If there was a deliberate effort on the part of some major studio heads, and cooperated in by some of the police, including D.A. Woolwine, to transfer the reported time of the shooting from 9:00 pm to 8:00 pm, what could have been it's purpose? This, of course, can only be speculated at present. It might be argued it was done to mislead the real killer, as to what they knew. However, there is another possibility; namely, smear Mabel Normand by tying her more closely in with the crime, yet without formally implicating her of any guilt.
Why would they want to make things more difficult for Mabel?
1. Some important people were very angry with Mabel. Emotionally, they blamed her for what happened. And perhaps, though through no fault of her own, they were right, inasmuch as someone may have targeted Taylor out of jealousy over Mabel.
2. As of the Arbuckle scandal, Hollywood was already in the process of cleaning house. In the occurrence of the Taylor case, here was a perfect opportunity to rid themselves of suspected drug user Normand.
3. Mabel was known for a devastating wit that might have got her into trouble with someone. This was then, their bitter "joke" her.
To make this distortion of the facts all the more easily to accomplish -- even if this interfering with justice were somehow brought to light, the damage would still have been done, and there would be little sympathy for Mabel, and probably more for the seemingly would-be do-gooders who, it could be said, were only looking out for the Hollywood community’s standing and reputation.
"…Mabel was the Patsy who got the blame for what other people did. She suffered humiliation and disgrace in silence when she could have set herself right -- by ‘telling on’ some one else…" [James R. Quirk]12
Moreover and it can be reasonably argued, Hollywood and Los Angeles as they grew up in the late teens and early 20s gradually came to be infiltrated, taken over, and fed off of to a significant degree by organized crime. Organized crime is by nature dictatorial; much like how a military order is or tends to be. One reason why Pickford, Chaplin, Griffith, Fairbanks, etc., founded United Artists, was so that artists would be in charge of making films, not “dictators.” From this perspective, Mabel and stars like her was a free spirit who could vie with the most powerful in influence both with the public and within the movie industry itself. A star of such magnitude was or was potentially on the same level, as producers in terms of cultural and popular standing. In this way, Mabel (and stars like her) was one of several possible rivals for spiritual and moral authority in the business. Such as she were a boldly humane, compassionate, and courageous sort that unless they were somehow ousted or demoted could be a voice on behalf of those who were not ready to take the dictatorial trend lying down; all the more so given this egalitarian nature -- something utterly anathema and at odds with the policy of bosses. Nor was Mabel the only one of this kind; such that one could name several other big names of early Hollywood; who by the advent of the talkies were slated to be got rid of. Indeed, hardly even one or two of the silent greats made it out alive (whether literally or figuratively) after the 20s. And even those that did were either downgraded in active status or alienated from the general run of things. All this in effect, I maintain, amounted to a sort of political purge and take over by dictatorial types, tied in on some level with organized crime; whose fundamental moral outlook was diametrically opposite to the caring, heart filled, free spirit types who made up the star elite of earlier Hollywood.
From Los Angeles Evening Express, January 3, 1922:
"The job is not worth it." Such was the statement made by Charles A. Jones, chief of police, today after he announced he will appear later in the day before the mayor and pension board and ask to retire. This announcement follows the circulation of many rumors for last three months that the chief intended to retire. Political wrangling both inside the police department and at the City hall followed his appointment by Mayor Cryer after the latter's election. Rumors about the central station are that either Capt. R. Lee Heath or Police Commissioner De Coo will be named to succeed Jones. Chief Jones, following the announcement of his proposed retirement issued a burning statement in which he said: "No one man can run the Los Angeles police department. There are too many meddlesome so-called reformers and others who interfere with the work of the officers. "They insist that the police department devote its entire efforts to running petty gamblers out of business instead of devoting itself to the more important work of protecting the lives and property of our citizens and the visitors in our midst. "Not only that, but within the department itself, among the men and officers, there is too much bickering and conniving to 'get' each other's jobs."
From Los Angeles Herald, Feb. 6, 1922:
There was some friction in the police probe of the slaying today and it was reported that certain detectives had asked to be given other assignments rather than continue investigating the murder with asserted misunderstanding existing.
From Chicago Herald-Examiner, Feb. 9, 1922:
Los Angeles--...Members of the sheriff's office made an outright declaration that they were being hindered in the Taylor investigation by an "iron-clad conspiracy between police and members of the film colony," with regard to giving information concerning Taylor...
From San Francisco Bulletin, Feb. 9, 1922:
Los Angeles--Police have been bribed, witnesses silenced, evidence suppressed, in a gigantic plot engineered from behind the scenes in filmland to defeat the ends of justice in the Taylor mystery--these sensational charges were under investigation today by District Attorney Thomas Lee Woolwine, hurriedly summoned from his vacation..
From Los Angeles Record, Feb. 9, 1922:
Officials Muff Taylor Murder Probe Hopelessly for Week; Will Woolwine End Police Chaos? So many things have gone undone in the investigation of William D. Taylor's mysterious murder in the brilliantly lighted living room of his Alvarado street apartments eight days ago, that the heralded centralization of sleuthing by the district attorney's office comes as a distinct relief after a long list of official blunders.
From New York Herald, Feb. 10, 1922:
A dramatic clash between the police and the sheriff of Los Angeles is the newest feature in the kinema murder mystery. The sheriff formally charges the police authorities with succumbing to the influence brought to bear by powerful interests connected with the kinema industry with the object of checking further investigation into the circumstances in which Mr. Desmond Taylor, or Deane-Tanner, the film director, was shot in his residence at Hollywood last week. The most important clues, states the sheriff, have not been followed up, and blind trails have been started in order to lead investigations away from certain persons high in the industry and stop the publicity which the case is receiving to the detriment of the film industry.
From New York Morning Telegraph, February 21, 1922:
The search -- if one can call it a search -- being made for the slayer of Motion Picture Director Taylor in Los Angeles is getting on the nerves of everybody, and the police should either produce the killer or turn the job of hunting for him over to competent persons. It seems as if every one who knew Taylor or could in any fashion be connected with the case has been interrogated at least a half dozen times. The police and the fame-seeking District Attorney of the California metropolis apparently have questioned persons who had no more to do with Taylor's murder than the residents of the Canary Islands. One Woolwine, District Attorney, made what he called an independent investigation, with a camera-man tagging him around and reporters in his following. Woolwine posed in the Taylor house with an assistant taking the part of the picture director ?this being done to "reconstruct the crime." How would that help find the criminal? In their efforts the police and the Woolwine force have sent several reputable actresses into retirement, suffering from nervous prostration, and have cast some slight suspicion on a few persons who could not possibly kill another. The time has come for these Los Angeles sleuths and Woolwine and his actors to get off the job, and devote their time to whatever business may be at hand. Skilled detectives should take over the case and follow it to the end. Motion picture makers of Hollywood have raised a fund to hunt down Taylor's slayer, and they can put it to good use by dealing with a reputable detective agency and ignoring the incompetents of the police force and the District Attorney of Los Angeles.13
From Santa Monica Outlook, February 22, 1922:
An article in a Canton, Ill, newspaper quoting a Los Angeles man in an attack on the film colony and the citrus conditions was the subject of resentment of F. H. Hamilton, secretary of the Sawtelle Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Hamilton has written letters to several newspapers and commercial bodies in this section calling their attention to this article. Mr. Hamilton said that C. E. Snively, Jr. was formerly assistant chief of police in Los Angeles and his misrepresentations should be corrected. The article in the Canton Daily Register containing the headline, "Says Film People Are Covering Up in Murder Mystery," reads as follows: Regarding the Taylor murder case, C. E. Snively, Jr. of Los Angeles, writing his father, C. E. Snively of this city, says: "Everybody is stirred up over the Taylor murder mystery. It is a nasty, smelly mess, and the film people are doing a lot of 'covering up.' I do not believe Sands shot Taylor, but the blame may be attached to him to save others, and Sands will disappear on a life pension, or will turn up a suicide, or be assassinated to prevent the real story from coming out; that's my forecast."
From Los Angeles Record, Jan. 7, 1930:
"You didn't tell this at the coroner's inquest?" "No. They wouldn't let me. They tried to shake the story I told them before the inquest. They threatened me. I didn't change my story, because it was true, but I left out that part about the row at Mr. Taylor's house. Then I knew they would make more trouble for me, so I left Los Angeles right away."14
Mary Miles Minter and Charlotte Shelby have been frequently brought in as suspects to the case, and with good reason. Yet neither was very likely the killer, since based on what we are saying it would be too fantastic (at least in this writer’s opinion) to think that they themselves would have been involved with the gang of burglars. In addition, it is somewhat difficult to conceive of, say, Charlotte Shelby being a methodical assassin or the cool customer Faith MacLean described exiting the bungalow.15
* from Los Angeles Police transcript of interview of Marjorie Berger, taken at her office, Mar. 11, 1926, as recorded in King Vidor Papers, University of Southern California, Film Library, Special Collections
Ques. What I want to find out Miss Berger is this...three questions I want to find out whether you called Mrs. Shelby or whether she called you in the morning the second of February...whether or not you knew at the hour you called whether Taylor's body was found. Ans. Will you let me alone for a few minutes while I talk to Mr. Marguetti? (attorney) [appointment is made to answer question next day] Ques. I asked you yesterday the question whether or not you had ever a conversation with Mrs. Shelby on the morning of February 2, 1922, following the death of Taylor. Ans. I did Ques. At what time? Ans. At half past seven in the morning Mrs. Shelby called me. Ques. And would you care to relate to me what that conversation was, Mrs. Berger? Ans. Absolutely gladly. I arrived at my office between 7 and 7:30 on the morning of Feb. 2, 1922. My telephone was ringing. I answered the phone. Mrs. Charlotte Shelby said "Marjorie, I have something terrible to tell you. The man that was in your office yesterday afternoon is no more. He is dead." I said what do you mean?" She said, "He was found dead this morning." I said, "Who told you? What do you know about it? Where are you now? She said I am at the New Hampshire home." I said, "Well, aren't you afraid to be alone?" She said, "Well, Mr. Smith16 stayed in the house last night." I asked her whether she had informed the family of this terrible thing and she said yes. No, I better not say that, I think she said yes. I then hung up the receiver because I was greatly shocked and grieved. That's all. Ques. Was anything further said between you and her in connection with the case? I will say at or about that time did she tell you how she communicated or given the information to the rest of the family? Ans. I do not recollect. I am not sure. She did state that Lasky Studios had called her up and informed her about half an hour previous to her calling me. [Berger goes on to state that Shelby called her around 6 or 6:30 and the other time at 8 or 8:30 (P.M.?) looking for Mary, the night of the murder.]
Based on this testimony, Shelby, as well as Minter could have found out about the murder not longer after the Lasky people did that night through certain channels, including perhaps family friend District Attorney Thomas Woolwine. This was perhaps why Deputy District Attorney Jim Smith was with Shelby that night -- to protect her. Maybe Minter, along with other certain studio people, entered bungalow that night after the murder to see Taylor's body, which would account for the blonde hairs. Though granted unlikely, it ought not be assumed impossible.
As to the claim Shelby had most motive to kill Taylor, this Shelby later credibly answered herself when she said that if she had killed Taylor because of his alleged violating of Mary, why would she not have killed James Kirkwood, who had gotten Mary pregnant a number of years earlier? That she was jealous, as such as Det. William Cahill believed, may have some plausibility to it. Yet if Shelby was indeed the assassin, do we then assume the pre-murder burglaries are unrelated to Taylor’s death, and that Shelby’s acting not dissimilarly to the burglars was just a coincidence?
The Identity of the Murderer
"Undersheriff Biscailuz late in the day admitted the Sheriff's office is working hard on three "leads" tending to connect prominent film people with the slaying. The Sheriff's office holds little credence in the theory that Sands committed the crime." 17
Almost right after the murder, any number of extraordinary stories and witnesses came forth, a pattern carried on for many years afterward. Apparently many stories were concocted by publicity seekers and newspaper people attempting to cash in on and exploit the drama. Nonetheless, it is conceivable that some of the stories were actually brought about through the efforts of the killer (and perhaps the efforts of his friends) in an effort to disguise the crime and further confuse the investigation.
If the killer was merely one among a gang of “poor” criminals (bootleggers, drug dealers) who would have felt the need to invent stories and produce false witnesses to protect them? Not probable since they would not have resources to employ actors and pretend witnesses or suspects. A very rich and powerful industry person, who hired a gunman, on the other hand, could more easily in such a position to effect such. The killer may have been found out within first day or so, but because he was so powerful, he could black mail others, including the D.A., and so the various cover-ups may have begun at this point. As well, if he were very powerful he could, and given his penchant for invading others’ lives, use blackmail on other officials if, in a given instance, it was deemed necessary. By “the killer,” I do not mean the gunman per se, but rather someone who employed the gunman.
It is conceivable then that if the killer was an industry higher-up that he participated in the cover-up on some level, and orchestrated false suspects and witness to confuse everyone. Because of perhaps a certain disdain for Normand and Taylor, some of his associates, whether knowing of his guilt or not, were perhaps more willing to cooperate than they otherwise might have been.
The following is a list of some of Hollywood's known most powerful figures at the time. This is not to necessarily imply guilt to anyone only to say who might have been in such a position to have pulled off such a scheme: Frank Garbutt, Jesse Lasky, Charles Eyton, Sol Wurtzel, Abraham Lehr, Carl Laemmle, Joseph Schenck, Mack Sennett, Thomas Ince, Richard Rowland. There is nothing particular about anyone of these to lead us offhand to think they would be suspects, except perhaps for Sennett. However, Sennet's being the killer is highly unlikely, for a number of reasons, not least of which is interpreting him as someone powerful enough to have manipulated city hall.
Where the inquiry can be continued from this point, I leave for others to take up and consider.
-------------------
Later Note, 22 Apr. 2012.
In the years since I addressed the WDT case in my "Mabel Normand Source Book," there have ben copious opportunities to more explicitly posit the likelihood of Taylor's murder being, after all, a premeditated political assassination of sorts; including perhaps as well a scenario where a "kook" is put up and incited to the deed; in order that a third person could reap it benefits. What might be the "benefits," if we assume purely criminal motives some that can be suggested are:
1) Induce fear and chaos in Hollywood and toppling some of its de facto leaders; while in the midst of which assailing bastions of financial power in order to gain control of it. If such speculation were sufficiently plausible, then it might be a good idea to find out where control of Hollywood went to or tended to move to from 1922 to 1929; and this may provide a lead.
2) If, for the sake of discussion, the culprit(s) was,involved in the occult, we can expand the possible motive further by including following orders from, placating, making offering to, and or what we might denote "scoring points" with forces and persons of an authentically sinister character. If so, this also permits us to include jealousy and the desired demise of others than just Taylor, such as Normand and Minter, to play a role in what actuated the crime.
In support of such conjecture, we can point to the seeming elaborate efforts of some person or persons to create distractions and red herrings to investigators. That in some such instances, as in the yellow journalistic reporting and editorials (assuming a connection), this necessarily involved people tied into big money; and who had both the means and wherewithal to wage such a long, drawn out, and years ongoing campaign of smear tactics, outrageous distortion, and misinformation.
But this is as far at the moment as I am, owing to practical and personal considerations, prepared to go.
-------------------
Footnotes
In 1922, the police made no statement regarding the nightgown. Reporter Frank Bartholomew was the one who said he saw it, with initials, and he broke the story. Cline later stated that the nightgown had no initials. Peavey said the nightgown had been there long before the day of the murder. I think the nightgown probably had no initials. Taylor certainly had several of Minter's handkerchiefs, and its logical that those handkerchiefs would have been in the same part of dresser as the nightgown. Perhaps Bartholomew just had a quick glance inside that drawer, saw the initialed handkerchiefs on top of the nightgown, and mentally transposed the initials onto the nightgown.
