On about the 15th or 16th of April, 1931, Bob had a conversation with Alma and after that conversation telephoned Dr. Thomas J. Ney at his office, 7110 Stony Island avenue, Chicago. That the same night he went to Ney’s office. Bob said that he had talked first with Mabel Boggs, Ney’s nurse. Ney then came in. Bob, giving his own name as Robert Webster, told Ney that sister was pregnant, that he understood Ney took care of abortion cases, and that he would like to have him take care of this case. Ney said he charged $50 for taking care of such cases and told Bob to bring her up any time. That's nearly $1,000 in 2023 dollars.
Was Bob paying any attention to the news? If so, he would have known that the abortionist he'd chosen for his fiancée was out on bail pending his trial for the 1928 abortion death of Eunice McElroy. Evidently nobody was keeping an eye on Ney, and he was left free to ply his deadly trade.
Dr. Thomas Ney |
Bob paid him in cash and asked for a receipt; Ney said he would give him a receipt after he got finished, but Bob never got that receipt.
Bob remained in the reception room while Ney, Mabel Boggs and Alma were in the private office. In about ten minutes the three came out. Bob and Alma went back to Ney’s office on five consecutive nights after that; and several additional times at Ney’s request.
Ney did not come but Mabel Boggs did. Bob did not see Mabel do anything. He called Ney the next day and Ney and Mabel arrived together and went into Alma’s room. Bob said that he was not in the room all the time that Ney and Mabel were there. Before Ney and his nurse left, Bob asked if Alma was was all right, and Ney said she would be all right and not to worry.
Bob called Ney the next day and told him that Alma did not seem to be getting any better, so Bob wanted to call in another doctor. Ney said not to do that — that he would come and bring another doctor with him. Ney came that night, bringing Dr. William White. Both doctors went into Alma’s room without Bob. Dr. White said that Alma was pretty sick and that they had “better send her to a hospital right away.” Ney agreed, and said “if anyone should ask us any questions, tell them nothing.” He told Bob absolutely not to mention that any instrument had been used at all.
Katherine also said that while they were in the room she listened through the door and heard Alma screaming. Somebody said that they were recommending a doctor from St. Luke’s Hospital and she had to go there, that this doctor was a “cracker-jack” and would pull her out of her condition. She heard the same voice add that they should not say a word to anybody who sent them over there and who treated her or anything.
Katherine asked Ney who he was, and he identified himself as Dr. Snyder. About twenty minutes after Ney and White left, the doctor from St. Luke’s came. Katherine saw Alma being removed. She added that she looked at Alma’s bed been and the bed clothes were soaked with blood.
Carlisle said that Dr. White told him over the phone that his patient had some serious complication of appendicitis. There were no doctors with Alma when Carlisle arrived at her room. He examined her and found her in a stuporous condition, with a markedly distended and tense abdomen. There were blood-stained cloths around her vulva and vagina and stains on the bed clothes. Her temperature was 102 and pulse rapid. Carlisle said that in his opinion Alma was not then suffering from acute appendicitis but that the distended condition of the abdomen at that time was due to generalized peritonitis. He had her sent immediately to the Cook County Hospital.
Dr. Edwin J. DeCosta, resident physician at the Cook County Hospital attending in obstetrics, testified that he examined Alma there. She was acutely ill — practically “in extremis” at the time. Her abdomen was distended, peristaltics were absent and she had free blood inside her abdominal cavity. Her pulse about 141 and her temperature 107. In short, she presented the findings of a generalized peritonitis. DeCosta he examined the vagina, which had a small amount of blood, and that the opening to the womb was dilated.
All efforts to save Alma were in vain. She died on April 25.
Her uterus was markedly enlarged and the cervix was open and very soft, The upper area of the interior of the uterus had placental tissues that had a very foul odor. When Levinson cut into the uterine muscle and applied pressure to it there was free blood and a dirty-looking exudate came out. He was able to press blood out of the fallopian tubes; and when he cut into the ovary there was a large corpus luteum, with several luteum cells surrounding it. The ovary itself was filled with pus cells, showing infection of the ovary as well as of the uterus and tubes.
Levinson preserved the uterus, fallopian tubes and ovaries in a jar and noted that the uterus indicated from its enlargement a pregnancy of three to four months. The upper part of the cervix had signs of instrumentation.
Levinson took tissues of the uterus, fallopian tubes and ovary to make microscopic tests. The section from the uterus showed the wall of the uterus was markedly thickened, and distributed throughout the entire surface of the uterus was pus. The inner lining of the uterus, containing evidence of residual cells, fibers and blood, indicated microscopically placental tissues. The section from the fallopian tubes was covered with pus, indicating an infection of the tubes. The section from the ovary showed large groups of luteum and the ovary itself was filled with pus.
He concluded that Alma had been pregnant; that she had a septic condition of the uterus and that she died of a purulent peritonitis, resulting from the pus going out of the uterus through the tubes into the abdominal cavity and the pus infection getting into the blood stream, producing a septic condition which caused the degenerative changes of the heart muscle and liver and produced an acute septic spleen.
On Trial
Ney’s trial took place while he was dragging out three years of continuances pending his trial for the 1928 abortion of Eunice McElroy.
Ney did not take the stand during the trial. The only witnesses called by the defense were Mabel Boggs and Dr. White.
Mabel Boggs testified that she was a practical nurse and had worked for Ney from June, 1930, to the first part of May, 1931. She had seen Alma at the office of Ney. Bob had been with her the first and second times she came. The next time Boggs saw Alma, she said, was when Ney sent her to Alma’s home. Boggs said that she gave Alma an enema; and that while the enema was being given Bob was in the room next door. Boggs said that she talked to Berry after giving it, saying to him that it looked like appendicitis. She said that Bob said that Alma had chronic appendicitis.Dr. White testified that he visited Alma at the request of Ney, who told him that she was turning yellow and he was not sure of the diagnosis of the case. White examined her at her room and found her to be suffering from peritonitis and in a serious condition Her pulse was racing at about 152 and her temperature 102.8. He recommended that she be taken to a hospital. Bob, who had introduced Alma as his wife, wanted her sent to St. Luke’s Hospital. White recommended Dr. Carlisle.
White said that he made no vaginal examination and saw no blood, but did notice that Alma’s abdomen was greatly distended. Alma was conscious all the time he was there. He also said that when he went outside he found Katherine Kolb going from door to door trying to block the passage of White and Ney. White told her the case was not to be discussed with strangers.
Ney was convicted in Alma’s death after a belated trial that had been delayed by 25 continuances. Though the state had sought the death penalty, Ney was merely sentenced to 15 years.
The first contention of Ney on appeal was that he was inadequately defended. The appellate judge ruled, "Assuming this to be the case, it does not follow that he can for that reason call upon this court to reverse the judgment. His defense was conducted by counsel of his own choosing."
Ney summarized the alleged shortcomings of counsel at the trial by saying that said counsel “did not object to the conduct of the court in examining in chief at great length the witnesses for the prosecution and cross-examining witnesses for the defense; did not object to the repeated and unnecessary repetition by the court of culpatory evidence by the prosecution after it had been brought out by the court; did not object to the court’s taking charge of and conducting the prosecution, and did not object to the court’s lecturing witnesses and counsel for the defense and using the pronoun ‘we’ therein when and where the pronoun ‘we’ could refer only to the prosecution.”
The judgment of the criminal court was affirmed.
Sources:
No comments:
Post a Comment