1959-12-05

Murder Trial Set for Jury

"I loved my son..." sobbed Frederick L. Fidler as he testified in his murder trial in 47th District Court here Monday afternoon.

The slight-built defendant, who is charged with murdering his son by beating him, was called to the stand in an emotion-packed day of testimony which was concluded at 4:47 p.m.

The jury is to return at 9 a.m. today to hear the court's charge and arguments by attorneys.

Fidler, 30, of 2804 Cleveland, is charged with murder with malice in the death of his five- year-old son, William Charles "Buddy" Fidler. He is alleged to have fatally beaten the boy with his hand on the night of Dec. 5.

The boy died in Northwest Texas Hospital on the morning of Dec. 6, some 10 hours after he was taken to the hospital.

The court room was nearly filled with witnesses, friends and relatives of the defendant, and spectators. At many points during the testimony members of Fidler's immediate family sobbed. At one point a sister fainted and had to be taken from the court room.

Fidler came to Amarillo from Elk City, Okia., and many of those present were from there and Canute, Okla., where most of the family lives.

Defense attorneys Jack Hazlewood ad Walter Wolfram called the defendant to the stand in an attempt to establish there was no intent to do harm in the punishment, which is admitted. His appearance was only one of many points in a day punctuated often by emotional outbursts by witnesses, the defendant, members of his family, and some of the jurors.

Wolfram asked Fidler to state his relationship with his deceased son.

"I loved my son," he sobbed,

"I didn't in—" and his voice trailed off to obscurity.

Under questioning, Fidler said he didn't intend to deny anything read from a statement he had given to police shortly before the boy died. The statement describes in detail how he whipped the boy with his hand and a belt and shook him before the lad collapsed at his feet.

The admitted punishment came. he said, after a mess had been found in the bathroom of the family home and he attempted to get the boy to admit doing it.

"Look at the jury and tell them whether or not you intended to kill your son on the night of Dec. 5," Wolfram instructed his client.

Halting to regain his composure, Fidler replied, "I did not."

"Tell them whether or not you intended to do the boy harm," Wolfram requested

After another pause to quiet his sobbing, the defendant said, "I didn't intend to do him no harm-just wanted him to do right."

On cross examination, Dist. Atty. Wayne Bagley asked Fidler whether or not he had an occasion to kick the boy on the night before the alleged fatal beating.

Fidler said he could not remember if he ever kicked the boy.

Fidler came close to collapsing on the stand when Bagley handed him a photograph of the boy's body. The photo purports to show bruises from the bottoms of his feet to his neck.

"Turn around and tell the jury how these marks got on his body," Bagley said,

Fidler only sobbed

"How many ways are there to do that with a foot, Mr. Fidler?" Bagley asked.

"That wasn't done with a foot," the defendant answered.

"What was it done with, Mr. Fidler?" Bagley asked.

No answer.

"What was it done with, Mr. Fidler," the district attorney repeated

"I don't know," was the weak reply.

During much of the earlier testimony by defense witnesses, Hazlewood dwelt heavily on the mental condition of the victim.

Witness after witness testified that the boy would often hurt himself purposely, would not cry when he was injured and bruised very easily.

"Is it your contention that the boy inflicted injuries on himself that caused his death?" Bagley asked, referring to the earlier testimony.

Fidler said he didn't know.

The state rested at 11:30 a.m. Tuesday and trial was slated to resume at 1 p.m. It was delayed when defense attorneys told the court that their client was ill.

A doctor was summoned and reported Fidler had 102 degrees of temperature, but the defendant expressed a desire to continue with the case after medication.

Another delay came when the first defense witness, Fidler's wife, took the stand and started to testify. She lost all composure and had to be taken to the hall by a bailiff.

At one point during his own testimony the defendant also had to be taken from the court room when he broke down sobbing.

The state's first and last witnesses in the trial created a stir in the court room. These were Miss Jo Ann Reynolds, of 813 N. Marrs, who was living with the Fidlers at the time of the alleged beating, and her airman boyfriend. Jerry Cox of Amarillo Air Force Base.

Miss Reynolds was the first witness and explained in detail what she saw when she and Cox were called back to the Fidler home by Mrs. Fidler. Both said they had left the home when the punishment started and were called back in about an hour.

Miss Reynolds said when she returned to the home Fidler was sitting in a chair holding the boy and attempting to administer artificial respiration by applying pressure with his hands.

During this part of her testimony Miss Reynolds broke down.

Fidler sobbed heavily, members of his family cried and a woman in the jury box wept openly.

Cox was called as a rebuttal witness by the state and was the last witness on the stand. He told substantially the same story as Miss Reynolds and then went into details of earlier punishments he had seen at the Fidler home

Cox testified that he saw Fidler kick or shove the boy with his foot on the Thursday night prior to the Saturday night in question

Asked Assistant District Attorney Walter Knapp what other punishment he had seen. Cox replied that on either Wednesday or Thursday night he had seen Fidler hit the boy in the face.

"What with?" Knapp asked.

"With a belt," was the reply

This brought more emotional demonstration from the audience and a sister of the defendant fainted and had to be removed from the room.

Under questioning by attorneys on both sides Mrs. Fidler testified that "Buddy" was considered a problem child by members of the family.

Mrs. Fidler, who has three children by a previous marriage living in the home and was a stepmother of the victim, engaged in a long and heated exchange with the district attorney over conditions in the home. She said she never whipped the child

Other witnesses were called by the defense in an effort to show that the boy bruised easily, that he always had bruise marks on him and that he often injured himself.

The state had brought in medial testimony during the morning session which brought out condition of the boy's body when he was taken to the hospital and the cause of death. A pathologist testified that death was probably caused by an injury to the brain, caused probably by a sharp blow bringing about a brain hemorrhage.

The defense brought in numerous character witnesses to testify in the defendant's behalf as they sought to prove conditions for a suspended sentence.