On a drizzly Sunday, April 22, Bloody Work had its first official day of shooting in downtown Austin, in a parking lot at the corner of 3rd and Brazos. Not exactly the most glamorous location, but in 1885, it was the location of the home of Dr. Johnson, his family, and his cook, Eliza Shelley, who lived in a little house behind the main house. And that's where she became the Servant Girl Annihilators' third victim on the night of August 30.

With the aid of sound man extraordinaire Peter Heitman, I shot about an hour of Jeanine Plummer giving us some basic information about Eliza's murder, the discovery of the body the next morning by Dr. Johnson's niece, and some salient points about the crime scene. Jeanine was a lot more nervous in front of the camera than she thought she'd be, but I was able to coach her and nudge her into her comfort zone, where she could get through her spiel without stumbling over her words too badly. Shooting this was, as she said, very different from what she's used to as a tour guide. Being directed on film (well, HD, actually) was nerve-wrackingly new to her. But she said she enjoyed the experience a lot and was looking forward to future shoots, when we plan to go to other crime scene locations around the city.

The only potential clusterfuck occured when Peter called early in the morning to announce that his microphone of choice, a nice little battery powered body mike, had been broken by the last bozo he loaned it to. If we were to get any good sound, he'd need an AC outlet. It was either that, or use a hand held mike, and I didn't want Jeanine standing there holding a mike and looking like a CNN reporter. Already downtown, I did a little hurried scouting and persuaded the manager of a swell little shop on Congress, Tesoros Trading Co., to let us run our 100' extension cord out the back door and into the parking lot. As a result, Peter captured Jeanine's voice to perfection. Hooray! So if you're in Austin and looking for a knick-knack place to blow your money at, do stop by Tesoros. They're the movie's first official "Special Thanks" recipient!

In all, a modest but, I thought, auspicious start to production. Very eager to get the rest of it in the can now!

Had a most illuminating first meeting with one of my proposed interviewees, Jeanine Plummer, who conducts the Servant Girl Annihilator tour here in Austin, walking through the murder sites. Jeanine and I had a really nice walk-n-talk for about two and a half hours through Austin's historic Oakwood Cemetery. Saw the headstone of Rebecca Ramey, the mother of 11-year-old SGA victim Mary Ramey, plus some others of folks associated with the crimes.

It was a perfect day (overcast) for walking through an old graveyard, and it really put me in the zone mentally for thinking about the crimes and this film.

Jeanine and I have differing opinions on the killers. She seems to think it was one man all along. And while I'm leaning towards two killers in at least some of the crimes for various reasons, she did present me with an entirely plausible scenario for one person pulling off the Mollie Smith murder, which you can read about in preceding blog posts.

This is one of the great things about doing a documentary: your interviewees will send you off on new research directions, and new approaches to telling your story. I'm now considering including both the one-killer and two-killers scenarios as possibilities in the movie. (Again, as we have no hard facts to go on for any of these killings, this is entirely legitimate from a narrative point of view.)

I think it will be something that can only give the movie more depth and heighten the sense of mystery about the crimes, maybe spurring viewers on to their own researches.

Anyway, Jeanine was very excited and completely supportive of the project. Hopefully she'll be ready to do a sit-down interview sometime in the next few weeks. She suggested a couple of her assistants to go out with me to shoot additional footage at the murder sites.

So things are moving ahead. I haven't had much time to post new newspaper items to the blog, but I'll start doing some more of that over the next couple of weeks.

Remember, those of you who want to follow the course of Austin's year of terror, 1885, subscribe to my blog now so you don't miss a single newspaper article, as we follow the Bloody Work of the Servant Girl Annihilators to its grisly, gore-soaked conclusion.

AUSTIN DAILY STATESMAN, January 6, 1885

Saturday night last, the jury of inquest impanelled to investigate killing of the colored woman, Mollie Smith, on the night of the 30th of December, brought in their verdict. The verdict shows that neither court nor jury has any more knowledge of the true circumstances of the crime than outsiders. It is as follows: "We, the jury of inquest over the remains of Mollie Smith, find that she came to her death between ten o'clock p. m. on the night of December 30, and three a. m. of the 31st, in Austin, Texas, from injuries on her head inflicted with an ax, and we believe that said injuries were inflicted by one Lem, alias William Brooks.

(Signed)

W. W. PACE,

ISAAC SUARES,

ROBT. HATCH,

R. S. CAPERTON,

THOS. WAMSLEY,

R. M. SOJOURNER.

It will be seen that the verdict expresses the belief of the jury that Brooks committed the crime.

Though debarred the right of publishing the testimony envoked from witnesses before this most secret and august tribunal, the readers of The Statesman are assured that all the important points have already been presented to the public through the medium of its columns. The verdict is a mere expression of opinion -- nothing more. It sheds no new light on the murder -- reveals nothing that tends in the slightest degree toward clearing up the mystery. It is needless to repeat the details of this bloody business. But those readers who have kept track of it will be very slow to accept the verdict as conclusive against Brooks. He may be the guilty murderer, but if any reliance is to be placed in the statement made by numerous parties who were with him the night of the ball, it ought not to be a difficult matter for him to show up an alibi. But as his preliminary trial will shortly take place, all further comment is withheld until then.

Commentary: The paper was right, of course, to be critical (and even sarcastic -- "most secret and august tribunal" indeed!) towards the inquest. As we will see, they were hopelessly wrong, and the fun in Austin was only just beginning.

By the 1/8/1885 Statesman, the articles were thinning about Mollie Smith's murder, with only this little notice appearing:

Walter Spencer, the man who was severely wounded in the late mysterious tragedy, continues to improve.

On the 17th, they reported:

The negro man, Walter Spencer, who was so severely hurt at the time of the murder of the colored woman on Pecan street, is recovering from his injuries. But he is still unable to say who was the midnight assassin.

The paper began to turn its attention to another current crime problem, the prevalence of thieves and con men bilking folks out of their money, usually in dishonestly run gambling dens. The 1/11 paper has this awesome little remark you'd never see in a newspaper today: "The city is full of thieves: if caught in the act, a shot-gun is a fine remedial agent." That's the paper itself, not a letter to the editor!

Poor Lem Brooks just couldn't catch a break. On 1/25, the paper has this:

The horrible homicide that occured on Pecan street on the night of the 30th of December last, is still a mystery. The negro, Brooks, now in jail, charged with the murder, will have an examining trial to-morrow.

-------

The jury of inquest investigating the recent killing of the colored woman on Pecan street is still at work, with closed doors. The law provides that inquests may be privately conducted, but there is not one case in ten thousand where secrecy is necessary. As before stated, criminals don't wait to read the papers to find out whether they are suspected. On the contrary, the publication of every detail of a criminal transaction has often led to the arrest of guilty parties. That a mystery surrounds the murder of Mollie Smith is readily admitted. The effort to make it still more mysterious by excluding everybody from the inquest is probably well meant, but it don't facilitate the ends of justice one iota.

Walter Spencer, the other occupant of the room at the time of the killing, who also received facial injuries, is still alive. It is now thought he will recover. His statement that he don't know anything is reasonable enough, since the first blow may have knocked him insensible. The idea that he was first struck, while sleeping, by the woman, and afterwards killed her, is not generally entertained, though this theory has been advanced. Dr. J. W. Burt told a reporter yesterday that Spencer's wounds were not produced by an ax. He was struck by some sharp pointed instrument -- a rock or piece of iron probably.

The house where the ball took place on the same night with the tragedy, was visited by a reporter yesterday. The colored woman living there stated that Brooks, now in jail on suspicion, "called the figures" until the dance broke up at a quarter to 2 o'clock. Other parties on the place stated that Brooks was there from about 9 until the affair was over. The exact time that the murder took place is not known, though it was some time between three and four o'clock when Walter Spencer woke Mr. Chalmers up and told him that somebody had tried to kill him, and that Mollie was missing. Did Brooks do it? The circumstances seem to favor his innocence. If he staid at the ball till nearly 3 o'clock, he could hardly have been the man, unless he went a distance of about two miles at almost lightning speed. The ball was held away out on East Bois d'Arc, only a little way from the Tillotson Institute. The killing occurred in the western part of the city, full two miles away. This question of time may yet prove an important element in the case. There was no blood on his clothing when arrested, though he had time sufficient to have made a change.

But as yet there than be nothing but conjecture in this strange and horrible occurrence. The mystery that surrounds it would afford a fine opportunity for the shrewdest detective work, and the man that unveils it, and discloses the doer of the damnable deed will receive extended commendation.

-------

Commentary: So, not a whole lot new here, as the inquest was still closed. This report mostly recaps what we've already read and tries to fill the public appetite for new information with a lot of speculation, much of which admittedly sounds pretty sensible. You will have noticed journalistic standards of the day were not beholden to such concepts as objectivity and a cold recital of facts. The reporter here openly editorializes, particularly about the paper's chagrin at being shut out of the inquest. It's this kind of writing that makes 1880's newspapers such a fun read. (Also, that use of the word "don't" where they should have used "doesn't" -- yep, that's in the original. lol)

Things are looking pretty good, alibi-wise, for Lem Brooks. But as we will see, the inquest isn't so sure.

Amusing footnote: Here are a handful of actual ads that appeared in the paper at this time. Many of these are just printed as regular copy, and not that distinguishable from actual articles.

Smoke the Mardi Gras cigars.
Gentlemen whose beards are not of the tint which they desire, can remedy the defect by using Buckingham's dye for the whiskers.
Buy the Indian Territory coal of Mattingley and Co. at $8.50 per ton one ton better than two of cannel or Rio Grande or Pecos coal. Don't be humbugged.
Do not delay, but go to A. Alexander's at once and look at his bargains.

And, seriously, more snake oil cures and patent remedies than you can shake a stick at.

In the account given in yesterday's STATESMAN of the late killing on Pecan street, an incident was omitted that may help to solve the mystery that still surrounds the case. An ax, with blood stains, was found next morning near the bed. It was no doubt the instrument of the murder. When Spencer aroused Mr. Chalmers, he told him that he had been hit with an ax. This ax may turn out to be the chief means in finding out the guilty party. There was no ax belonging on the place. Chalmers asserts that the family did not possess an ax. Spencer had borrowed one a short while ago for some temporary use. Then it follows that whoever used it brought it there for that very purpose. This instrument of the murder may thus

All of yesterday was consumed in the hearing of witnesses summoned before the jury of inquest. The inquest was held with closed doors. Justice Von Rosenberg refused to give over the testimony for publication, saying that it was a private investigation, and intimating that its publication might facilitate the escape of the guilty party. A wise idea that criminals don't wait to read the newspapers to see if they are suspected. Ninety nine men have been caught through the agency of newspapers where one has got away. It is only in very rare cases that there is any need for secrecy of this sort. But in regard to this particular case the public is fully as well informed as the officials. No new developments have arisen implicating anyone else in the murder. Brooks is still in jail. If his story that he remained till four o'clock at the ball on Sand Hill be true then

The impression among a large number of the colored people is that the crime rests on Brooks. Others believe in his innocence, but very few, if any, think that Spencer was the murderer. It has passed into a proverb that "murder will out." It is hoped the saying will come true in this instance, that justice maybe executed upon the inhuman slayer of the unfortunate woman.

--------

Commentary: Interesting use of wordage there to refer to Spencer as the "murdered man" when of course he was still alive. You find a lot of strange and often melodramatic prose in the journalism of the late 19th century.

My opinion is that Spencer was flat lying about his alleged feud with Lem Brooks. Brooks' alibi that he was at the New Year's ball at the time of the murder is pretty damn strong. Perhaps Spencer had some lingering jealousy about Brooks' past affair with Mollie, and, though he couldn't prove it, thought that the murder was either the kind of thing Brooks was likely to do, or Spencer was simply was so distraught over Mollie's murder that he reflexively blamed the ex-boyfriend. And hey, if it helped to tie Brooks' noose to make up a story about a feud and a fight challenge, what the hell. Still, my approach to the documentary will be to avoid injecting too much speculation and stick to the known facts, so the audience draw their own conclusions. I'll leave the editorializing to this blog. :)

It's generally thought that this crime has all the earmarks of two assailants.

You have Spencer and Mollie sleeping together. Spencer says he was struck with an axe, but remember he was asleep at the time, so he couldn't have known what hit him, and it appears the first blow was immediately so massive it laid him out cold and nearly claimed one of his eyes. Also, as we will read in the next day's article, a doctor testified that Spencer was not struck with an axe, but some other kind of blunt instrument. So we now have at least two weapons that we know of, the axe left at the crime scene and whatever it was that bashed in Spencer's face.

This leads one to conclude two perps. Even if Mollie Smith were one hell of a heavy sleeper, you'd think that someone bashing in your boyfriend's face while he sleeps next to you would cause enough noise to wake you up and send you running from the room screaming at the top of your lungs, or at least, give you enough time to get one good piercing scream out before you were attacked yourself. As the first article notes, no one heard a thing, even though there was at least one other person sleeping in another room nearby.

So Mollie would have had to have been assaulted at the same moment as Spencer. One assailant could not carry two weapons as well as drag a desperately struggling woman (who was no stranger to violent exchanges with men) out of her bedroom and out into the yard fifty paces, covering her mouth to stifle her screaming while doing so.

It's interesting to see, early on, the poor level of thinking that went into the detective work here, which would taint every investigation throughout the coming year. The habit of focusing on one or two obvious and narrowly defined suspects, while being unwilling or incapable to think outside the box (two killers, gee whiz!) would enable the Servant Girl Annihilators to maintain their reign of terror for an entire year!

AUSTIN DAILY STATESMAN, January 1, 1885

At a late hour Tuesday night there occurred one of the most horrible murders that ever a reporter was called on to chronicle -- a deed almost unparallelled in the atrocity of its execution. It happened on the premises of Mr. W. K. Hall, an insurance man lately from Galveston, residing at 901, West Pecan, abut a block beyond the iron bridge that spans Shoal creek. A colored woman named Mollie Smith, had been in the service of the family as a cook for a little over a month. A young colored fellow named Walter Spencer, has been coming to see her for some months, and the couple, though not married, were lately living in the relation of man and wife. Between 3 and 4 o'clock Wednesday morning Mr. Thos. Chalmers, a brother of Mrs. Hall, was aroused from sleep by the entrance of Spencer. He was bleeding freely from several wounds on the head, and said, "Mr. Tom, for God's sake do something to help me; somebody has

Young Chalmers at once sprang up, and striking a light, saw that the negro was badly hurt. He could tell nothing of the occurrence and did not know who hit him. He and the woman above mentioned had been occupying a small apartment in the rear of the house, just back of the kitchen. He remarked that Mollie was gone. Chalmers told him to go to the doctor's and get his wounds dressed. He couldn't leave the house to go with him, owing to the sickness of one fo the inmates. Spencer then went away. At breakfast time yesterday morning Mollie was missing, but even then nobody was aware of her terrible fate. It was, perhaps, about 9 o'clock a.m. when a servant in the employ of a neighbor observed a strange looking object in the backyard of the Hall residence. He at once reported the matter and several hurried to the spot. There lay the woman,

[Some illegible sentences due to a big tear. We pick up very quickly with the reporter (writing about himself in the third person) describing his own viewing of the crime scene.]

...repaired to the scene...[missing]...He was first shown the [woman's body] lying in the yard, but a brief glance at the sickening sight was sufficient. She was a light-colored mulatto, apparently about twenty-five years of age. A distinct trail on the ground leading to her door showed where the inhuman fiend had dragged her. She was nearly nude when first discovered. Inside the room there were evidences of a desperate struggle. A broken looking glass, disarranged furniture, and bloody finger marks on the door showed that a fight for life, silent, and unseen save by the principals, but obstinate to the end, had taken place. The pillows and sheets were

Going to the house where Brooks said he went after leaving the ball, in an alley back of Dr. Wright's church, the reporter asked of the colored woman living there at what hour Brooks came in. Between 2 and 3 o'clock in the night, she answered. Are you certain of that, was asked. Yes sir, I am, because after he had come in and slept awhile, I woke up and happening to look at the clock noticed it was just three. It will be remembered that Brooks said it was 4 o'clock when he left the ball, and as the place was fully a mile and a half distant, it would have been at least twenty minutes past four ere he got to his room, had he gone directly home. A number of negroes, however, stated that he stayed through the dance, and it maybe the colored woman was mistaken about the hour.

The wounded man was next called on. He was in a pittiable plight, but was able to speak, though with a somewhat indistinct utterance. There were five facial hurts -- the most serious one being a puncture under the eye, fracturing the orbital bone. Dr. Hart, the city physician, had found a part of the bone pressed back into the cavity against the eye-ball, and had pulled it forward into place. Though badly hurt, the doctor thinks the chances of recovery are favorable. His statement was made in a clear way, as follows:

"It was some time between 9 and 10 o'clock Tuesday night that I went to Mollie's room. She complained of being sick, and asked me if I wasn't sorry for her. She also told me to wake her up early the next morning. I don't remember anything else that happened till I woke and found myself hurt. I don't know who did it, but it wasn't Mollie. I thought somebody had killed me. Mollie was not in the room and I never saw her any more. I went round in front of the house, woke Mr. Chalmers, and told him what had happened. He told me to go to the doctor. I went out the back way and noticed that the gate was wide open, though I recollected having fastened it. I first went to the house of a colored man living near and he gave me a coat. Then I went to see Dr. Ralph Steiner, who washed and dressed my wound. I then went back to Mr. Hall's, and found the front gate open; then I started up town but was so weak that I fell down several times before getting to my brother's restaurant on Brazos street near Newton's saloon. It was about six o'clock in the morning when I got there, and he had me taken home in a hack. I have not quarreled with any body but Brooks. Some three months ago he wanted to fight me. He had stayed with Mollie in Waco. But I don't say that he was the one. I don't know who did it, but any body could have got into the room easily through the door connecting it with the kitchen.

These are about the facts, and the reader is left todraw his own conclusions. Whether slain by her lover or some party from the outside is as yet a mystery that envelops as foul a deed as was ever done in Austin.

-----

More to come, and some commentary by me as we delve deeper into the mystery....