Slayers' Baseness Is Depicted
Murder Unimportant as Pie to Leopold
Dr. William Healy Says Moral Ordeal Aroused Slight Interest in Slayer.
Pleasure His Only Aim.
|
Source: Chicago Daily News, 4 August 1924, pg. 1.
|
"Dickie" Loeb and "Babe" Leopold were stripped to their moral and mental underpinnings to-day by Dr. William Healy of Boston, the second to be called of the psychiatrists with whom the boys' attorneys hope to buttress their mitigation plea.
Loeb was exposed as a boy who has lost sympathy for everyone except himself, "untruthful, unscrupulous, disloyal even to his friends," impelled to murder for the sake of a new sensation.
Leopold was revealed as the "superman," who discarded conscience and belief in God when a child, whose only crime was to make an intellectual error and who contemplated murder "the same as he would decide whether to have pie for supper."
Dr. Healy was in the witness chair all day and was still in the hands of Clarence Darrow, chief of defense counsel, when court adjourned. State's Attorney Crowe, with frequent interruptions, indicated that when cross-examination came, he would have much questioning to do. His inquiries suggested he would continue to prove that the two defendants posed under examination to make out their condition of "diseased mentality."
When Dr. Healy ended his day of testimony, young Nathan and Richard appeared as strange characters, and in the light of information not before introduced.
Discussed the Crime.
Loeb, said Dr. Healy, for one thing, was able to discuss with his family at dinner, when there were guests, the night after Robert Franks was killed, all the details of the crime that had been printed in the papers.
"He wanted to make out that he was smart enough to solve the mystery from the facts published in the press."
"Dickie" was a petty thief as a boy, and the trousers he now wears in his cell were, Dr. Healy said, "stolen from the country club."
"It's been a matter of amazement with young Richard as he sits in Chief Justice Caverly's courtroom on trial for his life that he has been unable to feel sympathy for persons injured by his crime.
"He told me he thought he would break down and cry when the mother of the dead boy was to testify," said the witness, "but when she was on the stand he had no feeling at all. He couldn't understand himself."
Yet "Dickie" has so much sympathy for himself that the other day, said Dr. Healy, he wrote a note to a girl asking her to stand across the street from the jail and look at him through the bars.
It waas a chance association, said Dr. Healy, that brought the two boys together into what he calls "a most remarkable compact."
A "most remarkable compact" between Nathan Leopold, Jr., and Richard Loeb, starting when each boy was about 15 years old, was described to-day at Chief Justice Caverly's hearing of murder evidence against the boys by Dr. William Healy of Boston, a specialized student of human behavior. he was the second "mitigation witness."
At one point in Dr. Healy's discussion State's Attorney Crowe demanded a definition of all the "compact" between the boys meant as the doctor used the word in talking of the defendants. Dr. Healy indicated his reply would not do for the courtroom throng to hear.
Judge Caverly called the lawyers close around the witness stand and Dr. Healy, with Mr. Crowe crouched tensely on one side of the stand and Clarance S. Darrow, chief of defense counsel, on the other, whispered for five minutes.
"Get away from here, you newspaper men," Judge Caverly said as two or three reporters slipped into the circle. This is not to be published."
Dr. Healy made little progress. Soon after Dr. Healy had spoken his "unprintable" testimony into the record he spoke of the forms of tests to which he put Leopold and Loeb.
Alienist Explains Charts.
More of the tests at the start of the afternoon session. Judge Cavely and the attorneys gathered in an interested circle around Dr. Healy as he spread charts and papers on the rail between the witness chair and the bench. Then he went on at Judge Caverly's "Please proceed, doctor."
"Dickie," the prodigy who entered college at 14 and was graduated with his class, is only average intellectually, said Dr. Healy, "which is remarkable in view of his precocious record in college."
And in matters of practical judgment, said the witness, Loeb's friends and relatives have come to regard him as "very much of a kid."
I asked him what hardships he had to meet in the world," Dr. Healy said, "and he told me he never had any disappointments, he wasn't allowed to."
Dr. Healy went on taking up one after another the aspects of young Nathan's character as they came in the order of the scientist's study.
"And so he began as a child deliberately to overthrow the idea of God, social responsibility and social obligation...."
"In connection with this boy's inner mental life, we find a pathological admixture," said the doctor. "Here was a boy who showed such tremendous mental powers and had such good chances in life and yet was willing to go on with these pernicious criminal plans."
A "tremendously abnormal contradiction" is indicated by that "rift," said Dr. Healy.
Dr. Healy made much of Leopold's boyhood interest in religious matters, the fascination he found in the crucifixion, his passion for attending churches in teh neighborhood.
"He told us that when he was 4 years old he began to make a catalogue of the saints," said the doctor.
Dr. Healy, who practiced neurology in Chicago several years ago and for a time was attached in the capactiy of mental specialist to the Juvenile court, went to the stand with a portfolio of notes on his examination and papers of his profession, prepared apparaently for as long a time in the chair as the first psychiatrist witness.
. . . . .
Saw Boys Three or Four Days.
Dr. Healy shuffled some loose sheets of notes as he told of his examination of the boy defendants in the county jail, beginning July 4 and going on three or four days.
There was a general physical investigation, special mental tests to inquire into the boys' emotional life, the study of correspondence between them and their friends, and interviews with other persons concerning their home life and behavior among associates.
As for the facts of the homicide, "I supposed I knew all about them before I came to Chicago, from reading the newspapers," said Dr. Healy.
There was "a tremendous grist of letters," said Dr. Healy, "including the one written by 'Babe' to 'Dickie' projecting a quarrel when they first had confessed the crime." Many of the letters illuminated his examinations, said the psychiatrist.
Mr. Crowe objected to Dr. Healy's unrestricted account of his examinations, but Judge Caverly settled that point promptly.
"Go right ahead, please, doctor," he said. "Start right at the beginning and tell how you examined these boys."
With hands in his coat pockets, legs crossed and sheets of notes spread on his knees, Dr. Healy took up his story, much less the witness than the school man turned loosed on his subject.
Traces Boys' Friendship.
Association, the first friendship between Nathan and Richard, was the starting point.
"Their contacts, quarrels, correspondence, all tend to show a most strange pathological relation," he said. "They told me that their crimes began with extensive cheating at bridge, at which, however, they were not very successful."
Loeb had been morally delinquent before, but htis was his first joint adventure into misbehavior, according to the doctor, and as he spoke the words Dr. Crowe leaped to his feet with a demand that the previous delinquencies be described.
Judge Caverly took charge of the situation with a firmness that has become characteristic these last few days of the trial. He silenced the prosecutor and directed D.r Healy to continue, telling his story in the best order possible.
"I'll be glad to tell all of it, as I have it arranged here," the witness said.
Petty thievery had characterized young Richard's conduct at that time, "swiping" pencils, dental floss and other small articles from shops. That was about all before he met Leopold.
Then a strange relation began in which, the doctor said, Leopld found opportunity to play out his weird fantasies and Loeb found some one to help him carry out his "criminalistic" schemes.
Says Boys Had "Compact."
Dr. Healy used "compact" for the relationship between the boys. Mr. Crowe demanded a definition of all that term signified. Dr. Healy spoke to Judge Caverly in a low voice and the judge, beckoning with his arms, summoned the lawyers on both sides close around the witness chair. What Dr. Healy told them wasn't audible outside that circle.
Three or four reporters hung on the rim.
"Now, go on back, you newspaper men and take your seats," the judge shouted, "this is not to be published."
Dr. Healy made little progress. Soon after Dr. Healy had spoken his unprintable testimony into the records he spoke of the forms of tests to which he put Leopold and Loeb.
"Now that stuff is all Greek to me," said Mr. Crowe. "I don't know what these tests are."
Leopold Made Record In Test.
"With the Monroe silent reading test, the time allowed is five minutes and I don't believe I ever saw any one answer all the questions correctly before," said Dr. Healy. "But Leopold answered all, and correctly, in three minutes and fifteen seconds."
The prodigy took more time with a series of questions proposing such errors as "silver is heavier than lead," said the witness, but made remarkable speed in tapping out squares on a cross-lined chart.
With the so-called "judgment test," including marks required to indicate whether it is an "astonishing statement, an absurd statement and so on," Loeb did "very well." He answered them in seven minutes, but made three of four mistakes.
Loeb did a cryptogram test, in which is allowed fifteen minutes for deciphering a sentence written in symbols, correctly in five minutes. That test required solving a symbol code before working out the sentences.
"In another test, the results were most interesting to me," said Dr. Healy, "because Loeb insisted on writing at great length to express himself and ran over the time limit to do it."
"If two negatives make an affirmative, why not say that two wrongs make a right?" was one question in that test, which Dr. Healy read as an example.
Loeb No Paper Cutter.
The only failure Loeb made was in the paper-cutting test, in which, said Dr. Healy, "one takes a sheet of paper, folds it in this fashion, then in that fashion, and cuts it, the test being to determine whether the examined person can visualize what the result of the cutting is going to be."
Then a test with a three-inch cube, painted differently on different sides. The problem is to tell how many one-inch cubes are contained in the large one and what color each side of each one-inch cube would be if the larger one were divided that way. Loeb solved the problem in a minute.
"How many cubes would there be?" Mr. Crowe asked. "Twenty-seven," said Dr. Healy.
Loeb's mind functioned so rapidly in these tests, said Dr. Healy, that frequently he conceived his answers in several forms at once.
"The words came to his mind so rapidly that he had half a dozen words ready at once. It was a most remarkable display."
Once in the tests, Loeb said, "he was 'all upset,'" which, said Dr. Healy, was the only show of emotion he gave under examination.
On a judgement test, Loeb scored only 56½ out of a possible 100. "That was very poor indeed," said Dr. Healy. "In fact, that is the average score for 10 or 12 year old boys."
Leopold's development of a memory system amazed Dr. Healy. Nathan exhibited his skill by memorizing in a trice a list of twenty words set down by some other person. "He took each word and place it, visually, in one room in his home," said the doctor. "Then he could recall it at will. Very remarkable. He enjoys nothing quite so much as his great mental activities."
Hates Social Obligations.
Young Nathan's personality, as Dr. Healy described it, is characterized by restless energy, physical and mental love of argument, extreme egoism, rebellion against social and religious obligations.
Mr. Crowe wanted to know how Leopold exhibited his ego during the doctor's examination, but Mr. Darrow objected and the witness was permitted to go on talking from the order of his notes.
"He is very punctilous," Dr. Healy continued. "He insists on other persons keeping appointments sharp on the hour and he does that himself.
"Years ago, his father said, he argued at great length on the ethical ideals of other persons. He always has been intolerant of others and their views.
"It is particularly clear that he is melodramatic abut this whole situation. He likes playing a part. He said to me, 'It's very much like a drama.'"
One attitude of Leopold's that struck Dr. healy forcibly, he said, was that a boy reared in luxury should find so little to disgust him in the county jail.
"I found nothing to evidence normal emotional reactions in his conduct in jail," said the witness.
Leopold has been so willing to "throw away his remarkably fine chances" that Dr. Healy is convinced there is some serious impairment of this boy's judgment.
"This conception of himself as a superior being is very apparently the reason for his being so destructive of his own career." A "superman on the theory of Nietzsche," Leopold, even in jail, is "a Napoleon on St. Helena." More important that preserving his life is preservation of his dignity.
Wants to Try Spiritualist Test.
"If he should die on the gallows after this trial Leopold wishes to make a last speech to the world," said Dr. Healy. "He has planned to prepare a list of ten 'world riddles,' which he would hope to solve after death."
Dr. Healy, like Dr. White, took up Leopold's "king and slave" fantasy. Nathan discussed it freely with the specialists, the witness said, as a favorite and lasting dream.
"All through these dreams there are continual croppings-up of suffering or of causing some one to suffer," said Dr. Healy.
While experiencing these dreams, said the witness, Leopold would sometimes lie on a couch, voluntarily seeking the thrill in his world of fantasy.
"Other boys got over such boyhood dreams, but this boy carried them along as he outgrew childhood," said Dr. Healy. "Nathan kept looking about him for boys who would fit into his dream of king and slave. Loeb entered his dreams a few years ago. Nathan told many persons of his admiration for Loeb. he was continually putting him on a pedastal."
Dr. Healy switched to another strange attitude of Leopold's mental activities these days he is on trial fo rhis life, lengthy quotations from poems that he feels applies to him.
"Just the other day in teh courtroom he passed me a sheet-and-a-half-long quotation from a poem by Lawrence Hope," said the doctor. "He is able to quote remarkably, and that is a strange manifestation of his mental processes."
Nathan exerted himself to destroy affection for his family and, said Dr. Healy, gradually he accomplished that. The boy developed into his notion of the superman.
Dr. Healy produced a letter, written last October 10 to Richard Loeb by Nathan, who was that day a passenger on the Twentieth Century Limited. Dr. Healy started to descirbe the characteristics of the note and Mr. Crowe asked that the letter be read. Dr. Healy went through it.
It was the letter printed in the newspapers the time of the boys' confession, a lengthy explanation of Nathan's side to a quarrel between the chums a day or two before.
Nathan requested a reply to his letter by a telegram to him in New York in which Loeb was to say whether he wished their friendship to continue. With that request, the tone of the letter changed suddenly to a discussion of Leopold's superman, a being answerable only to himself whose only possible crime was "to make a mistake." The letter was signed "Babe."
"And much to this same point is the story that Leopold got up in law class at the University of Chicago and proposed that laws are not applicable to the superman," said the doctor.
"In boyhood, Leopold's notions of superiority saved him embarrassments, especially when as a lad he went to a private school, where most of the pupils are girls. He felt then, said Dr. Healy, speaking from what Nathan had told him, so well above his surroundings that "he was astonished at his own success."
As for contemplating the crime of murder, "he told me that making up his mind whether to commit murder was the same as making up his mind whether to have pie for supper," said Dr. Healy. "The question was whether it would give him pleasure."
[End of news article]
|
|
Page compiled: 6 June 1997
|
|
|
