State v. Cloutier

• Decision Date: 31 July 1936
• Citation: 186 A. 604
• Court: Maine Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE v. CLOUTIER.

186 A. 604

STATE

v. CLOUTIER.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

July 31, 1936.

Exceptions and appeal from Superior Court, York County.

Alexander Cloutier was convicted of murder, and he appeals and brings exceptions.

Appeal dismissed and exceptions overruled.

Argued before DUNN, C. J., and STURGIS, BARNES, THAXTER, HUDSON, and MANSER, JJ.

Richard H. Armstrong, and Simon Spill, both of Biddeford, and Hiram Willard, of Samford, for appellant.

Clyde R. Chapman, Atty. Gen., and Robert B. Seidel, Co. Atty., of Biddeford, for the State.

THAXTER, Justice.

The respondent, indicted by the grand jury for the county of York for the murder of Florence Grenier, pleaded not guilty, was tried and convicted. During the course of the trial numerous exceptions were taken to the admission and to the exclusion of evidence, to the refusal of the Presiding Justice to give certain requested instructions; and, after the verdict, a motion for a new trial was addressed to the Presiding Justice, which was denied. The case is now before this court on the exceptions and on an appeal from the ruling denying the motion for a new trial.

The Appeal.

Florence Grenier, a girl seventeen years old, left her home in Williams Court, Biddeford, some time between quarter and half past 9 on Tuesday morning, August 20, 1935. She passed from Center street to Elm street, walked easterly on Elm to Cutts street, was observed proceeding southwesterly on Cutts street, and was last seen about half past 9 in front of the Buick & Olds Service Station at the corner of Elm and Cutts streets, passing in the rear of a parked automobile which was identified as one belonging to John Cloutier, the father of the respondent. She did not return to her home, and an intensive search was begun. She had been a friend of the Cloutier family, and the evidence clearly establishes that the respondent had shown her considerable attention. They had been automobiling together, to the moving pictures, and he had frequently come to the house for her. Cloutier had spoken to Irene Grenier of his affection for her sister, Florence, and had asked her to put in a good word for him.

Believing that Florence had entered the Cloutier car on the morning of her disappearance and had been driven off by the respondent, the Biddeford police placed him under arrest and questioned him as to her whereabouts. He denied even knowing this girl to whom he had been paying such close attention; he claimed that he had never ridden with her in an automobile; he refused to recognize her picture; at first he could not remember where he was the morning of her disappearance; and then claimed that he was at the mill at Alfred all day where his father worked. Finally, becoming very much distraught, he said: "I am going to tell you." At this time an interruption came when the telephone bell in the office rang; and, when the interrogation was resumed, the respondent had recovered his composure and refused to divulge anything. There is no evidence whatsoever that there was any abuse of the prisoner at this time. In fact, he was carefully informed of his rights. On Friday morning there was further questioning under similar conditions. His reply was: "I will die before I talk."

Though it is true that sometimes those accused of crime, even though innocent, may through fear attempt to divert suspicion from themselves by false statements, yet such is not the usual conduct of innocent men. The statements of Cloutier in this instance are particularly significant, because, at the time when they were made, there was no charge of murder. The authorities were attempting to find a missing girl, one who had apparently been the sweetheart of the man, who at the time of the search, denied ever having known her. His sudden lack of interest in her whereabouts, his failure to co-operate with those who were straining every energy to locate her, his disregard of her family, with whom he had been on terms of intimate friendship, all cast the shadow of suspicion toward him. Alone, of all people in that community, he seemed to have no concern about her. To the agonized inquiries of relatives and friends, his reply was: "I do not know the girl."

On Friday morning, three days after her disappearance, the body of Florence Grenier was found in a dump in the town of Lyman about 300 feet from the main highway leading from Biddeford to Alfred. It was partially covered with boxes, branches, and rubbish. Under the head, soaked with blood, was a small pillow similar to those used as a back rest in chairs or automobiles. The condition of the body indicated beyond question, that the girl had come to her death by violence. Her clothing was drenched with blood; there was a deep cut on her forehead apparently made by some blunt instrument; there was a compound fracture of the skull extending from the base of the nose to the top of the head and from there to the back of the left ear; the lower jaw was fractured and the chin pushed back into the mouth. With the exception of slight bruises, there were no marks of any kind on the body. The nature of the injuries indicated that her face and head had been beaten with some blunt instrument. It was without question an incredibly brutal murder.

Cloutier's whereabouts in the early morning of August 20th, the day of her disappearance, seem to be fairly well established. He left his home in Biddeford in the family automobile and drove his father and his brother, Noe, to the Shepard Morse Sawmill at Alfred where they worked, a distance of approximately 12 miles. They arrived there about quarter past 6. William R. Berry, who lived about a mile from Alfred on the Biddeford road, testifies that some time between 7 and 8 in the morning, the respondent stopped at his house and wanted to borrow fifty cents with which to buy some gasoline. Instead of giving him the money, Berry gave him some gas. The respondent at this time was neatly dressed in blue pants and a light shirt. Arthur Boulay, who was employed at the Staples Service Station on Franklin street in Biddeford, testifies that Cloutier stopped at his station about 8 o'clock and bought gasoline. The time is fixed very definitely, for a charge slip was offered in evidence and Boulay states that the sale to the respondent was made about half or three-quarters of an hour after a sale to a man named Greenier, who called at the station at half past 7 every morning. According to the testimony of Mederic Lebel, who was employed in the service station at the corner of Elm and Cutts streets, the respondent next appears there about half past 9. He parked his car in the street, walked to the station, and talked to Lebel. He was cleanly dressed and his hair was neatly combed. He said that he was waiting for some one. Looking outside, and apparently seeing the person whom he was expecting, he left and got into his car, leaving the right-hand door open. Lebel saw a girl, whom he recognized as Florence Grenier, cross the street and walk in back of the car. He heard the door close and saw the car drive off. These details fit in with the testimony of Romeo Gagne and Blanche Bastille, who testify that they saw the girl coming down Cutts street about a quarter or half past 9. The testimony of Everett McLeod, who worked at the mill, is significant in this connection. He saw the respondent at the mill between 7 and 8 in the morning, and thereafter until after dinner he did not see him, nor was the Cloutier car in its usual parking place.

From this testimony the jury was warranted in finding that Cloutier drove his father and brother to the mill at Alfred early in the morning; that he left there some time between 7 and 8, and drove first to Mr. Berry's, then to the Staples Service Station in Biddeford, and finally arrived at the corner of Cutts and Elm streets, where he was expecting to meet Florence Grenier; that ha did meet her there about half past 9; that she entered his car; that they drove off; and that she was never seen again alive.

His own story of his movements is confused, at some points at variance with established facts, uncorroborated except by members of his family, evasive, and altogether improbable. He admits driving back to Biddeford to buy tires, but claims that, after leaving the Staples Service Station, where he talked with Boulay, he drove back to Alfred. There, he says, he went to see a man by the name of Jones, who worked at the mill packing shavings. Jones, however, did not appear at the trial. Then he drove to Springvale to look at a steam engine. Just what his purpose was in so doing is not explained, except that his father had an interest in the engine. He then spent the rest of the morning at the mill in Alfred. His father says that he saw him about the mill during the morning. Neither the respondent's testimony nor that of his family carries conviction. It is inconsistent with their previous testimony and with their earlier statements. It is highly significanfthat the respondent himself does not recall his visit to the service station where Lebel says he talked with him, for it was here that the murdered girl was last seen alive.

Under the head of Florence Grenier, as she lay in her shallow grave, was found a cushion. It was certainly not by chance that her head happened to fall on that. Just what may have been passing through the mind of her murderer as he laid her battered features on that pillow we can only guess. Boulay testifies that he saw such a cushion in the Cloutier car when the respondent stopped at his filling station for gas, and that he moved it to one side in the front seat when he got in at Cloutier's suggestion to try the car. Jeanette Bill, who had ridden in the car and had been a visitor at the Cloutier house, testifies that she had seen this cushion in the car and at the house. Archille Angers, who operated a truck and had moved the Cloutier family, testifies that such a cushion was among the furnishings of the...