume will be gone into later, that their results show evidences of some pathology of the glands, the internal secretion, probably of the sympathetic nervous systen.

Concerning Leopold's mentality I find conclusive evidences by a giving of a considerable number of mental tests that he possesses very high intelligence.

MR. CROWE: Q Now, will you give us those tests, doctor.

A Would you like them in detail?

Q Absolutely?

A I gave the general age level intelligence test, the so-called Stanford-Binet test, and as expected that showed very little, because Leopold could pass all the tests without trouble, and the scale does not go high enough to test such ability as he has. He passed all except one test for visualization.

In the course of this test I went into the matter of his auditory memory span, and found he had nothing very phenomenal in this way.

I gave him a so-called silent reading test, in which one is asked to read a number of paragraphs, and to give answers concerning them in order to show the rapidity of understanding and comprehension and the ability to react quickly to the matter presented. On this he gets a score that is much --

MR. CROWE: Doctor, I asked, would you kindly give what the tests were.

THE WITNESS: You don't want the results on them?

MR. CROWE: I want the tests first.

THE WITNESS: You want the tests first?

MR. CROWE: Yes.

THE WITNESS: I gave the Stanford-Binet set of tests, I gave the Monroe Silent Reading Test. I gave the test known as --

MR. CROWE: I know, but what are they?

THE WITNESS: What I am telling you.

MR. CROWE: All that is Greek to me.

THE WITNESS: I just told you this other test was a test for comprehension, by reading.

MR. CROWE: Describe the test.

THE WITNESS: That is what it is.

MR. CROWE: No, you say, "I gave him a number of tests," I don't know what they were. I don't know whether he had to stand on his head or not.

THE WITNESS: He had to read. I told him what to read and I gave him passages to read. 

MR. CROWE: Tell us what you gave him to read, and tell us what happened after he read them.

THE WITNESS: I don't know of any better way than the way I am doing.

MR. DARROW: I suppose the tests are very well known tests?

THE WITNESS: Very well-known.

MR. DARROW: That is all.

MR. CROWE: I don't know what the the Monroe Test is. I never heard of it.

THE COURT: Tell us what the Monroe test is. Give us all the facts.

THE WITNESS: The Monroe test is a test that emanated from the Kansas State Teachers College, and one that is used, as I say, for the study of individual ability to comprehend written language.

MR. BACHRACH: Suppose you be more explicit, doctor, and tell us so that we can all know what it know what it means. I am in the same boat that Mr. Crowe is on that.

THE WITNESS: One reads certain passages or paragraphs and answers them with pencil.

MR. CROWE: Q What did he read? And what answer did he make? That is what I want.

A That is what I am attempting to tell. He read then. He gave a score on them.

Q But tell us what he read and what his score was?

A Would you like me to read all of these tests?

Q Certainly.

A It to an awfully long job.

MR. DARROW: Can't you do it on the cross examination?

MR. CROWE: No, no. We are entitled to it on direct examination.

MR. DARROW: I think you are not.

THE COURT: Let the doctor go on and tell, and then you can cross examine him at length when you come to the cross. If you will explain, doctor, when you apply such a system or test, that it means reading a paragraph from Homer or whatever it is, have a little paragraph read from it, and then give his answer thereto; that would be sufficient, and later if they want to go into it further they can do it.

THE WITNESS: It is an awfully long job to read these tests.

THE COURT: I know, but we don't care how long it takes, doctor, if it takes three weeks, if it is going to be of any enlightenment to us in this case. Time cuts no figure.

THE WITNESS: The whole test shows his tremendously high ability on the whole thing right through. I can summarise it right now at the start, and you won't know know any more at the end. I will be very glad to go into it, but that is all it shows.

MR. CROWE: I appreciate you are very anxious to give your conclusions, but I want to know what they are based on.

MR. DARROW: I object to that statement. The doctor is perfectly candid with you.

THE WITNESS: I am perfectly willing to read these off.

THE COURT: All right, doctor, go ahead and read these off.

THE WITNESS: In the Monroe Silent Reading Test, No.1 is: "The Chinese believe that whatever their ancestry did, they must do. Since their fathers had no railways, telegraphs or telephones, they must have none. They dislike new things. Will you expect to find the civilization of China modern or ancient?"

"Ancient" he answered.

MR. CROWE: He answered "Ancient".

A The answer is "ancient" which is correct.

No. 2 is: "The tighter a wire is stretched the higher the tone produced when the wire is struck. Two wires are stretched, ones with a fourteen-pound weight pulling on it, and another with a ten-pound weight pulling on it. Which wire will produce the higher tone, the former or the latter".

He answers: "The former."

No.3 is: "The battle of Holenlinden occurred December 3, 1800, during one of Napoleon's campaigns. The battle was fought between the French under Moreau on the one side and the Austrians under Archduke John on the other side. In this battle,, Archduke John led the army of what couutry?

His answer to that was "Austrian".

No. 4: Ocean currents are caused by the wind. North of the equator the currents of the Indian Ocean move generally eastward during the summer and westward during the winter. Ceylond is in the Indian Ocean, north of the equator. Underline the word below which tells in what direction the wind normally blows there in December."

His answer is "West"

THE COURT: I don't think you need to take every question and answer. You have got enough now of what questions were put to him and how he came to answer them, and you say his answers were what?

THE WITNESS: his answers to the whole set of questions were not only correct, but they were done in the most rapid time of anybody I have ever known to take the test.

THE COURT: No need of going any further along that line, is there, on that particular test?

MR. CROWE: Not on that test.

THE COURT: That is all, doctor, on that.

MR. CROWE: I would like to know what those other tests are.

THE COURT: Now, if there are any other tests that were employed, give them.

THE WITNESS: the next test was a test for language ability. The exercise data of the Kelly-Trabus scale is published at Columbia University. This is a test in which certain words are left out of sentences and to have to fill in the sentences.

THE COURT: Now, will you give us a sample of two or three questions put along that line, doctor.

THE WITNESS: Yes, we will take some of the later ones on that.

THE COURT: Any one.

THE WITNESS: Take, for instance, Question 36. It says, "To friends is always the it takes". And then they fill in the words and so makes the sentence, "To make friends is always worth the trouble it takes."

"The lest difficult, are by no, always the most, are the tasks the most disagreeable."

MR CROWE: He answered those correctly, didn't he?

A He fills in.

MR. CROWE: Q He filled those in correctly?

A He fills in those words.

THE COURT: And did it all?

A Did it all extremely well.

THE COURT: Now, if there are any other tests, you may give them.

A I gave him the so-called equivalent proverbs test.

Q Give us an example of that, doctor.

A An example of that is as follows:

You are given on this some twenty proverbs, and then you are given these on one side with the numbers on them, and on the other side twenty other proverbs, and you are told to tell which one of the first set of proverbs the second one is similar to. For instance, "Bend the willow while it is young." Is it like "Ill nature needs no tutor," or "An old dog will learn no tricks" or "Sail when the wind blows" and he answered all of these twenty questions perfectly.

THE COURT: We will take a short recess at this time.

Whereupon Court and Counsel here took a short recess.

Court convened pursuant to short recess heretofore taken.

Present: Same as before.

DR. WILLIAM HEALY,

resumed that stand for further direct examination by Dr. Darrow, as follows:

MR.CROWE: May I interrupt? Will you give me the name of the last test?

THE WITNESS: That is the Trabue test -- or I beg your pardon, I think we were talking about the Proverbs test, weren't we?

MR. CROWE: Yes.

THE WITNESS: That is this one here.

MR. CROWE: Thank you.

MR. DARROW: Q State what other tests you made.

A I think in stating the matter with regard to that Monroe Silent Reading test that the time allowed on that test is five minutes and during that time very few individuals--in fact, I do not think I have ever seen a single one answer all the questions correctly, whereas

Leopold answered them all correctly in three minutes and 15 seconds.

Another test I gave him for reasoning ability, known as the syllogism test, Thurston's syllogism test and the language of that test is, "Silver is heavier than iron copper is lighter than Silver, therefore copper is heavier than iron."

Or another one: "All the members of the City Club are members of the University Club. Smith is a member of the University Club, therefore he is a member of the City Club."

There are twenty such tests in syllogistic reasoning, and he did them all --

MR. CROWE: Will you give is one more sample there, doctor?

THE WITNESS: I beg your pardon?

MR CROWE: Will you give us one more sample?

THE WITNESS: "Henry's father George has a brother William who has a son James. Therefore George is James' nephew."

These questions are to be answered, whether they are right or wrong, and he answered them all correctly but slowly and with more difficulty with this sort of thing than he did with the other tests given. I tested him also for his motor control, in a certain sample tapping test in which he is asked to tap one square after another on a sheet of paper. There he showed his control was very good indeed, making a record of 106 squares tapped without any errors, which is above any medium norm which we have. I gave him some tests that are included in a list of tests which are the only ones that I know of that deal particularly with this type of mentality, known as Roback mentality tests for superior adults. I did not take the time to give him all of these, because they are exceedingly long, but I will tell you which ones I did give him. Here is a so-called "difficult directions" test in which you say these symbols above here. If the square is smaller than the circle and the triangle put together, do not put a cross here, but if the diamond is below the square, make a dash in the figure to the left of the circle. If the star in the diagram has no more than seven points, write no here, etc. They are tests to see whether a person gets confused, or whether he can follow those well. He did these all correctly and very speedily. Another test is the so-called judgment test for which you are allowed fifteen minutes. You are asked to put opposite the given sentence -- and there are some thirty sentences -- an "s" if it is a striking or significant statement, a "c", if it is a commonplace statement, an "a" if it is an absurd statement, a "t" if it is a tautological statement, and a "j" if it is a joke. They are such sentences as these:

"The secret of genius is to suffer no fiction to exist for us, and to realize all that we know."

"Other men are lenses through which we read our own minds."

"Make the necessities of life too expensive for the poor to reach them, and they will save their money, so that in time, provided this practice is rigorously carried out, there will be no paupers."

"What has not been accomplished in the present cannot be reproduced in the past."

MR. CROWE: Q How did he answer those?

A He answered them all very well and correctly, -- let me rescind my statement. He answered them in

seven minutes, but he made three or four mistakes.

Q How many were there altogether?

A Thirty.

Q Read three or four that he made mistakes in?

A I don't believe that I could, because since I gave them to Loeb, I erased his answers on the first ones. He did a so-called cryptogram test in which he is allowed fifteen minutes, for deciphering a sentence that is written in symbols in which you have to draw deductions concerning what letters these symbols represent. He did this correctly in five minutes, whereas fifteen minutes is the time allowed.

"The following symbols constitute a sentence of nine words. The symbols" -- then it gives a certain symbol -- "stands for "m", and then certain other symbols represent the word "with". "Try to decipher the code and do not give up the problem until time is called."

I gave him another test of these series, called the problem test, and the time allowed was twenty-five minutes. The directions are:

"Answer the following questions concisely but convincingly. Three minutes on the average for question should be ample time." The result of

this was quite interesting to me, because he wrote at such tremendous length in the endeavor to express hos own conception of things, and insisted on running over into thirty-three minutes. The first question is:

"If raising the marks of one student will give him a higher standing in class, why not raise the marks of all in the class, so that they can have a better understanding?"

His answer was:

"This is a perfectly absurd statement. Raising the marks of one student raises his standing in the class only by comparison with the other students. His marks are high or low only relatively to those of others, and therefore, should the marks of all students be correspondingly raised, no one of all would have a higher standing than before. If an object measured in terms of another, or other objects, be increased at the same time that the other object or objects are raised, and in the same ratio, the relation between them remains unaltered."

The next one is, "If two negatives make an affirmative, why not say that two wrongs make a right?" His answer to that is, "The force of one negative is to show that the statement just made is not true. When another word of negation is added, it does not deny the original statement, but that statement in its negative form namely, the statement plus the negation thereof, to negative a negation, amounts to an opposite of the affirmative, but this cannot be carried to the case of right and wrong. Here while a wrong may be called a negative right, the addition of another wrong does not act to negate or deny the first, but creates a new negative right, and cannot be applied to the first situation. The two are totally independent and do not act one upon the other." The interest in this, of course, is in the fact that this boy suddenly proceeds to write in this prolix fashion, wanting more time, page after page, in answering these questions as you have seen, with a good deal of overstatement, and not concisely at all, as the directions call for. Now did you want the detail on that Binet test? He passed all except one. The only failure that he made was in the so-called paper cutting test, in which one takes a sheet of paper and folds it over and then makes a cut-out;

and the person is asked to think of this paper as being opened up in his own mind, and it would look with these piece cut out. He had difficulty with this, although when I carried that scheme further, he developed a logical method of reasoning it out, even though he could not visualize it apparently, and did extremely well with it. That was also true in another test that I gave him, which we have always considered an extremely difficult one, known as the McAlly cube test. You are told to see in your own mind a cube that is three inches in all directions, in all measurements, and that is painted on all sides. Suppose that cube is composed of one inch cubes. How many of those cubes will be painted on three sides, two sides, one side, and no sides at all. His answer in one minute was entirely correct.

MR. CROWE: Q How many cubes are there?

A 27. The answer in one minute was entirely correct, which of course is an astonishing result, because many of us are not able to answer that in 5 or 10 minutes.

Q And some of us not at all? A A lot of us. I would find a great deal of difficulty with it myself.

Then I gave him the so-called Kent-Rosanoff association test that has been used a good deal by psychiatrists in order to see his reaction times and the quality of his mental reactions. With a stop watch in hand you are asked to respond as rapidly as possible with a word directly after a so-called stimulus word that is given. For instance, with a stop watch I say to the person "table", and the person answers, for instance, "chair, room, music, books," or anything that comes into their mind, and the point is in how rapidly can they get out a word and what is the nature of the word.

Now Leopold got these answers in a most remarkable short time, vert frequently being under one second, four-fifths of a second, for instance, and I thought I caught some in even three-fifths of a second but the interesting part that developed in this test is the fact that his mind is so rapid in his reactions that at times he found difficulty in saying a word because several others seemed to come into his mind almost simultaneously, and I caught him once when he had checked off saying the first syllable, and I asked him what he wanted to say and instantly he reeled off five or six other words that he might have said. A very remarkable exhibition.

Now, this test is also used to determine whether an individual has emotional reactions. I used it to no great extent in this fashion, that is, I did not introduce words as they are sometimes introduced to see whether there would be emotional reactions to those special words, with one exception. I did introduce in his case the word "chisel" and I also did in the case of Loeb, and got no special reaction, that is in the way of a lengthening of a reaction time.

But during the course of this I was very much struck by the fact that while he was so exceedingly rapid in his general reactions, when I said the word "trouble" he did not answer for six seconds, and then said the word "plus" and the next word that came along was "soldier", which he responded to by the word "general" in 2-4/5 seconds, and I asked him then what the trouble was and he said, "I am all upset now", which I think is the first evidence I have seen of his having any emotion under the surface at all, or anywhere.

MR. CROWE: You are now talking about Leopold?

THE WITNESS: Well, I have not quite finished --

MR. DARROW: These are all Leopold.

MR. CROWE: These are all Leopold's tests.

THE WITNESS: What?

MR. CROWE: These are Leopold's tests?

THE WITNESS: Yes, I am speaking about Leopold's tests now.

MR. CROWE: Yes.

MR. DARROW: Yes.

THE WITNESS: Yes, that was Leopold. Then I also gave him a test known as the picture completion test too, which is a set of ten pictures in which there are cutouts, and the person is asked to select from among sixty squares the particular picture which would best fit the meaning of the picture. They are specifically made with the idea that some of the cutouts may pretty nearly answer the meaning correctly but not do it thoroughly and well.

This test is, as we call it, a test for apperceptions or practical judgment. On this he did very poorly indeed, much to my surprise. He made a score of 56.5 out of a possible 100, and that is just the average for twelve years; or stated in another way, twenty-five percent of the ten year old boys do better than that.

MR. CROWE: Can you give us one or two illustrations there if you have got them?

THE WITNESS: I could bring them at another session and show them to you much better.

MR. CROWE: Do that this afternoon.

THE WITNESS: Because it would take a long time to explain that. You can see it instantly.

MR. CROWE: All right. Do that this afternoon.

THE WITNESS: Now I think that exhuats the group of tests that I made, with one exception I remember now. Leopold has developed logical methods of so-called mnemonic devices, memory devices by which he can remember things in most remarkable fashion. You can make out a list of twenty words and he will read them over and then he can tell the order of those words or if you tell him any one of the words he can tell which word came after it and which word came before it and so on.

Not only did he exhibit his ability to do that but he exhibited his ability to do it on the day fater, when we had no intention of asking him, in twenty-four hours.

He gave a very interesing account of how he did that trick. He took one word, or rather he took all the rooms in his house and then he placed, as I remember it, one word in each room and associated that word with that particular room, and its contents, and then he could recall very readily the words by the relationshipo of the rooms in his house.

He also demonstated to my mind his very great attainments in the sceince of language. You heard Dr. White speak of the different dialects he has learned, but Leopold also does this sort of thing; he writes the Franch and Greek letters; or German in Sanscrit character, and things of that sort, playing with philological ideas, enjoying the whole performance most remendously he enjoys nothing the whole performance most tremendously he enjoys nothing evidently quite so much as his great activity.

His conversational powers are extremely good and he is, all through, very argumentative.

Now concerning his personality which is the next thing I would like to take up in my notes, one finds him very definitely by observation and by an account of him, extremely energetic both physically and mentally, showing as I say this great pleasure in mental activity; he does not want to stop after a half day of these arduous tests but would like to go on. It seems there is a great deal of what psychiatrists call pressure to mental activity, very little fatigue, and great desire to go on elaborating his thoughts. He is very enthusiastic and forceful about anything he initiates, throws himself into it with a very great deal of zest, making many gestures, being very talkative, having very many ideas on the subject to get out, about almost anything you speak of.

He throughout the examination showed himself to be self-centered and egotistic beyond any normal limit. From all accounts of him given by his family, particularly by his father, he has been for years very rebellious against obligations, social obligations, religious obligations and various sorts of conformities.

MR. CROWE: Doctor, pardon me.

THE WITNESS: Yes.

MR. CROWE: Go back a little where you said he was self-centered and egotistic and he showed it during this examination. Will you at this point tell me how he showed it?

THE WITNESS: By his constant inconsistencies--

MR. DARROW: I think the doctor ought to tell his story and then you can cross examine.

THE WITNESS: Nearly all of this will be cleared up later when we go into the matter in detail.

MR. CROWE: The only thing is, we may forget it and if we can get it as we go along we are entitled to it.

MR. DARROW: Doesn't it go along in chronological order, doctor?

THE WITNESS: I am trying to prevent it in chronological order because there is such a mass of it.

THE COURT: All right. Go ahead, doctor.

THE WITNESS: In a very curious way he is very punctilious about keeping his appointments, for instance. We have some evidence from a Dr. Bernheim, I think it is --

MR. DARROW: Bernheimer.

THE WITNESS: He says that Leopold became very annoyed when the doctor was not there exactly on time. He is very careful about finishing his mental tasks for us. If he has not finished them the time before he comes next time with a slip of paper and says, "This is what I forgot," or "I did not do this," and he is, judging by some of the letters I have or had seen just as punctilious in keeping his appointments with his classes in ornithology, in bird life, getting other fellows to take charge of them a day of two within a few days after the crime was committed.

He appears with us altogether and not unfriendly, but he is extremely critical of other people and decidedly supercilious about his own mental attainments. Very stubborn in his opinions. He is right; the world is wrong. His father says that years ago Leopold has argued repeatedly with him about the nonsense of ethical ideas, about the nonsense of having a conscience and doing as other people do in regard to right and wrong.

As far as I can judge from my numerous interviews, he has extremely little sympathy or feelings or conceptions of gratitude except in some very narrow fields, with regard to his family life in particular, and it is particularly clear that he is melodramatic about the whole situation; he enjoys immensely playing a part.

He himself said to me that it is very much like a drama, and that he thought the best way to play the whole thing out in the same way; he would enjoy it best that way whatever the ending was.

Now the next thing I should like to discuss would be in regard to his emotions or moves and there judging from his own story of himself particularly, there has been a tremendous subordination of many normal feelings and emotions to this excessively developed conception of himself as a superior individual; and he has reacted thus and is reacting all the time in a most abnormal way in regard to this and particularly in regard to the whole crime. I am immensely struck --

MR. CROWE: Doctor, just a minute. Are you going to give illustrations of that later on?

THE WITNESS: Yes sir. I am immensely struck too by the fact that notwithstanding his opportunities in life for culture and comfort and ease, that he shows so little disgust at jail surroundings. His main concern seems to be and he himself says is whether or not the reporters say the right thing about him; and one observes a very distinct exhilaration, even as we saw him in jail whenever there was opportunity for him discussing himself or displaying hos own powers.

And again I might state that considering his emotions I saw no evidence whatever of what one might expect to be normal emotional life in jail, or as related to discussions of the crime. The only evidence of it was in this test, whatever that may be worth.

The main thing, of course, we are interested in, is whether there would have been alterations in personality, and my judgment is that there seems to be some steady impairment of his own judgment considering himself particularly, and his relationship to the realities of life, inasmuch as he has been willing to throw away his remarkably fine chances in his environment and as an individual who has such remarkable abilities, throwing away these chances for such petty awards in relation to a most heinous crime.

This conception of himself as a superior being, really superior to laws and social regulations, is very apparently then destructive of his own self interests. He might have been a distinguished scholar; he was already quite an eminent investigator of bird life, having published really very commendable contributions on this field, and an individual with normal judgment would have naturally developed his real superiority and not taken such extraordinary chances of ending his career.

There is another contradiction there that comes out in his life attitude and in his behavior, a contradiction between his notion of his being a superior being and his behavior on such extremely low personal and social levels.

And concerning his inner mental life, which of course is the main concern of the psychiatrist, we find in the first place he has gradually evolved quite delusional ideas concerning himself, and if you will permit me I will go into those a little later.

But in important spheres of life he seems to feel and think and act as if he were a superior being with desires and his own will as gudies to conduct. He says he is a superman on the basis of the philosophy of Nietzsche.

In jail, even though he may be despised, he is Napoleon on St. Helena.

He says that there is one thing that he is afraid that he has not "gotten across to us scientists," and that was his final remark the other day, and that is, that the most important thing, much more important even than preserving his life, is the preservation of his dignity.

Dr. White gave you the account of the ten world riddles that he wants to put into a vault and try to answer after death.

He also wants to write an autobiography if he can, showing how his nineteen years have been packed full of the most interesting and pleasurable and valuable experiences. He wants to make a last speech, if he has to make a last speech, showing that he has had a consistent life career. Ever since he was a little boy he says consistency has been a cart of god to him.

And then we come to the matter of his day dreaming, which again is a very important thing, not because we are not all subject to day dreaming as children and in our later life, but because his ear;y day dreaming was so abnormal in its extent and has been carried along so abnormally and carried over into everyday life.

He began, so he says, with dwelling mentally on the pictures of suffering and causing others to suffer,. which would seem to be a proof of something going wrong already in his emotional life as a little child. There was the crucifixion, which he has dwelt upon, which made, he says, an abnormal appeal to him, and the idea of somebody being tied or he tying someone.

And he went on and told me, at great length, and elaborated freely upon the theme that he had first developed with Doctors Bowman and Hulbert, namely, the theme of the king-slave phantasy, which he began, evidently very early in life, and which has some very strange components of a childhood and abnormal nature, of which I have spoken in this, because that was not open to the public. The slave would be a person that would be made to suffer, but he would be a good looking, strong man in some ways. Saving the life of the king he would be offered liberty, but he would refuse his liberty. Sometimes he himself would be the slave, and sometimes he would be the king.

As time went on, he belonged to a caste of slaves, a class of slaves; he himself was bound to his king by a golden chain, which he could easily have broken. He explains this by saying it was a vestigial remnant; his slave was as really as good as any kind. At other times he has phantasies about a boy being captured and beaten, and the king saves his life; or himself as a slave being stolen by gypsies, and brought up subject to punishment; or a boy who is captured in war time, and beaten, but saved by a nice young girl; all through there are these continual croppings up of suffering of causing to suffer in these phantasies. This imaginary life was developed very early, and had all along this abnormal material, and it kept up even last year. He has told us about this himself, and his aunt tells me that notwithstanding his tremendous activity and vigor, she had noted that sometimes during the last year he came in and went and lay down on the couch, and she supposed he was taking a nap, but these were the periods when he says he voluntarily went into periods of day dreaming. These phantasies apparently have had an immense influence upon his life. They have come up again and again, and have had relationship to his relations to Loeb, and to other boys earlier. Normal phantasies, of course, are carried out with all of us in our ambitions, and in our interests in general. This boy carried his abnormal phantasies vert early over into real life. He distinctly remembers, he tells us, even at twelve years of age, identifying a camp counsellor as a slave, and putting him into this position of slave-knighthood. Other boys are gradually drawn into this slave idea; any boy who would appeal to him as good looking was eligible for playing the part of his phantasy life; and he tells us of elaborating a scheme of capturing these, and even of branding them; he had a special sort of imaginary and complicated brand, which he applied in his phantasy to the inner calf of the leg. Most significant, according to his own account of his life, is the fact that three or more years ago, soon after their first acquaintance, Leob began to be woven into his phantasy life. Loeb would figure sometimes as the king, and sometimes as the slave, but it was a transfigured Loeb. Loeb would be an ideal man, wonderfully good looking, an athletic star, a brilliant scholar, a fellow who got the highest marks in college. Now he knew none of these things to be true, but he forcibly transformed Loeb; he tried to make himself believe these things, and he himself says that he told many others about his admiration for and belief in Loeb; and from one of the boys' acquaintances I have confirmation of that fact. It seems to have been really a rather extorious [?] fact, that Loeb himself object to, that he was so continually praising Loeb and putting him on a pedestal. Dr. White told you about his stating that he made a chart of the perfect man, in which Loeb ranged much higher than himself. But it is also interesting to note that Leopold himself speaks of having made a complete identification of himself with Dick. Now, to this point we have the fact that Leopold is able to recite poetry at great length, and that in itself is an interesting thing, it seems so incongruous. All at once he is able in prison to declaim poetry, some three or four pages, which he dictated to me as fast as I could get it down.

The other day in the court room he passed me a little memorandum, and said this was the part of the poem that he had in mind particularly, one of Lawrence Hope's poems that he recited to me, and which I will give you a large excerpt from it you want it. This is what he wrote the other day, in court, and passed on to me:

"Let me dream once that dear delusion

that I am you,

O heart's desire."

And he prefaced it by "In re Dr. White's remarks about identification with alter ego, Dick; see poem I quoted to you." That line comes in this stanza,--it is hardly worth reading the whole poem: This is what he quoted with a good deal of apparent feeling, to me:

"Long past the pulse and pain of passion;

Long left the limit of all love'

I crave some nearer fuller fashion,

Some unknown way, beyond, above;

Some infinitely inner fashion,

As water with water, flame with fire.

Let me dream once that dear delusion

That I am you, O heart's desire."

MR. CROWE: Q Who is the poet that wrote that?

A Lawrence Hope, he tells me. I am not familiar with it. I am informed by one of my confreres, however, that that is the fact. In his phantasy there was a ready changeabout of himself with Loeb and he fitted into Loeb's suggestion about their criminal activity because he could work out his double-faced scheme, the phantasy scheme of being either a king or a slave.

Bearing upon this whole problem of his phantasy life and upon his delusional tendencies, his ideas of superiority, and a fact that seems to be very well substantiated from his relatives, is that for many years he showed an abnormal and intense energy. Many witnessed that. He is never idle a minute. He has no ordinary fatigue. He would remain up all night when he was going to undertake some special task or investigation next morning often, because he thought he could do it better if he remained up.

As we know by his actual productions, he has been continually reaching out for new subjects to study,a and a developed formidable list. In his room he has an ornithology collection, which I have seen, which is really very remarkable. I do not know the exact number of birds in it, but a lot of very rare specimens; but I think they stated there were something like three thousand specimens in the collection.

He has been continually seeking new life experiences, and ideas and sensations' a great talker and arguer throughout, showing an intense physical and mental attitude for years, and determining it through the period of his examination.

THE COURT: We will now adjourn until two o'clock this afternoon.

Whereupon an adjournment was here taken by Court and Counsel to 2:00 o'clock P.M. August 4th, 1924.

Monday, Aug. 4, 1924.

2:00 o'clock P.M.

Court convened at 2:00 o'clock P.M.

Monday August 4th, 1924 pursuant to adjournment heretofore taken.

Present: Same as before.

DR. WILLIAM J. HEALY

resumed the stand, and being further examined, testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION

(continued)

BY MR. DARROW

THE WITNESS: Shall I go back and show this test that was asked for this morning? Here is a set of pictures representing the activities of a boy during one day in his life. The person who is to be tested is informed of that fact, and is asked to select something that fills in the spaces there, that makes the meaning correct. Of course, anybody would observe that this boy is getting up, and he has one shoe on and one shoe off. So he selects a shoe. Now, he might select a bedroom slipper, or a low shoe, but he has a high shoe on, so he naturally selects that to fill in. You pass this to the person who is being examined, and say, "Fill in each one of these as you go along with the correct message."

So you go through with these things. I have seen many shrewd country boy make a pretty nearly perfect record on this, while this particular lad, with his fine mentality, only did as I have stated. There is nothing but common sense judgment required in this rather than any specific type of learning.

Finishing the points concerning Leopold's inner mental life I would like to say at this time that I, with the rest of them, was impressed with the validity of his recital and his imaginative life, because it fits in so well with his life trends and activities and then because also this sort of phantasy life is very similar in its qualities and the way it came out to the so called autistic thinking, that is, reveries, that is done by patients who have mental disorders. This came out spontaneously with the first investigators, Drs. Bowman and Hulbert, and were elaborated more or less to each one of us.

In connection with the boy's inner mental life we find a great deal of pathological admixture of inferior and superior concepts, ideas and strivings, not only in his diseased imagination, but also in his behavior reactions in real life. There is nothing more impressive in this respect than the fact that here was a boy who already showed such tremendous good powers and had such widely good chances for developing in the line of his especial abilities, but at the same time was willing to go on with these thoroughly pernicious activities. It appears to me to reflect a profound disorder of judgment, this contradictory existence of impulses and ideas which were living side by side. It indicates a spontaneously abnormal rift or tremendous contradiction between his intellectual precocity and his judgement and his emotional condition. There was no normal and consistent personality developed.

Then if I may, I want next to speak of his early peculiar tendencies which have already been spoken of to some extent.

His being at five or six years of age so much interested in the religions and different religions; interested in going yo different churches; interested in the ideas of the Crucifixion and the Madonna and early questioning why there were so many different ideas about God. About that same time he began a desire which he has he has had all his life, of wanting to complete everything, to do a good job out of everything, to go to all churches; to know all the words in the different languages for the equivalent of "yes".

He tells us he asked his nurse to be awakened at night at odd hours. He remembers distinctly wanting to visit 100th Street simply because it had the number 100. He wanted to be taken to see a certain Madonna picture.

His interest in churches we have been told about also by his family, and at the same time there began this very intense mental activity; he began his collections with a great deal of zeal in the study of insects of insects and birds and then later other collections.

He tells us that at four years of age he had begun to catalogue the minor saints and to learn something about their lives from the nurse that he had.

His development of his peculiar personality tendency that amounted to practically a delusional form, is, to my mind, very interesting. Of course, he showed early very extraordinary intellectual superiority and it was recognized by his mother and certain teachers; he was soon set apart and superior.

I asked him what hardships he ever had to meet in the world. He never had any. He says he never had any disappointments; he was not allowed to have any.

As a young child he placed his mother and favorite aunt, as you have heard, on the level with the Madonna as most wonderful persons, and in conversation apparently retains this sort of ideal, although he thinks that women are quite inferior. To the psychiatrist this, of course, has considerable interest, because it relates to his own origin. He thinks of himself as coming somehow from very wonderful people.

And then we have his superior accomplishments and the ideas which he early developed of doing very off things which would set his apart. He was very tense about doing well those studies, about making wonderful collections, about showing that he had an abnormal resistance on a very peculiar resistance to fatigue. He says he strove for perfection; he thought in the fourth dimension; he hoped to find the universal language.

And then next what is even more interesting it seems that he very early thought oh himself as possibly a completely intelligent individual who might experiment with ideas of right and wrong and conscience and God.

You will remember he is reported to have told the authorities when he was in custody that a conscience was drilled into him until he was eight years of age and then after that he proceeded to drill it out.

And so he began as a child to deliberately overthrow the idea of God and of conscience and of sympathy and of social responsibility as unnecessary and unworthy.

The following are two or three of his expressions:

"I have reveled in the fact that I have had no qualms of conscience". Speaking of family loyalties, "I was trying to break down any feeling that I had for my family. I have tried to kill affection for years."

He says that he at first, from the intellectual standpoint, doubted the existence of a conscience; that is something that tradition has handed to us or we learned at our mother's knee, and then by the result of experiment he found that he could completely down it.

Only gradually he seems to have developed the superman idea, and at this point I should like, if I may, to cite a letter dated last October, in which he dwells on that.

MR. DARROW: We will show by another witness the genuineness of the letter.

THE WITNESS: This is a letter that I myself picked out from a large batch of letters which were brought to me by the members of his family. The whole letter has a very great deal of interest on account of its verbosity and the peculiar playing with ideas, that is so characteristics of individuals of his type of mentality. It is a very long letter.

MR. DARROW: Q Does the envelope bear a post office stamp and date?

A It bears the stamp of the post office, Toledo, Ohio, October 10, 1923, addressed to Mr. Richard A. Loeb, 5107

Ellis Avenue, Chicago, a special delivery letter.

MR. CROWE: Read all of it.

A "October 10, 20th Century Limited, 1:45 P.M.

"Dear Dick: I want to thank you first of all for your kindness in granting my request of yesterday. I was highly gratified to hear from you for two reasons, the first sentimental and the second practical. The first of these is that your prompt reply conclusively proved my previous idea that the whole matter really did mean something to you, and that you respected my wishes, even though we were not very friendly. This is a great satisfaction, but the second is even greater, in that I imply from the general tenor of your letter that there is a good chance of a reconciliation between us, which I ardently desire, and this belief will give me a peace of mind on which I based my request.

"But I fear, Dick, that your letter has failed to settle the controversy itself, as two points are still left open. These I will now attack. As I wrote you yesterday, the decision of our relations was in your hands, because it depended entirely on how you wished to treat my refusal to admit that I acted wrongly. This request you did not answer. You imply merely that because of my statement that, `I regret the whole matter' I am in part at least admitting what you desire. I thought twice before putting that phrase in my letter, for fear you might misconstrue it, as in fact you have done. First, you will note that that I said that `I regret the whole matter' (not any single part of it). By this I meant that I regretted the crime you originally committed (your mistake in judgment) from which the whole consequences flow. But I did not mean and do not wish to understood as meaning that once this act had been done, I regret anything subsequent. I do not in fact regret it, because I feel sure, as I felt from the beginning, that should we agin become friends, it will be on a basis of better mutual understanding as a result of these unpleasant consequences which I deliberately planned and precipitated. Furtherm even if I did not regret those consequences, it would not follow at all that I consider myself to have acted wrongly. I may regret that it is necessary to go downtown to the dentist, and still not feel that I am acting wrongly in so doing. Quite the contrary. So if you insist on my stating that I acted wrongly, as a prerequidite to our renewal of friendship, I feel it duty bound to point out to you that this is not the meaning of what I wrote. In this do no think that I am trying to avoid a renewal of these relations. You know how much I desire a renewal but I still feel that I must point this out to yu, as I could not consider re-entering these relations when you were under the misapprehensions that I had conceded to what you demanded. On the basis of this construction of my words, then, Dick, should you base your decision. Next comes the other point of issue, namely, whether I wish to be a party to a reconciliation, supposing that you wish on the basis of the previous statements to do so. Here the decisions rests, not with you, but with me. Now, as I wrote you yesterday, you obviated my first reason for a refusal by telling me what I wanted to know, but another arose, the question of treachery, and that is not quite settled in my mind. For the purpose of this discussion, I shall not use the short term "treachery" as you suggested in your letter, to cover whatever you want to call it. I have no desire to quibble over terms, and am sure we both mean the same thing as treachery. Very well.

The whole question must be divided into two, namely, treachery in act and treachery in intention. On your suggestion, the first was to be settled by phoning Dick, as I did, I apologizing verbally on condition that you were right, and implying the same apology from you in case you were wrong."

MR. CROWE: Q The Dick referred to there is Dick Rubel.

A I couldn't tell you.

MR. DARROW: Yes.

MR. CROWE: Q Have you made any effort to ascertain that?

A I do not know that I have read this part of the letter before, -- (reading):

"You were proved wrong, and I am sure you are a good enough sport to stick by your statement, unless you question whether I did all you suggested in good faith. Hence, you remove any previous charge of treachery in act. If there was such. But the second is not so simple. I stated, and still hold, that if you still held me to have acted treacherously in intent, our friendship must cease. You circumvent that by saying you never could have held this  opinion because you believe me to have acted hastily, etc. I did my best in stating I was wholly responsible for all I said and did, since I had planned it all, and if there were malice at all it would be malice afterthought. You refuse to believe me. Now, that is not my fault. I have done my best to tell you the true facts, (since they were in my disadvantage) and hence have discharged my obligation. I still insist that I have planned all I did. You can believe this or not as you like or come to your own decision, or whether you still stink I acted treacherously. If you say you do not, then I shall infer either that you never thought so (although you accuse me of it) or that you have changed your mind (and imply these as an apology for ever thinking so) and continue to be your friend. All I want from you then is a statement; that you do not now think me to have acted treacherously in intent, which I will construe as above. Then it is up to you whether you will forego my statement of wrong action or will on your part break up our friendship. Please wire me at my expense to the Biltmore Hotel, New York, immediately on receipt, stating, one, whether you wish to "break our friendship or to forego my statement, or, two, whether or not you still think me to have acted treacherously. If you want further discussion on either point merely wire me that you must see me to discuss it before you decide. Now, that is all that is in point to our controversy but I am going to ass a little more in an effort to explain my system of a Neitzschien philosophy with regard to you. It may have occurred to you why a mere mistake in judgment on your part should be treated as a crime, when on the part of another it should not be so considered. Here are the reasons. In formulating a superman, he is, on account of certain superior qualities inherent in him exempted from the ordinary laws which govern ordinary men. He is not liable for anything he may do. Whereas others would be, except for the crime that it is possible for him to commit--to make a mistake. Now, obviously any code which conferred upon an individual or upon a group extraordinary privileges without also putting on him extraordinary responsibility would be unfair and bad. Therefore, an ubermensch is held to have committed a crime every time he errs in judgment, a mistake excusable in others. But you may say that you have previously made mistakes which I do not treat as crimes. This is true. To cite an example, the other night you expressed the opinion and insisted tat Marcus Aurelius Antonius was, "practically the founder of stoicism", and in so doing you committed a crime. But it was a slight crime and I choose to forgive it. Similarly I have and had before this matter reached--I don;t know what the next word is--forgiven the crime which you committed in committing the error in judgement which caused the whole train of events. I did not and do not wish to charge you with a crime, but I feel justified in using any of the consequences of your crime for which you were held responsible to my advantage. This and only this I did, so you see how careful you must be.

"Now, Dick, just one more word to sum up. Supposing you fulfill both conditions necessary for reconciliation. One, waive claim to my statement, and, two, state yourself that you no longer think me to have acted treacherously. We are going to be as good or better friends as before.

"I wanted that to come about very much, but not at the expense of your thinking that I have backed down in any way from my stand, as I am sure of that in my mind and want you to be.

"Well, Dick, the best of luck if I do not see you again and thanks in advance for the wire, I am sure you will be good enough to send. Hoping you will be able to decide in the way I obviously want,

I am

Babe."

P.S. Excuse scrawl. Train is moving. Your spelling, young man, is abominable, and I for one should advocate that Tomeie-boy be taken away from your instruction in the subject."

MR. DARROW: You want to mark that? Will you mark it for us?

MR. CROWE: All right.

MR. DARROW: Defendants' Exhibit 2 of this date. Mark it inside and outside. Would you like to look at it now?

MR. CROWE: Let me look at it. There is no objection?

MR. DARROW: No.

THE WITNESS: And much to this same point is the fact, as I understand, Mr. Darrow, by one of the teachers in the University of Chicago, that during the last term Leopold got up in a class on torts and insisted that laws might be applicable to ordinary people but not to supermen.

With us, Leopold ridicules our type of work, as far as psychiatry is concerned. He insists that there is nothing in the way of mental disease or lack of balance on his part. He is a different individual, but the difference is only one of superiority.

My opinion about all this is that this group of delusional tendencies shows no consistency or normality. His ideas about himself as a superior person are so widely different from the sort of life that he enters into. With all of his sort his love he does not show a normal self regard. He proves intrinsically his defective judgment in this. He has not taken an ordinary attitude toward himself, a normal attitude. He has not been consistently headed toward the development of his alleged superiority.

MR. CROWE: Pardon me. There is no objection to my keeping this letter over night, is there?

MR. DARROW: No.

THE COURT: You may have it.

THE WITNESS: We are naturally, of course, much interested in the development of Leopold's emotional life. It seems clear that with his very deliberate subordination of his feelings that he has had all the more energy to give to his intellectual pursuits. His feverish mental activities have been made all the more possible because he has not, as he himself indicates, wasted any time on emotion.

We have some clue as to how this has developed on his part. There was the fact of his early small size and his being very specially taken care of by nurses, of his being taunted as he tells us, by being sent to a girls' school for a couple of years, and then, through with that, being accompanied to a public school by the nurse.

His reaction to this was that he could down his sensitiveness, down his feelings, by thinking of himself as being a superior type of an individual, and he has been, he says, surprised at his own success.

He expatiates nowadays on his own coldness as being desirable. It has led him to the position where he is now, as an intellectual who can keenly observe things. He can enjoy what he sees in jail,his own notes on the trial. He tells us that he has had considerable interest in observing hoimself as a murder and says that before the murder was committed that before the murder was committed that he had some thought of the possibility of observing his own actions in such a situation.

Asked about his own feelings or emotions, especially as related to any question of sympathy for anybody who was attacked or murdered or kidnaped, he said to me, "making up my mind to commit murder was paractically the same as making up my mind whether or nor I should eat pie for supper, whether it would give me pleasure of not."

Now, conclusiomns concerning Leopold's mentality. Inb my opinion on account of --

MR. CROWE: Just a moment, doctor.

THE WITNESS: Yes.

MR. CROWE: Before you get into your conclusions, hadn't you better now go into details as to the various things which were said or done that caused you yo come to those conclusions.

THE WITNESS: All this I have been recounting is simply the source.

MR. CROWE: This morning when you said he was eccentric, you said later on you would give the various things that caused you to think he was eccentric and egotistic. You said you would give these later on.

THE WITNESS: Yes, I am going to give those now. That is what I am going to do now.

On account of his abnormal phantasy life developed as abnormal material in childhood and continued in abnormal ways during an abnormal extension of years.

On account of his chronically developed delusional notions about himself, particularly as being a superman.

On account of his subordinated emotional life to the extent that it is now pathologically out of accord with his intellectual life.

On account of his defective or deteriorated judgment which has not permitted him to see the pathological absurdity of mixing phantasy and real life, and the effect of displacing emotional life.

On account of his abnormal urge toward mental activity and his diminished sense of fatigue.

On account of his disintegrated personality so that e fails to really care for his much beloved ego and enters into a thoroughly childish and absurd compact which endangers him.

On account of all this, in my opinion, he is thoroughly unbalanced in his mental life, or to use another term, mentally diseased.

MR. CROWE: When you use the other term, do you mean the same?

THE WITNESS: Yes.

MR. CROWE: You think he is insane, then?

THE WITNESS: I don't think anything about it.

MR. CROWE: He isn't insane, he is sane?

THE WITNESS: I didn't use the word "sane" or "insane" I have not thought about that matter.

MR. CROWE: Go ahead.

THE WITNESS: He has a paranoid personality. His conversational powers and his scholastic ability lead him to be unrecognized. His maniacal tendency, his over-excitedness and over-energy have been interpreted as evidence of vleverness, and it is typical of such cases that they remain frequently in the world unrecognized.

MR. DARROW: Q What effect will that have on -- well, strike that out. To what extent were those repsonsible for his acts?

A This crime in particular?

Q Yes, this crime.

A To my mind this crime is the result of diseased motivation; that is, its planning and commission.

Q Yes.

A It is possible only because he had these abnormal mental trends with the typical feelings and ideas of a paranoid personality. He nedded these feelings and ideas supplemented by what Loeb could give him. There is no reason why he should not commit the crime with his diseased notion. Anything he wanted to do was right, even kidnapping and murder.

There is nothing in the feelings of sympathy which would prevent him, because of his disintegrated personality, there was no place for sympathy and feeling to paly any normal part. In other words, he had an established pathological personality before he met Loeb, but probably his activities would have taken other directions except for this chance association.

Q Now, will you take up Loeb next, and then consider the two together.

Mr. Crowe: Doctor, have you finished on the specific acts and facts upon which your conclusion is based as to Loeb?

THE WITNESS: Yes.

THE COURT: Counsel have requested that we have a five-minute recess now on account of the air and the hunidity in the room, and they have something to talk about outside, so we will have a five-minute recess.

Whereupon a short recess was here taken by Court and Counsel.

Court convened pursuant to short recess heretofore taken.

Present: Same as before.

D R . W I L L I A M H E A L Y,

resumed the stand for further direct examination by Mr. Darrow, as follows:

MR. DARROW: Q Turn to the Loeb part, and state what you did, the investigations you made, and what you found with reference to Richard Loeb.

THE WITNESS: I should like to add one point, if I may. You had a little conference, and interrupted me, and in answer to your question, was that all from which I drew my conclusion. I should say it was, with the single exception of those matters that we took up together.

MR. CROWE: Yes.

MR. DARROW: He meant to include that. I don't know whether I called your attention especially to the letter introduced by the State's Attorney. You said that was included in your consideration?

A Yes.

MR. CROWE: Q It is on the same subject matter as the other letter.

A Yes, but giving a very different aspect to it, from which one draws inferences to my mind that are unwarranted.

MR. DARROW: Will you proceed.

A In the case of Richard Loeb, I see nothing particularly from the physical side by a general examination, that is of significance. He is a well-built, active fellow, but though apparently calm and pleasant in his demeanor, he does show signs of some nervous disturbance in the muscular twitching of his face, and in the asymmetrical use of his mouth, which is very pronounced, one side frequently being drawn up in peculiar fashion.

Inquiry from the family makes it plain that this condition has developed during the last two years. He stammers very slightly indeed.

Concerning mental tests, and if you care I will go through the same sort --

THE COURT: Go ahead.

THE WITNESS: Not as many mental tests quite were given to him; for certain special reasons they did not seem necessary. He also as a college graduate and a young man of considerable education rates too high to be fairly tested. On the ordinary test Stanford-Binet test he gets a very good rating and passes them all with one exception which is known as the code test in the sixteen visualization series. A test that calls for some visualizing powers but is a matter of no great importance.

MR. CROWE: Just give us a sample or two of the tests you applied to him.

THE WITNESS: Of what these tests are, and so on?

MR. CROWE: Yes, as you did in the case of Leopold.

THE WITNESS: Yes, I have not given this before. These form a set of tests year after year and are of considerable value for children, but when it comes to adolescence of good education, they are not of nearly so much value.

For the 18-0 series, for instance, the first test and that is a test also for several years previously, is the so-called vocabulary test. Here we have 100 words and the individual examined is asked to give the meanings of those words. Now you have to pass seventy-five words to get the 18 year old series, and he only gave 78 words, which for a  graduate from college is a pretty poor record, as an ordinary 18 year old individual is merely a high school graduate. I do not think it is worth while giving you the words he failed on.

MR. CROWE: Yes.

THE WITNESS: Do you want them?

MR. CROWE: Yes.

THE WITNESS: Such words as artless, depredation.

MR. CROWE: What did he say artless means?

THE WITNESS: I do not know. He did not give it a satisfactory definition, that is all. Gravel, harpy, declivity, fen, incrustation, sapient, retroactive, and so on.

MR. CROWE: There are some of those we would muff on, aren't there?

THE WITNESS: Those are all standard for testing individuals 18 years of age, so it is no test as to what we will do,

Now other tests of this same series. One of them I have mentioned before is this so-called paper cutting test in which yo u are asked to visualize a sheet of paper after it has been cut. He passed that correctly.

The next test is to be able to repeat eight digits after they are said to you in this fashion. Reading them slowly to him and he is allowed to say them back just as fast as he pleases. He is given three trials on this and he only has to do it once. Seven, two, five, three, four, eight, nine, six. He passed that without any trouble.

Another one of the 18 year old tests is to repeat the thought of a passage which is read to him. Shall I read that passage?

MR. CROWE: If you please.

THE WITNESS: "Tests such as we are now making are of value both for the advancement of science and for the information of the person who is tested. It is important for science to lean how people differ and on what factors these differences depend. If we can separate the influence of heredity from the influence of environment we may be able to apply our knowledge so as to guide human development. We may thus in some cases correct defects and develop abilities which we might otherwise neglect."

That test is simply to give the idea of the passage. They are not asked to remember it at all.

The fifth test of that series is to repeat seven digits backwards, taking all the time that you please.

The sixth test of the series is the old ingenuity test perhaps some of your or many of you have heard; the mother sent her boy to the river to get seven pints of water. She gave him a three-pint vessel. Show me how the boy can measure out exactly seven pints without guessing at the amount, beginning by filling the five pint vessel.

He is allowed five minutes to do that. These are samples of the test. This is the standard intelligence test that is used almost everywhere nowadays.

MR. CROWE: Did you tell how he came out on those?

THE WITNESS: He came out all right. He showed normal motor control in the tapping test we spoke of in the case of Leopold this morning.

On the same Monroe Silent Reading test for which we have pretty well established norms, he failed on quite a number of them and gained a score

which was the equivalent of twelfth grade. That is the last year of high school. I don't think it is necessary to read that again, is it?

MR. CROWE: No, but give one or two examples of where he failed.

THE WITNESS: Of where he failed?

MR. CROWE: Yes.

THE WITNESS: Well, this is test No. 6 of this series:

"The wall enclosing the whole island and the waters, each built for a double purpose of bulwark against the river and defense against the mob was said to have rendered the palace unfit for constant occupancy, insomuch that legates abandoned it and moved to another residence."

"Underline the word that tells us what it was that rendered the palace unfit for occupancy."

He underlined the word "river."

MR. CROWE: What word should he underlined?

THE WITNESS: Wall.

MR. CROWE: Wall?

THE WITNESS: Yes. Another one he failed on. "When the air is heavy the liquid in a barometer rises and when the air is light the liquid falls. Suppose the barometer registers ten degrees lower at twelve o'clock than it did at eight o'clock. At which time was the air heavier?"

He says twelve o'clock. That gives him, as I say, a score equivalent to the ordinary four year high school.

On the syllogism test, the reasoning test that I spoke of this morning, the so-called Thurston syllogism test, he works hard at it, takes seven minutes to do it, and gets it correctly except for one failure.

MR. CROWE: What was that failure?

THE WITNESS: What was it?

MR. CROWE: Yes.

THE WITNESS: I couldn't say. I would have to go all over it now. I haven't it in mind.

In the equivalent proverbs test where he has some twenty Proverbs to reason about, generalize about, he gets sixteen correct and four errors.

MR. CROWE: What is his answer on the two negatives;

The two wrongs making a right; read that. 

THE WITNESS: I didn't give it to him.

A standard test that correlates with the general intelligence is again this language test by which you fill out certain words. On this he makes a good many errors, and gets a total score again that is only equivalent to a fourth-grade high school. Not at all equivalent to a college grade. You do not care for the errors here, I don't suppose do you?

MR. CROWE: Well, give us just one or two, as examples.

A Well, he says, "One should not as a rule direct attention to uninteresting things." He leaves blank one that says, "To eat one is a (blank) person." It seems easy enough.

MR. CROWE: That first one, will you read that again?

A "One should not as a rule direct attention to uninteresting things." It is incorrect to say "One should not."

He says -- and this is poor language again -- "The sum is so bright that one cannot read in it directly without causing great discomfort to the eyes."

"The least difficult things are by no means always the most important. Many are the important tasks found the most disagreeable." A pretty incoherent sentence, no meaning to it.

On that judgment test I gave, that we spoke of this morning, in which you asked to say whether a sentence is striking or it is commonplace or it is absurd, and so on, he gets only twenty out of thirty correct.

MR. DARROW: That is a judgment test?

A Yes. Judgment of the sense of these different sentences.

MR. CROWE: Give us an example of each.

THE WITNESS: I beg pardon.

MR. CROWE: Will you give us an example of some of these that he passed.

THE WITNESS: I do not know whether I have got the scoring left or not. I am a little afraid that the rubbing out that I did in order to use it with the other fellow interferes with the statement. But I have the record, and I could work it out at length. He got 20/30ths or two-thirds of them right. In this test he does better than Leopold somewhat, and he gets about the medium, fourteen years, showing again not nearly so much shrewdness in judgment as one would expect to find from a fellow of his years and probable education.

I also gave him this Association Test, the Kent-Rosinoff Test, without any marked result. This performance is just about an average one, without any very definite evidence of any emotional disturbance -- none at all, in fact -- and no particular results in the length of reaction time, but just about an average performance. That is about the extent of the tests I gave. He was very much interested in that cryptogram test that I spoke of, and said that he found it a lot of fun, and worked very hard indeed. That ius the sort of thing that challenges him, because it has a sort of hidden meaning, something that might be used as a code, and he worked very hard, indeed on that, and got it all right in six minutes and thirty seconds.

MR. CROWE: Q What is the usual time?

A You are allowed fifteen minutes. The result of this simply is, I fond him to be a fellow of certainly not more than average intelligence, which of course is tremendously surprised at, on account of his remarkably precocious record, having entered college at fourteen years and three months, and graduated when he was just eighteen. His language ability is not good; he does not express himself well, either in any tests given or in his ordinary conversation. I have read a great many of his letters, and most of them are expressed in very simple terms, and not always very coherently. Considering his practical judgement, I have talked to some people who have known him over many years, outside of his own family, and i was much surprised to learn that in spite of this academic accomplishment, he has been regarded as very much of a kid in practical judgement -- that is the expression they used -- and some of them have said, "without any evidence of practical sense."

Q Give some instances of that.

A I am merely giving now what others have told me in that regard.

MR. DARROW: We will furnish you some.

MR. CROWE: Q You cannot cite any instances?

A No.

MR. CROWE: Then I move that his statement be stricken out as clearly hearsay.

THE WITNESS: Certainly, but it helps me to form an opinion, that is all.

THE COURT: He has told you that part of his conclusions are based on the examinations he made, and what was told him by the parents.

MR. CROWE: But he cannot give me specific instances.

THE COURT: Mr. Darrow said he would.

MR. Darrow; If we donot furnish you some instances, we will consent to its being stricken out.

THE COURT: Q Would your conclusions have been different if you had not gotten those statements from others?

A I think I should have arrived at exactly the same conclusion, but I attempted to be sure, to corroborate and confirm as much as possible, an i have taken a great deal of pains to do that. His life history and his conduct I should have relied on that for that. He is not at all interested in mental tasks. He forces himself to, and can work with fair attention and persistence, but it is a good deal of grind for him. Concerning his personality, it came up very clearly from observing him, talking to him, and hearing about him, that he is in general rather a lazy individual, but he can on occasion energize himself very well indeed, though most remarkably lacking in ambitious and normal interests, which seems very strange in the light of his training and his tutoring.

MR. CROWE: Q Will you give some specific instance on which you base those conclusions?

A I asked him to think of any interest that he has ever had in his life, any ambitions, and he can think of nothing except his early inner idea of being a criminal. I have asked the same question of his parents and friends, and they can think of nothing that he ever really cared thoroughly to do. One of his friends whom I saw last night, who has known him for many years very well, said that he was a boy that never finished anything, who never had any deep interests. One finds, then, that this secret abnormal mental life that he has been carrying on unbeknown to his governess, tutor and to his family over these many years, has in a most curious way swallowed up his ambition.

He has apparently had, judging from his own straightforward account of himself, a great love of excitement and adventure.

He describes his heartbeats and excitements and physical sensations under various conditions, beginning with, for instance, the stealing, which he says he did for nine years. He had a tremendous thrill from doing it in the dusk and carrying it out, and from carrying out these criminalistic practices of shadowing people, and so on, that he tells about, and that others have said something on.

But he also appears to have been pretty strong in an emergency, and on one occasion where he went out into pretty rough water over at Charlevoix and brought back some members of his family, and as evidenced by his most cold-blooded handling of the situation in his criminal adventures.

One notes that he is very friendly, pleasant, well mannered; in the jail takes especial pains, to see that first of all we order what we want for lunch before he considers ordering for himself, having charming qualities, which I have heard much about from other people, including this man whom I saw last night, a very charming boy, having many nice qualities on one side, and nobody who reads the small volumes from his old governess or from his girlfriends can doubt it, and yet on the other hand, having carried out for many years a dual personality, having been an extensive liar and a most unscrupulous individual, in a manner and to an extent that is quite beyond any in my experience. A curious desire of sympathy in pathological ways, and evidently this dates back to his early imaginative life, a most curious and abnormal affair. A tremendous contrast between his very well evidenced desire to get along socially and to have some nice girl friends and to have boy friends, contrasted with the fact that he is most remarkably, according to even his own account and according of course again to his life history, most remarkably unscrupulous, untruthful, unfair, ungrateful and disloyal in many social relationships, disloyal even to his comrade when he cheated him, in buying liquor, and to his fraternity when he robbed them.

MR. CROWE: Doctor, are you going to give some illustrations of the matters you have just been describing?

THE WITNESS: I have just given some.

MR. CROWE: Not merely the last, about robbing the fraternity, but the disloyalty to his friends, and his tremendous lying, and this and that and other things.

A Disloyalty to his friends, of course, in the first place to his governess, to whom he was writing, with whom he was in closest contact, atthe same time that he was carrying on these criminalistic practices, by himself most generally, and occasionally with others. His unfairness in that whole situation, of course, the same way. His disloyalty to his girl friends, who thought he was leading one kind of life when he was leading another.

But he expresses on the other hand, some loyalties in certain and narrow spheres, to family life in certain ways, and he has some well expressed and decent ideas about girls.

All of that, of course, shows a disparity and a contradiction that to my thinking is certainly abnormal. the ability to carry on for many years, as a child, this tremendously contradictory dual life is certainly pathological.

He appears to have been an even tempered boy, with occasional depressions, which he can, however, readily dispel, according to his story, by making good social contacts. He tells us -- and that is the only evidence -- he tells uw that he has frequently contemplated suicide.

So we have those very curious quips and displacements in his emotional life, his desire for sympathy in childish ways.

MR. CROWE: Give us an illustration of that.

THE WITNESS: An illustration of that would be the fact that while he has been in jail I happen to know that he has sent out a letter to a girl, to ask her to station herself on Dearborn Street,where she could look through a certain window, which he gave in a diagram -- I saw the letter -- which he gave in a diagram, and look up there at him. Not that she could see him at all.

He tells us he has a distinct feeling and desire for sympathy; that while Leopold, for instance, is inclined, unless he can give his ideas, to retreat from reporters, he is apt to stand up near to the bars, and when around people he would take a particular satisfaction, which has some particular interest to us, in his being looked at there. In a most curious and wistful fashion, he seems to have these emotions one way, and yet on the other hand, of course, we have only to look at his deeds to realize the extreme lack of feeling and sympathy which he has shown in the most desperate human situations, making a mixture that is very strange.

Naturally, we are interested in the standpoint from his mental development in whether or not he has shown alterations in personality. About this I do not feel at all sure. He feels that when he was younger he was brighter. He thinks that perhaps he has dulled his mind somewhat by drinking. But I am not at all positive that we have any light to throw on that, because the boy was so extensively tutored between the time he was four and fourteen years of age by this most ardent governess, that it is quite possible that it is possible that she managed to instill in him a great deal of knowledge that helped him through his examinations, when he really had very little intelligence.

Concerning alterations from the standpoint  of his emotions and feelings, all I can say there is that I have frequently talked to him about it, and he feels, in the first place, that he never had anything in his life to call forth any emotions or feelings, had no necessity for it, especially for him to show any sympathies or to do anything for anyone else, and he believes he never did have any of it. The only instance that he can give of it was once when his governess had an entrhm infection and he felt rather badly for her. Outside of that he thinks he has always been rather dull in his feelings, he says.

One of the first times one finds out in conversation with him is that, indirectly, he wonders at his own callousness. He says the/reason he has gone on in his career is because he has found nothing inside of himself to deter him from going on, and in the last few years he has been able to face his criminal imaginings and tendencies with equanimity.

He thinks he may have been somewhat hardened as things have gone on, but on the whole, as he looks at his own nature, he never did have, he says, much sympathy, emotion, or deep affection for anyone.

Dick Loeb's inner mental life, as in the case of the other boy, of course, has a great deal of interest for us. We can only learn of that through his own statements, again with such checking up in its bearings on his life career and criminalities and the fact that he has told it consistently from one person to another. It is not the sort of thing that anybody would imagine, I am inclined to believe, when he began, certainly before he was nine years of age, with very curious, abnormal criminalistic ideas, picturing himself as someone in a jailyard, naked, abused, whipped, and all of the comforts he gets out of it is that the people looking through a jailyard fence sympathize with him. There is a wonderful criminal, great criminal, and people sympathize with him. Asked who sympathized with him, he says at first it was people in general and then later on it was mostly young girls who sympathized with him. To use his own expression, "I was abused". It was a very pleasant thought. Punishment inflicted in jail was pleasant. "I enjoyed being looked at through the bars, because I was a famour criminal."

I am not sure whether it was a matter of very great import, but I was much interested to go  into this question of where he could have gotten any pictures at all in his mind of a jail yard, and it suggested to my mind at once the jail yard and the fence around the house of correction as it was years ago -- it may be still, for all I know -- and found that he as a young child had been driven past that occasionally with his father on the way to his father's place of business.

Well, he tells me that after he had had these phantasies for some time, of actually being a suffering criminal, he began the idea of the phantasy life of being a criminal himself, and there is much elaboration of this with ideas derived from many sources, as some of his own experiences, as in stealing at nine years old, and so on, in reading detective stories, but he insists that that was not the beginning of it, that he already had his inner life of this kind before he actually read anything, and he goes on and develops his imaginings with respect to his becoming this master criminal, about which much has been spoken already in this trial, always deriving great pleasure from the idea that he was the leader of confederates, or of one confederate, or especially as being the one who knew how the thing was done.

Later on he used to say to himself, after he had done things, "Gee whis, if our friends only knew we had done this." and then grew up the idea of being such a clever criminal that he could plan a crime and escape detection from the very cleverest of detectives, and he tells us that he was long working at the idea of a great crime, which would stir all the country and never be solved.

It was all for the sake of being somebody in his imaginative life. Nobody else, except perhaps his confederate, had known he had played any great part in it, but still it would be done and people would marvel at the skill of the person who had done it. He claims to have had these phantasies early in life, with very great vividness, so that he remembers them as well as he does the affairs in his daily life and his actual life, and that he has continued these imaginings right through the years.

You have already heard something about his other phantasies, of being a frontiersman, and this photograph which we found, with this tremendously intense expression. It is not the fact that he has got a photograph taken in cowboy clothes, or anything of the sort. It is the expression on his face, with the changed expression on his face, which seems to me to be very obvious in this matter.

MR. CROWE: Have you got that photograph, Doctor?

THE WITNESS: I have not.

MR. CROWE: Have you?

MR. WALTER BACHRACH: We can reproduce it for you, yes.

MR. CROWE: Have you got it here?

MR. WALTER BACHRACH: I have not got it here. We can have it for you tomorrow morning, if you like.

THE WITNESS: I would also like to speak of this matter of the formula of the teddy bear affair because he told that first to me in jail, and of course it is ridiculous to bring in such a matter except the fact that this boy in jail says, "I caught myself" -- that is the pathetic part of the situation, and the remarkable part of it from a pathological point of view. Tells me voluntarily "I caught myself last night saying 'you know Teddy'. That is the formula by which he would introduce to himself this phantasy life because it was unnecessary for the narrator of his own phantasy to explain things, to be explicit or to make it consistent and logical. He could go ahead and make it any old thing provided he began with that formula, which he had from early boyhood days, and to my mind --

MR. CROWE: Doctor --

THE WITNESS: -- again, of course, this illustrates -- just a moment please, until I finish -- this illustrates how much of a child he really is still, although he is capable of such tremendously hard and vicious behavior.

MR. CROWE: I think you just said provided he started with the formula, "Now, you know Teddy", he could make up any kind of story, is that correct?

THE WITNESS: That is his explanation of it.

MR. CROWE: Do you think he started his conversation with/Dr. White/with that formula?

THE WITNESS: I beg pardon?

MR. CROWE: Do you think he started his conversation with Dr. White with that formula?

MR. DARROW: I object to that question.

MR. CROWE: All right, let it go.

THE COURT: Very well, withdrawn.

THE WITNESS: To contrast these and to supplement them and correlate them with his own known acts. With as I say of now actually playing without any doubt a double life over many years, very completely from the time he was nine years old of so, evidently first with secret association with a delinquent boy, and then his secret reading, and then had companions of both sexes and his criminalistic practices, all of these quite unknown to his governess, to his parents and to his friends. His mixing up of phantasy with real life evidently begins with this early shadowing of people, playing criminal and detective. Directing this burglary or burglar play which even his friends thought was childish, this burglary play having been kept up even in the last year or so, Leopold tells me. And of course he was caught shadowing and using a mask by some members of his own family. He remembers his sense of exhilaration and power in his early episodes of stealing, at nine years of age. He has indulged in a great deal of stealing, evidently, from field's and from other shops, as well as from this fraternity house; I should judge a great deal of it, as i saw quite a batch of pocketbooks the other day among his letters. The gray trousers he has on in jail here he tells me were taken from the country club. He just takes these things in the carrying out of his criminalistic ideas, and in a most eccentric and childish way. He always most the fact that knows more about the details of the event than anyone else. to use his own statement "It just seems that I wanted to be a criminal", and that he has stated, very openly for the last two or three years. This idea of his, of course, is very remarkably carried out by his -- in most dangerous fashion, taking the reporters, which i believe has already come out in evidence, who he saw on the campus of the university of Chicago, down 63rd Street, or somewhere, and when theyintended to back out, insisting on their going, and going from drug store to drug store, as if he did not knowthe place, until he struck the drug store to which the telephone message had been sent.

MR. CROWE: Q What do you say that indicates?

A I will tell you my conclusions later. Then I have information from his family of the affair at the dinner table the night after the murder, in his own house, at which a guest was present, where Dick Loeb expatiated at great length about the crime itself, and told the familythe ways in which it must have been done, as if he were a very wise fellow, and could draw conclusions and inferences from what had been published in the newspapers. This appears to me also to be bearing directly on the matter of his phantasied desire for knowing more about it than anyone else.

Q Tell the details of what he told the family that night?

A I couldn't tell you, because I don't remember them all; they but -- they told me that he gave the details of the affair, the events of the crime, that is all I know, as if he had read them from the newspapers, and knew what sort of things were done. That is all I know. I got it in a very general way, and I was satisfied with that . then we have this insistence on his part that he is very comfortable in jail.

He seems to feel at hom e there. He says that he had a pleasant feeling when he first came in and got a jail outfit;, that he was a little glad of the jail clothes, of being in jail. His own self pity entered into the matter.

Q In other words, he makes an argument for a life sentence?

A "They gave me a ragged coat, and offered me a better one" -- giving an argument in favor of his phantasy in youth being pretty true, I should say. He refused to take the better coat. He was living out being subjected to worse conditions than other prisoners were. He said, "I feel comfortable here. I am living out what I used to picture as a child." So it is of a good deal of interest to the student of abnormal psychology, the fact that under the influence of this inner mental life, this boy has been steadily going along the path of wrecking himself, as people with abnormal phantasies frequently do, people who are mentally diseased. It seems as if he is himself following out fate, the hand of fate, in these early imaginings of his own self-suffering. If I may come now to the whole matter of his emotional life; we find the extraordinary spectacle of this tremendous lack of sympathy for other people growing upon him. He seems incapable of viewing his criminal acts with anything like a natural feeling. If we may judge by the accounts given us separately by both Leopold and Loeb, they were contemplating kidnapping members of their own families. They even spoke of kidnapping the little brother.

Q Did they tell you that?

A Both of them told me that.

Q Did they tell you whom they were going to kidnap?

A They didn't tell me who; they said they spoke of it, contemplated it. That is the expression I used. Comparing these features of his emotional life with his evidently normal intelligence and particularly with his scholastic achievements, it appears clearly that there is a tremendous and abnormal imparity between his development along these two lines. We have the spectacle of a boy capable of entering college at fourteen years and three months, with almost no normal feelings or emotions concerning the most serious of all human behavior. When I asked him about this case, he thinks it had already begun by the time he was ten years old, when he began his dual life, his persistent lying, his governess thinking that he was a model boy, when he knew very well that he was not. His notorious unfeeling behavior that we see here in the court room or in the jail, or as he discusses his pres