Dr. Mary’s Monkey Read online

  Again single, Mary moved to New Orleans in 1952, and took up residence on historic St. Charles Avenue, near the corner of Louisiana Avenue. There she lived until her death in 1964, juggling her jobs at Tulane and Ochsner’s, doing surgery at Charity Hospital, and working on the medical staff of several children’s hospitals. But as doctors went, she was always more comfortable in a laboratory than an operating room.

  Mary’s career prospered. One of the clear marks of professional success for an orthopedic surgeon is to be elected to the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons. It takes years, if not decades. Some never make it. Once in the academy, the ladder continues. The bright stars get put on Committees which make the rules about science and ethics. They establish what is acceptable and who is accepted. The brightest of the stars chair these Committees. One of the most prestigious is the Pathology Committee, which reviews the state of the art on disease itself, particularly bone cancers.

  Mary Sherman was Chairman of the Pathology Committee of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons. Her position took her around the world. When the great wizards of medicine realized the very language which they used to describe and categorize cancers of the bone and soft tissue needed to be re-examined, they chose six of the nation’s leading experts to tackle the task, including Dr. Mary Sherman.5 When the front page of the newspaper had the sad task of announcing her death, it described her as “an internationally known bone specialist” whose main area of interest was “bone cancer treatment and research.”6

  So our question remains: What would motivate an accomplished medical professional to risk her reputation by getting involved in an underground medical laboratory with a violent political zealot owning a criminal record of sexual misconduct and with no medical credentials? Was she led there by her own ambition? Was there a dark side to her concealed from public view? Was she simply manipulated by more powerful forces? Or was there a medical problem brewing that was so serious that it was worth the risk?

  The Press Reports

  IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DESCRIBE THE DEATH of Dr. Sherman without appearing both sensational and mysterious. This is because it was a sensational event, and much of it is still shrouded in mystery.

  For nearly thirty years, the only information the world would see concerning her murder were articles published by two New Orleans newspapers, the New Orleans States-Item and the Times-Picayune.

  Both papers covered the story for several weeks with overlapping reports and language, each with a slightly different editorial perspective. The coverage began with a banner headline on the front page on July 21, 1964. The States-Item announced:

  Orleans Woman Surgeon Slain by Intruder; Body Set Afire

  Clues Lacking in Killing of Dr. Sherman

  The lead article read,

  An intruder forced his way into a fashionable St. Charles Ave. apartment early today, stabbed a prominent woman orthopedic surgeon to death and set fire to her body. Police apparently had virtually no clues to the identity of the slayer of Dr. Mary Stults Sherman ...

  The basic storyline went like this: At approximately four o’clock in the morning a neighbor smelled smoke and called the police. His name was Juan Valdez. The police checked the building and found one apartment filled with smoke. The police called the fire department. When the firefighters arrived, they removed a smoking mattress from the apartment. Within minutes the police searched the apartment and found the badly burned body of a woman that had been stabbed repeatedly. An investigator from the Coroner’s office arrived and checked the scene. Then the NOPD homicide team arrived. No murder weapon was found, but a large knife was missing from the knife rack in the kitchen. Her body was removed to the Coroner’s office, where it was identified by another doctor.

  The States-Item reported,

  Homicide detectives said the front door to her apartment had been forced open, her wallet was empty, and her 1961 automobile was missing ... Sam Moran, Special Investigator for the Orleans Parish Coroner’s office, said the front door had been forced open and an unsuccessful attempt had been made to open a jewelry box.

  Between the two papers, each of which ran three articles on their first day of coverage, the burglary motive was stated or referenced about twenty times, including several references to the fact that Dr. Sherman’s apartment had been burglarized before. The burglary angle is so strong that the NOPD precinct captain complained to the press about “the departmental manpower shortage” in response to criticisms of “inadequate police protection in the neighborhood.” It would not be until the next day, after a horrified city had literally millions of word-of-mouth discussions about the sensational murder/burglary, before the newspapers stated that the front door had not been forced open and her burglar alarm had been turned off. The press now reported that the homicide department, impressed by these facts, and the facts that “the intruder” knew which car belonged to Dr. Sherman and that a box full of jewelry which could have easily been carried off was left behind, ruled out burglary as a motive.

  The first-day coverage continued with the standard biographical information about education and employment. Additionally, we learn that Dr. Sherman was a widow living alone, that she loved flowers, that her neighbors described her as “wonderful” and “thoughtful,” and that her housekeeper said she was expecting a lady friend for a visit that evening.

  Both papers take time to describe an unusual painting hanging in her living room:

  The most striking thing about the living room, however, is a pastel painting hung in a prominent position. In the foreground of the painting is the fear-gripped face of a woman clutching her throat. A series of smaller sketches in the background depict a Roman warrior stabbing a woman with his sword.

  Deeper into this first-day coverage, we also learn that none of the neighbors, including those who were used to hearing even casual sounds from her apartment, heard a thing that night.

  Mrs. Levy [a neighbor who lived beneath Dr. Sherman for 12 years] ... usually heard Dr. Sherman when [she] came in at night, but last night she went to bed early and didn’t hear anything.... “If there had been a loud commotion, I know I would have heard it,” Mrs. Levy said. “The doctor was quiet, but I always heard her come in and take off her shoes, then padding around in her slippers. Sometimes I remarked to my husband, ‘Doc’s home again.’”

  That day Dr. Sherman had come home early and washed her hair. She was seen by the building maintenance man about 4:00 P.M., and was last seen by her housekeeper at 4:30 P.M.

  On the second press day the case was referred to as “a mutilation slaying,” to which NOPD Captain Stevens added, “Obviously some perverted mind was involved.” The police were looking for a psychopath, perhaps one of her patients. The newspapers reported a “mysterious telephone caller” who had called several of Dr. Sherman’s close friends to say, “You’re next.” The voice was male. Other developments were reported: Her car was found eight blocks away. A palm print was recovered from the car, but could not be identified. The car key was recovered from a neighboring lawn. Partial results of the autopsy leaked to the press: “Though Dr. Sherman’s body had been mutilated, there was no evidence that she had been raped.” Her body was held for ten days at the morgue and was then sent out of town for cremation.

  Having now ruled out burglary as a motive, homicide officers proceeded “on the presumption that the killer was an acquaintance of the fifty-one-year-old widow.” The press said, “Neighbors, relatives, and friends are being questioned, and police are ruling out no possibility as to the identity of the killer, the motive, or his method of entering the apartment.” Police told reporters they suspected “Everybody and nobody.” Over the next two weeks, “professional associates and social acquaintances” were interviewed by the police. The reported number grew to over 100 by August 3 and topped off at 150. On August 5, the Times-Picayune announced,

  No Leads Found in Slaying Case

  ... and dropped the story.

  The States-Item continued covera
ge with eight more articles. On August 11, the front page of the States-Item announced a press blackout by police:

  Information in Sherman Case Halted

  Information on the status of the police investigation of the mutilation-murder of Dr. Mary Stults Sherman was shut off today, as all questions on the probe were referred to Chief of Detectives Lawrence J. Cassanova, who is out of town.

  Police say questioning scores of the bone specialist’s professional associates and social acquaintances has turned up no lead to her killer.

  The following day the front page story explained:

  Blackout Continues On Murder

  Police say they have no clue on the murder ...

  Detective Chief Cassanova was still out of town, at a homicide seminar at LSU in Baton Rouge.

  An exasperated police department responded by presenting the newspaper with an “if-it’s-murders-you-want-it’s-murders-we’ve-got” portfolio of unsolved murders, four male and four female, which the States-Item published on August 15 under the headline:

  Medic Slaying Still Baffles N.O. Police:

  One in 10 Murders Unsolved.

  The papers had used a lot of colorful language to describe the murder:

  savage slaying gruesome slaying

  brutally slain charred and mutilated

  gruesome murder hacked to death

  grisly mutilation-murder partially burned body

  But it is only in two sentences from the last column of the last article that we find any detail of the fire itself, or of the burns to Mary Sherman’s body. We read,

  The murderer set fire to her bed and piled underclothing on her body, setting it afire. The fire smoldered for some time — long enough to denude an innerspring mattress and burn away the flesh from one of the doctor’s arms.

  This article also tells us that:

  Dr. Sherman had been away for two weeks prior to the weekend before the murder.

  This raises another question: “Where was she?” I am told she was in Boston. Why was she there?

  It would be nearly thirty years before anyone, other than the tight circle of people involved in the autopsy and the investigation, would know what the police and autopsy reports really said about Mary Sherman’s murder.

  Concurrent with the newspaper articles, rumors spread like influenced the public’s perception of Mary Sherman’s murder. By nine o’clock on the morning of the murder, the word had already spread throughout the offices of the New Orleans newspapers that there had been a lesbian sex killing in the uptown area. This is interesting, since the autopsy, which determined the cause of death and which discovered the laceration to her sexual organs, did not even begin until 9:15 A.M.7

  Six weeks after the murder, in early September 1964, I personally heard another rumor about a female orthopedic surgeon killed over the summer. The source of this was a teacher welcoming our class back from summer holiday. In his version, she had been murdered by Communists. This was a head-scratcher, even in 1964. “What is the world coming to?” he asked us.

  I couldn’t understand why the Communists would want to kill an orthopedic surgeon. And since my father was an orthopedic surgeon, I wondered if the Communists had any interest in killing him, too. While researching this book, I wrote that teacher a letter about his comments made decades ago. He remembered the incident, and talked about the doctor’s “dark side” and her association with “gay Mexicanos.” Such was the word-of-mouth on the streets of New Orleans in 1964.

  In 1992, I set out to get copies of the police reports. With the help of the NOPD item number (G-12994-64), I found them in the City Archives of the New Orleans Public Library. There were two reports. One was the Precinct Report, promptly written and filed by the street cops who first arrived at her apartment that July morning; the other was a Supplementary Report written by the Homicide Department months after the investigation had subsided. The Precinct Report was signed and approved by all parties. The Homicide Report was not. It was only signed by the officer who prepared it and was then filed without being co-signed or approved. I consider this violation of basic procedure extremely unusual for such a high-profile case.

  The Precinct Report

  FROM THE PRECINCT REPORT we get a straightforward view of the post-call events at the crime scene. The police arrived and were met by Juan Valdez, who told them he thought the smoke was coming through the ventilation ducts from another apartment. A search of the various apartments found the door to the patio of Apartment J ajar, and the sliding door entrance to the apartment open one to two inches. Inside, the living room was full of smoke. The police called the fire department. Valdez told the police it was Mary Sherman’s apartment, and brought them a wet towel to use as a gas mask, but they were unable to penetrate the smoke of the apartment. They waited for the fire department to arrive, and to remove the smoldering mattress using oxygen masks. When the smoke cleared, they found a body lying on the floor next to the bed. Their report said,

  The feet of the white female’s body was pointed towards the head of the bed ...

  Soon the coroner’s team and the homicide team arrived. The scene was photographed. Certain items were confiscated. The Assistant Coroner pronounced the body dead and made comments about the victim:

  A preliminary examination by Dr. LoCascio on the scene determined that there were several possible stab wounds of the left arm of the body, which had not been deteriorated by the fire There also appeared to be several stab wounds in the torso. There was also a large wound of the inside of the right thigh just above the knee. From further examination of the body, it was noted by the coroner that the right arm and a portion of the right side of the body extending from the right hip to the right shoulder was completely burned away exposing various vital organs.

  The body was removed from the apartment and taken to the Coroner’s office. The other residents in the building were all questioned. None heard anything between the time they retired and the time the police arrived, except one who heard Juan Valdez walking around his apartment before the police arrived.

  From Elmener Peterson, Mary’s housekeeper, police learned that the burglar alarm was in the “off” position, that Dr. Sherman was “expecting visitors from out of town,” and that she had laid out a polka dot dress, which they found lying on a chair in the bedroom. As to the issue of whether the intruder had forced the door open, the report says,

  The officers could find no signs of the door leading to the apartment patio or sliding glass door having been forced open.

  It is mentioned that the body was positively identified by Dr. Carolyn Talley, and that their police captain had summarized the results of the autopsy for them.

  The cause of death was also given to Patn. Knight by Capt. Stevens as follows: 1. Stab wound of the chest, penetrating the heart, hemopericardium and left hemithorax [sic] 2. Multiple stab wounds of the abdomen, with incid wound of the liver. 3. Multiple stab wounds of the left upper extremity and the right leg. 4. Laceration of Labia Minora. 5. Extreme burns of right side of body with complete destruction of right upper extremity and right side of thorax and abdomen.

  The Homicide Report

  NOW WE LOOK AT THE HOMICIDE REPORT, a baffling document written in two parts. The first half, covering the crime scene, was completed on October 29, 1964, approximately ten weeks after the police stopped their investigation. The second half was dated several days later, on November 3, 1964. The report should have been signed by both investigators, Detective Frank Hayward and Detective Robert Townsend, Jr., and their supervisor, Lt. James Kruebbe. But there is only one signature, that of Detective Robert Townsend, Jr. The extreme delay in preparing this report and this unusual violation of a basic procedure show that, for some reason, this was not an ordinary report. My guess is that it was not signed by his co-investigator and supervisor for a reason. Perhaps they refused to sign it in protest. Perhaps they filed it without signing it so they could say they never saw it. Perhaps Townsend filed it himself, just to put someth
ing in the file. Who knows? I tried to contact Townsend to find out, but he did not return the calls.

  This report begins with recounting the same events as the Precinct Report, except told from the perspective of the homicide team. As they arrived, they found the firemen cleaning up debris. They instructed them to stop and to leave all debris where they had placed it, so that the homicide team could inspect it and see what was being removed from the crime scene. (This is an important detail.) Then they described what they saw:

  The undersigned entered Apt. J. from the patio, the only entrance to said apartment, into the living room area. Said apartment was composed of a living room, kitchen, bathroom, study, and a bedroom.... Located in the bedroom, was the body of a white female, apparently dead, later learned to be one Dr. Mary Stults Sherman, WF, 51 yrs., formerly residing 3101 St. Charles Ave., Apt. J., who lived alone.... The body was in a supine position, the head in the direction of the river, the feet in the direction of the lake, and both legs were outstretched and parallel to each other... The left arm was outstretched and parallel to the left side of the body. The right side of the body from the waist to where the right shoulder would be, including the whole right arm, was apparently disintegrated from the fire, yielding the inside organs of the body. There was what appeared to be a stab wound in the left arm and also in the inner side of the right leg near the knee. The body was nude; however, there was clothing which had apparently been placed on top of the body, mostly covering the body from just above the pubic area to the neck. Some of the mentioned clothes had been burned completely, while others were still intact, but scorched.