Dr. Sam Sheppard Mystery Solved Through My Statement Analysis- Part Three [FINAL]

Undated File Photo: Dr. Sam Sheppard, Center, Whose Story Inspired The Popular Television Series And Movie 'The Fugitive,' Is Seen In This Undated File Photo. Proceedings Begin January 31, 2000 In The Wrongful Imprisonment Suit Against The State Of Ohio Filed By Sheppard's Son, Samuel Reese Sheppard, Jr. (Photo By Getty Images)

My comments are Bold and Italicized throughout the statement below. Interesting things said by the doctor are in RED.


At this point the statement would be marked as after the incident. 50% of the statement should be the actual incident. At this point we'd expect the statement to become more emotional because it is at this point the realization and the affect of his wife being murdered would be felt. As with other posts I will not mark all items that are normally marked during statement analysis for fear it would confuse those not familiar with the process- I will only mark sections that are interesting from a deception or guilt perspective.

A number came to me and I called, believing that this number was Mr. Houk's. I don't remember what I said to Mr. Houk. He and his wife arrived there shortly thereafter. During this period I paced back and forth somewhere in the house, relatively disoriented, not knowing what to do or where to turn. I think that I was seated at the kitchen table with my head on the table when they arrived but I may have gone into the den. I went into the den as I recall, either before or shortly after they arrived. The injury to my neck is the only severe pain that I can recall. I should say the discomfort in my neck. I didn't touch the back door on the road side to my recollection. Shortly after the Houks arrived, one of them poured half a glass of whisky as they knew where we kept a small supply of liquor and told me to drink it. I refused, since I was so groggy anyway, I was trying to recover my senses. I soon lay down on the floor. Mr. Houk and Mrs. Houk went upstairs, I am not sure of their actions. Mr. Houk called the police and the ambulance; this is in my recollection, and also my brother Richard. I am pretty sure that Mr. Houk called the police station from my study because he said "bring an ambulance"- correction - he referred to the need of an ambulance and maybe two. He also called my brother Richard. I remember my brother, Dr. Richard, speaking with me for a moment and looking at me. I believe Officer Drohnken spoke to me and asked how I had been injured. I can't recall my reply for sure. Soon thereafter I was on the floor trying to give my neck and head some support, when Dr. Stephen Sheppard examined me some time thereafter. Dr. Stephen Sheppard assisted me to his car, which I think was his station wagon, which as I recall, was just behind the Bay Village ambulance. I remember no other specific vehicles. I was transported to Bay View hospital.

I related some of the incidents to mayor Houk and one or more of the Bay Village police officers. Later in the morning I was questioned by Dr. Gerber and at another time by two officers of the Cleveland Police Department, Officers Schottke and Gareau. Later, I believe, later in the day, I was again interviewed by Officers Schottke and Gareau the presence of Chief Baton of the Bay Village Police Department. At this time I was asked to explain some things that I had no explanation for. I was shown a green bag; a green cloth bag looked like heavy cloth. I thought it was eight or ten inches long and five inches wide. I was asked to identify it. It looked to me like a bag that is used to carry motor boat tools. This was similar to the bag, if not the same bag, that accompanied my Johnson outboard motor vehicle I purchased it. I was also shown a watch that I identified as mine and questioned why there was blood on the band and crystal and why it had been found in this bag with some other articles in the weeds behind my house on the bank. I am not sure but I believe Officer Schottke said that there was also a ring and keychain, also in the bag but I don’t believe that he showed me these articles. I told him, as I recall, that I had attended stock car races two or three days previously with my wife, Otto Graham and his wife and I didn’t mention the children as I recall and was caught in a drenching rain, at which time I wore no coat or jacket but I don't think I explained this at that particular time. I since recall having inadvertently this at that particular time. I since recall having inadvertently water-skied with my watch on in the past few days and had noticed a great deal of moisture in the crystal. I had commented on this to my wife and some other people, I am not sure who. My wife planned to take the watch to Halle Brothers in the near future where she had purchased it.

A: I was subjected to a period of questioning, all of which I can’t recall at this time but was reminded of this morning and then the officers left.

Q: How long had you known your wife Marilyn?

A: Since we were in Junior High School, approximately fifteen years, or slightly more, in 1937 or 1938.

Q: From the time you met her until you were married, did you see one another quite frequently?

A: I would say yes, however, there was a period when she entered high school that I remained in Junior High School, that we saw each other very seldom for being sweethearts. In other words, we were not going together but still giving each other and liked each other…

Q: When did you first begin to keep steady company with her?

A: When we were in Junior High School, when she was in the ninth grade and I was in the eighth grade. She was a year and a half ahead of me in school. We had a so-called affair which, as I say, became inactive when she went to high school, but was revived when I reached high school and was able to assert myself. This continued throughout high school. She as I saw, was a mid-year but; she took extra courses in order to stay in high school until June of 1941. Some time during my sophomore year, I had joined a fraternity and Hi-Y and I offered her my Hi-Y pill and eventually my fraternity pin, which at that time signified going steady. During the following spring and summer she displayed the intent to have dates with other fellows. She was staying with her grandparents out at Mentor-on-the Lake. Early in the fall the following year, which was 1941, we resumed our former relationship. The following year I was a junior in high school and she went to Skidmore College. From that time on we considered ourselves engaged although it was not publicly announced und the fraternity pin was the only representation of this fact. This was a high school fraternity but a national organization and part of the laws of the fraternity insisted that only mothers, sisters and engaged sweethearts should wear the pin other than the active member himself. My freshman year in college, I joined a national college fraternity and she got that fraternity pin as soon as it was available.

Q: When and where were you married?

A: In 1945, I believe, February 21st, in Hollywood, California, First Methodist Church.

Q. Where did you take up residence after you were married?

A. In a small apartment on Sichel Street in Los Angeles.

Q. How long did you live there?

A. We lived there on that same street until the spring of 1951.

Q: During the time that you lived in California, did you and your wife, Marilyn have a misunderstanding whereby either one of you thought it best to part or separate?

A: During and following my wife's pregnancy up to approximately two years following the birth of the youngster, my wife became quite jealous. This was consistent with the termination of my didactic school work and the initiation of my work as a physician, which included contact with many women, both patients and fellow workers. This jealous reaction improved steadily until she became seemingly much more tolerant than I would consider the average female to be.

Q: Did she ever consult an attorney in reference to your domestic difficulties?

A. Not that I know of.

Q: Is it true that some members of your family communicated with her, asking her to be tolerant and reconsider her action?

A: Not that I know of, but I think that some members of her family, however, may have.

Q: Since your removal to the State of Ohio, what has been your home life?

A: Well, I considered it to be ideal in that she seemed to make it her business to be agreeable, tolerant and I should say, livable. Forever, there were times when this little jealous streak would show up but I would always reassure her and she seemed to need no further support.

Q: Did she ever directly or indirectly accuse you of having an affair with someone else?

A: She indirectly may have in questioning me about my whereabouts at various times and in the form of reassurance I often took her with me, when possible on visits to nearby cities or even the hospital.

'May have' is incorrect. She either did or did not question him. This is a sign he does not want to admit about her questioning.

Q: How would these inferences affect you?

A: Well they affected me in the direction of reassuring her what seemed to satisfy her and thereby produce a reversed action, whereby she would encourage me to be friendly with other women at social gatherings whereas at other times she might have resented the same action which she had encouraged before.

Q: Is it true, Doctor, that on several occasions when you were discussing your marital troubles, that you flew into a rage?

A: Absolutely not, never.

Absolutely is word that we always mark in statement analysis; it is a word that people use to 'prove' what the next thing they say is true- but what they say is suspect in our analysis. It is said to give emphasis to a denial or statement. Innocent people do not need to use words to plead for believability.

Q: Did you ever have an affair with a Sue Hayes?

A: I wouldn't call it an affair but we have been good friends for some time, which was known to my wife.

He is being asked a 'Yes' or 'No' question which he does not answer either yes or no; instead he gives a sentence where he can skirt directly answering the question by bending his definition of "an affair." It is also interesting that he admits that it was know to his wife, yet she only indirectly asked him questions concerning his whereabouts.

Q: Had she been employed at Bayview Hospital?

A: Yes. I don't know the exact dates. She was employed there when I initiated my work at the hospital and she terminated her work there some time last winter or early spring in 1953. She returned some time later in that year and terminated her work again at the hospital some time early in 1954. She went to California.

Q: In what capacity was she employed at the hospital?

A: Laboratory technician.

Q: While at work you had considerable contact with her didn't you?

A: Yes.

Q: To what extent?

A: She did a great deal of the technical laboratory work on all of the doctors' patients in the hospital and was the only technician practically that readily answered emergency calls on accidents or emergency surgical cases. I might also add that she was considered during her stay one of the authorities when special work was necessary.

Q: Is it true that you socialized a lot with her?

A: In the hospital, yes. I wouldn't call it socialized. We talked we became good friends.

Q: Nothing more than good friends?

A: No.

While it is a strong 'No' it is interesting that he admits to something in other places. Once again he is bending his definition of friends.

Q: What was the occasion for you purchasing a wrist watch for her?

A: She was in California at the time. I was there in March of 1954 and I had asked her with some of her friends to accompany me with a group of doctors and wives to a dinner, at which time or during the evening she lost her wrist watch. I paid the check for the dinner which, incidentally amounted to more than the wrist watch was worth and knowing this she could not afford to purchase another one, I purchased one for her which was consistent with the one that she had lost, in price range.

Q: Did your wife Marilyn know that you were contemplating purchasing this wrist watch or did she know immediately thereafter?

A: My wife didn't know of this until in casually discussing the trip some time during our trip home, that is, me and my wife, or after we had reached home shortly, at which time she became some what upset, failing to understand the intent. I wish to add, I told her of this voluntarily.

Q. Do you own a Jaguar Sport car?

A: Yes.

Q: Where did you purchase it?

A: I purchased it from M.G. Motors, which was at that time located on Lorain Road and has since been moved to Detroit Road.

Q: Do you recall the salesman name that negotiated the transaction?

A.: The only real salesman is the boss and that is Mr. Robert Lossman.

Q: Did you have occasion to meet his wife, Julle Lossman?

A: I took care of her as a patient about a year and a half ago when they were involved in an accident.

Q: Did you become very well acquainted with her?

A: As a doctor-patient relationship, yes.

Q: Now, is it true that a very close friendship resulted from this meeting?

A: I would say a close friendship with both the husband and the wife.

Q: Isn't it a fact that it developed into a love affair?

A. No, not on my part certainly.

As you will see from the below line of questioning that once again he is bending his definition of 'love affair' and perhaps this answer was 'true' because he never felt love on his part.

Q: Of your own knowledge, do you know whether or not there had been a discussion between Mrs. Lossman and her husband and you and your wife Marilyn that there had been such an affair existing between you and Mrs. Lossman?

A: That is difficult to answer. My wife and I were present at a time when Mr. Lossman and his wife discussed some of their marital problems. He at this time did mention the belief that she had shown particular like to me. We merely attempted to act as referees, my wife and I.

Once again a yes or no is all that is required.

Q. How did this affect your wife Marilyn?

A: She thereafter felt that it would be best that we not arrange frequent social affairs with the Lossman's and I agreed.

Q: How long ago was it that you decided not to see the Lossman's so frequently?

A. That was last summer in 1953 after the middle of the summer.

Q: Isn't it a fact that you have contacted Mrs. Lossman by telephone since then?

A: I never contacted Mrs. Lossman by telephone. She contacted me always in regard to some medical problem in regard to her little girl or herself. I saw Mr. Lossman frequently at the car agency and I saw them both infrequently at gatherings of the Sports Car Club, which is it club that I am not very active in but attend functions of occasionally here in the city.

Q: Isn't it a fact that you dated Julle Lossman on several occasions?

A: Absolutely not. I know there was some rumor to that effect but it is not true.

Q: Did your wife Marilyn know of this rumor?

A: Yes.

Q: How did it affect her?

A: She made it known to me and I reassured her and agreed that we should minimize our social contacts with the Lossman's and that was all there was to it. She had no particular objections as long as we kept it on a very infrequent basis.

This is interesting, he is referring to social contacts. This is slightly different than the other occasion where they agreed to minimize social contact. 'Which was known to my wife' above when discussing a different woman, can lead to confusion as to the intent of the sentence.

Q: Since this agreement with Marilyn about the contacts with the Lossman's, did your wife Marilyn show any coldness toward you?

A: No.

Q: Your home life was like an average normal couple's, had no bickerings or any petty quarrels?

A: No, because she respected my decisions on all matters.

Q: Directing your attention to the night of July 3d, 1954, at which time your wife was murdered, are you directly or indirectly involved in this crime?

A: Absolutely not.

Q: Do you know of any reason why someone else would take her life?

A: Possibly.

Q: Will you state the possibility?

A. Well, I don't know but I have heard of individuals who are maniac enough that when they start something, an act like that, it becomes a compulsion, a means of satisfaction like the ordinary man has from an orgasm or something of that nature. She has spurned lovers, potential lovers.

Beware of the speech. What follows is always important.

Q. How many of those potential lovers did she have?


A: Three that I know of and I am pretty sure, more. I am certain that there wore more.

Three is called a liars number. When people make things up they are more likely to make up the number three. While he could be telling the truth, it warrants further investigation and confirmation. With the next question it appears there was follow up and the individual names were left out of the signed statement.

Q: Have you told the police about these three and revealed their identity?

A. Yes.

Q: The night of July 3rd, 1954, when you reached the top of the stairs, after you heard Marilyn's outcries, you say you saw someone standing beside the bed occupied by your wife, were they standing or stooping over the bed?

A: I don't recall seeing anything from the head of the stairs, it happened so rapidly, it must have been when I entered the room and I don't know whether they were standing or stopping.

Stopping what? If it was beating or sexual assaulting (by the way the body was found) he would have heard something upon approaching the room.

Q: Immediately upon entering this room, did you have an opportunity to make some examination of your wife?

A: No.

Q: Why?

A: Because as I told you, I seemed to be immediately engaged in grappling, with someone.

Q: Do you know what portion of the body of this person you were grappling with that you had hold of?

You can tell the detective also picked up on my same concerns I had stated in previous posts, he understands that things concerning the struggles are not adding up in his statment.

A: I don't recall holding any portion of the body in the bedroom.

Q: You stated that you were assaulted from behind when you entered the room or immediately thereafter?

A: I felt that I was engaged from a direction somewhere within 180 degrees in front of me and you seemingly were struck from behind as I stated above.

For this to occur there would have to be two intruders, which there was not.

By Detective Robert Schottke:

Q: At the time you were assaulted on the beach, what was the condition as to light or darkness?

A: As I related before to Mr. Rossbach, it was just lighter than dark, it was not as dark as darkest night. There was a light seemingly starting, about the best way I can put it, as though daylight was just barely beginning.

Frustration is showing. Investigators will ask the same question over and over again, rephrasing it, attempting to elicit more information. This is a sensitive question to the doctor.

Q: At the time when you and this man were tussling or fighting on the beach, about how many feet of beach was there?

A: I don't know.

Once again, in his statement above he was very clear concerning his position when he awoke. The doctor has made a mistake with this part of the story that the detectives are attempting to bring forth. It is likely related to the north wind, high water, and no signs of a struggle. North winds on Lake Erie are not long lasting without bad storms, to wake up in the water would be unlikely. Without knowing the shape of the beach, position of the boat house, etc. it is hard to determine the exact nature of their questions and his answers.

Q: At the time when you were fighting with this man, could you feel any water in which you were fighting?

A: I can't say for sure but it seemed like the bench was firm, as though it had been washed over and packed somewhat.

Q: At the time when you woke up, will you explain your position on the beach as to this retaining wall, how many feet you were from this retaining wall?

A: I don't know, I can't say, but I think I can say that I was between the easterly and of that retaining wall and the steps, but I cannot say how far I was north-south wise.

Q: At the time when you woke up on the beach, will you tell us as to the condition of the wind and the waves?

A: It seemed that it was somewhat windy and the waves were moderately high. I’ll say too high to water ski and not too high to fish, not real high but moderately high.

Q: Is there anything else that you can tell us about this, Doctor?

A: Not that I can think of now. I wanted to say that I have come here of my own free will to help you in every way that I can to solve this tragedy and I hope that you will give me the opportunity to give you any additional information when and if I shall be able to remember it or find it.

'Think of now.' is an indictator he does have more information to give, but is unwilling or chooses not to.

He is leaving the door open that there may be 'reason' to continue the converstation at a later time.

Q: Have you been treated fairly during the course of this questioning?

A: Yes, absolutely.

Q: Have you read the above statement and is it the truth?

A: Yes it is true.

This is one of those things that drive people trained in statement analysis crazy. Language is specific, and when conducting statement analysis we take it to the greatest degree. What is the object of 'IT' in the above 'Yes it is true.' The statement itself is simply a statement; it does not have the right to be true or false. The words, sentences, and answers have the right to be true or false. In many older statements this type of language is used. Today there is more clear language that more accurately states that the information contained in the statement is an accurate representation of what has occurred and happened and nothing has been left out. This allows for further questions if something is found out after the statement was taken that contradicts the statement.strong>

Signed Samuel H. Sheppard

Robert F. Sehottke, Det.
Patrick A. Gareau, Det.
Carl Rossbach, Dpty.
Arthur E. Petersilge

This statement was taken by Gertrude Bauer and concluded at 4:15 o'clock P.M. Saturday, July 10th, 1954.


End note: I was hesitant to release this because this occurred many, many decades earlier and statements this old are from a different time. Language and the way we talk changes, they were more proper. Today when we see more proper language in statement we analyze the proper parts of the statement more clearly.

Another example showing this was from a different time, is the interview of the doctor took many hours and was condensed in this statment. Since the doctor has signed the statement we have to assume words were not placed in his mouth; an innocent man would object over the smallest detail that makes him appear more guilty.

Another thing that concerns me is the effect if could have on others. All of the major players in this case are long gone at this point. This case was a major case for the time and several people were hurt as a result. I feel that time has passed to the extent that it is not widely known and public interest has long passed.

Social science and criminal investigations have changed drastically since the murder. His wife was pregnant at the time, today we understand that the father is the statistically the most likely suspect. We also know that when a loved one finds a family member murdered, if their privates are exposed, each and every time they will cover the privates to give them dignity- some have gone so far as to wash the body to erase the indignity- which did not occur here.

For more background into the doctor, click below.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Sheppard

◦

Dr. Sam Sheppard Mystery Solved Through My Statement Analysis- Part Three [FINAL]