Call Northside 777 (1948)

 

 

 

Call Northside 777 is a historical drama (based on a true story) which premiered in 1948. It is the story of a wrongful conviction, which happened in Chicago in the 1930s.

 

Here is some basic information about this drama:

 

** Director: Henry Hathaway (1898-1985)

** Producers: Otto Lang (1908-2006) (credited) & Darryl F. Zanuck (1902-1979) (not credited)

** Writers: Leonard Hoffman, Quentin Reynolds, Jerome Cady & Jay Dratler

** Based on articles in the Chicago Times by James McGuire (credited) & John “Jack” McPhaul (not credited)

** Released on DVD in 2006

** Run time: 111 minutes

 

The cast includes the following:

 

** James Stewart (1908-1997) as P. J. McNeal – a reporter at the Chicago Times

** Helen Walker (1920-1968) as Laura McNeal – the reporter’s wife

** Lee J. Cobb (1911-1976) as Brian Kelly – chief editor at the Chicago Times

** Richard Conte (1910-1975) as Frank Wiecek – accused of murder

** Joanne De Bergh (1918-2005) as Helen Wiecek – Frank’s wife

** Kasia Orzazewski (1888-1956) as Tillie Wiecek – Frank’s mother

** George Tyne (1917-2008) as Tomek Zaleska – accused of murder

** Betty Garde (1905-1989) as Wanda Skutnik – owner of a bar - eyewitness to the crime

** Leonarde Keeler (1903-1949) (co-inventor of the polygraph) as himself – a technician who conducts a polygraph test on Frank (see reference in the PS below)

** E. G. Marshall (1914-1998) as Mr Rayska – Helen’s second husband

 

Since this drama is based on a true story, the basic facts are part of the public record. They are not a secret. Therefore I feel free to mention some of them in this review.

 

While this drama is based on a true story, it is not a documentary film. It is a dramatized version of events. Not everything happened exactly as shown here. But the basic story is true.

 

This movie is filmed in black-and-white. In 1948 it was possible to film a drama in colour, but it was very expensive. This is probably the reason why it is made in black-and-white. After a while you will get used to it. And you will probably not even think about it, unless someone reminds you that it is in black-and-white.

 

An on-screen message placed at the beginning tells us that this movie is based on a true story. A second on-screen message tells us that this movie was filmed on location (in Chicago) and, wherever possible, it was filmed on the actual locations where these events took place. Apparently, historical authenticity was an important issue to the movie-makers.

 

In 1933, two young men – two Polish-Americans – were accused of having killed a police officer in a bar (speakeasy) in December 1932 (during prohibition, when murder was a common event). The two men were identified by an eyewitness, the owner of the speakeasy. They were tried in a court of law where they were found guilty. The sentence was 99 years in prison. Two years later, the verdict was upheld in the Illinois Supreme Court.

 

The mother of one of the two young men did not believe her son was a killer. She was convinced he was innocent. She worked as a cleaner and saved up all her wages year after year. In 1944, she placed a classified ad in a local newspaper, the Chicago Times: she offered a reward of 5,000 dollars – at that time a huge amount of money – to anyone who could find evidence to prove her son was innocent and thus secure his release from prison.

 

Staff at the the Chicago Times noticed the ad and began to look into the case which was by then more than ten years old. Having conducted a long investigation of the crime and having published numerous articles about the case, the newspaper was able to prove that the mother was right: her son was innocent. The court agreed. He was released in 1945.

 

In this drama, we follow the case from the beginning in 1932 until the end in 1945:

 

** We see how the police officer is killed in the speakeasy in 1932.

** We see how two young Polish-Americans are arrested and found guilty of murder in 1933.

** We see how the Chicago Times begins an investigation of the case which leads to the release of one of the two prisoners in 1945.

 

What do reviewers say about this historical drama? Here are the results of two review aggregators:

 

** 74 per cent = IMDb

** 76 per cent = Rotten Tomatoes

 

The case is important and, as you can see, the ratings are quite good. They correspond to (almost) four stars on Amazon. If you ask me, these ratings are very appropriate. I like this movie and I want to give it a good rating, but I cannot go all the way to the top, because there are some flaws. What is wrong?

 

# 1. Some names have been changed.

# 2. Some historical facts have been changed.

# 3. Important aspects of the case are virtually or completely ignored.

 

Let us look at these topics one by one:

 

# 1. SOME NAMES HAVE BEEN CHANGED

The police officer who was killed in December 1932

** In the movie he is called John Bundy

** His real name is William D. Lundy

 

The two Polish-Americans who were convicted of murder in 1933

** In the movie they are called Frank Wiecek and Tomek Zaleska

** The real names are Joseph “Joe” Majczek – he was released in 1945 and died in 1983 – and Theodore “Ted” Marcinkiewicz – he was released in 1950 and died in 1982.

 

The mother of one of the two prisoners

** In the movie she is called Tillie Wiecek

** Her real name is Tillie Majczek – she died in 1964

 

The owner of the speakeasy who identified the killers

** In the movie she is called Wanda Skutnik

** Her real name is Vera Walush

 

Helen’s second husband

** In the movie he is called Mr Rayska

** His real name is Ed Bartosiewicz

 

The staff of the Chicago Times

** In the movie, chief editor Brian Kelly notices the classified ad about the case and tells one of his reporters (P. J. McNeal) to look into the case. In the real world, a young member of staff noticed the ad and showed it to the city editor (Karin Walsh), who told a reporter (McGuire) to look into the case. His notes about the case were turned into an article by another reporter (McPhaul) and then published in the paper.

 

** In the real world, the case was investigated by two reporters: James McGuire (who is credited) and John “Jack” McPhaul (who is not credited). For some reason, the movie-makers did not like the idea of two reporters working on the case, so they merged the two reporters into a single character, P. J. McNeal, a fictional character, who is played by the famous actor James Stewart. It follows that his wife (Laura) is also a fictional character. 

 

** In addition, the city editor (Karin Walsh) was replaced by the chief editor (Brian Kelly).

 

# 2. SOME HISTORICAL FACTS HAVE BEEN CHANGED

The classified ad that was placed in the newspaper ended with the following passage: 

 

“Call GRO-1758, 12-7 p.m.”

 

The movie-makers removed the time frame and changed the phone number to Northside 777, which has a nice ring to it. 

 

As you can see, the title of the movie was inspired by the ad, but the original text was changed to something that sounded better.

 

The end of the movie in which the reporter proves Frank’s innocence is a fabrication. The reporter proves that a certain photo was taken on a certain day. This fabrication was introduced for dramatic reasons. But this is not how the two reporters proved his innocence. They were able to prove that Wanda’s eyewitness testimony was unreliable.

 

When first interviewed, Wanda had stated that she could not identify the two killers because she was hiding in a closet. During two line-ups at a police station, she failed to identify Frank. But in court she testified that Frank and Tomek were the killers. How and why did this happen? 

 

The police officers had forced her to co-operate. They gave her an offer she could not refuse: if you do not identify these men, we are going to prosecute you for running a speakeasy, which was highly illegal during prohibition. Wanda did what she was told.

 

It is hard to believe that two men could be convicted of murder and could be sentenced to 99 years in prison based on the testimony of an eyewitness (who had been forced to co-operate with the police) and virtually nothing else.

 

It is well-documented – even if not well-known – that an eyewitness identification is highly unreliable. The police did not have the murder weapon or weapons. There was no physical evidence which connected the two defendants to the crime. The defendants had an alibi, but this evidence was discounted by the police and the court.

 

# 3. IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF THE CASE ARE VIRTUALLY OR COMPLETELY IGNORED

The killers arrived in a car that was driven by a third man. Two men went inside while the third man was waiting outside in the car. When the police officer had been killed, the killers left the shop and ran to the car which drove away quickly. What about the car? What about the third man? These important leads were never pursued by the police and they are not explored in the movie.

 

The two defendants had an alibi. Other people stated that they were with them in another location when the crime took place. But this evidence was brushed aside by the police and the court and it is not explored in the movie.

 

At first, McNeal is convinced that Frank is guilty. But after a while, he begins to change his mind. Soon he is convinced that Frank is innocent. However, he still believes the other defendant (Tomek) is guilty.

 

In one scene, he is talking to Tomek urging him to reveal the name of the other killer. If he does this, McNeal says he will help him get a parole for turning state’s evidence. In this moment, McNeal crosses the line. He is no longer an objective reporter. He is trying to interfere with the case itself.

 

When Frank is released in 1945, he says the state has given him 12 dollars and a new suit. In fact, the state of Illinois gave him 24,000 dollars and a new suit.

 

When the movie was released in 1948, Tomek was still behind bars. But his fate is not even mentioned, even though he was just as innocent as Frank. Why is he forgotten? The reason is obvious: he did not have a mother who believed in him.

 

In 1950, the state of Illinois finally realized and admitted that Tomek was also a victim of a wrongful conviction. He was released and given a compensation of 35,000 dollars.

 

The real killers were never identified. The third man – who drove the car to the bar and helped the killers escape – was never identified, either.

 

Call Northside 777 is a fascinating account of an important case, but as you can see, it has some flaws which cannot be overlooked. I have to remove one star because of them. This is why I think this product deserves a rating of four stars.

 

PS # 1. Joseph “Joe” Majczek is listed in the National Registry of Exonerations. The case file is written by Rob Warden.

 

PS # 2. The following items are available online:

 

** June Sawyers, “The true story that led to Call Northside 777,” Chicago Tribune, 19 March 1989

** Gary Houston, “A Real-Life Chicago Murder Mystery,” Chicago Tribune, 9 January 1995

** Brent Cunningham, “Call Northside 777,” Columbia Journalism Review, 9 September 2011

 

PS # 3. The following article is available online (only if you have access to the academic network JSTOR):

 

Leonard Kurdek, “The Real-Life Story behind Call Northside 777: The Crime, the Conviction, and the Search for Justice,” Polish American studies, vol. 70, no 2, 2013, pp. 5-78.

 

PS # 4. There is a chapter about the making of the movie in this book: Hollywood on Lake Michigan by Arnie Bernstein and Michael Corcoran (first published 1998, reprinted 2013).

 

PS # 5. There is a chapter about the case in this book: Trials edited by Martha Merrill Umphrey (2017). 

 

The case is covered in chapter 7: 

 

“Theaters of Proof: Visual Evidence and the Law in Call Northside 777” by Jennifer L. Mnookin and Nancy West (62 pages).

 

PS # 6. The Lie Detector is a documentary film which premiered on US television (PBS) in January 2023. 

 

It is an episode of the long-running program American Experience (season 35, episode 01).

 

This film covers the life and career of Leonarde Keeler with special focus on his role as co-inventor of the polygraph (also known as the lie detector). 

 

This film includes a brief clip from Call Northside 777 where Leonarde Keeler plays himself: a technician who conducts a polygraph test on Frank.

  

*****

  

 

The American actor James Stewart (1908-1997)

who plays the leading character in the historical drama

Call Northside 777

 

*****

 

 

Murder on a Sunday Morning (2001)

 

 

 

 

Murder on a Sunday Morning is a documentary film which premiered in 2001. The topic is a murder case which took place in Jacksonville, Florida, in the year 2000.

 

Here is some basic information about this film:

 

** Writer and director: Jean-Xavier de Lestrade

** Producer: Denis Poncet

** Run time: 111 minutes

 

Here is some basic information about the case:

 

On 7 May 2000, a white woman (Mary Ann Stephens) was shot and killed by a young black man, who stole her purse and disappeared. It happened on a Sunday morning; hence the title of the film.

 

About two hours later, a young black man (Brenton Butler) was picked up by the police. The victim’s husband (James Stephens) identified him as the perpetrator. The young man was arrested. During an interrogation he confessed. He was charged with murder and brought to trial. But the jury found him not guilty. He was released after six months in prison.

 

In this film, we follow the court case, which took place over ten days in November 2000. We also follow the investigation conducted by the two lawyers who were appointed to defend Butler: 

 

** Ann Finnell

** Patrick McGuinness

 

What was the evidence against Butler? 

 

An eyewitness identification and a confession. 

 

Both items were false:

 

** Eyewitness identification is highly unreliable; especially when a white person has to identify a black person (or vice versa).

 

** The confession was false, because it was made under duress. Butler was interrogated for several hours without the presence of a lawyer.

 

No physical evidence connected Butler to the crime or the location. The police never found the murder weapon. Butler had an alibi: his mother claimed that he was at home when the attack took place. But this evidence was ignored.

 

James Stephens was standing next to his wife when she was shot. He was face to face with the killer, but only for a brief moment (less than one minute). He had described the killer as tall and 20-25 years old. Butler was not tall and only 15 years old. He did not fit the original description which the eyewitness had given to the police. But this problem was ignored as well.

 

The police accepted the eyewitness identification and began an interrogation. After a while they had a confession. The false identification led to the false confession.

 

Once the police had this evidence, they did not do any further investigation into the case. Fortunately, for Butler, the public defenders took their job very seriously. They put a lot of effort and a lot of time into their investigation.

 

This was a case of wrongful arrest and wrongful charge. It could also have been a case of wrongful conviction. Fortunately, for Butler, this did not happen: the jury realized that the prosecution did not have a case against Butler and therefore they declared him not guilty.

 

The real perpetrator was found after the end of the trial, when the public defenders received a tip. His name was Juan Curtis. His fingerprints were found on the victim’s purse (which had been found, but never tested for fingerprints).

 

The public defenders did the work the police officers should have done!

 

What do reviewers say about this film? On IMDb it has a rating of 80 per cent, which corresponds to four stars on Amazon. This average rating is quite good, but if you ask me, it is not high enough. I want to go all the way to the top with this product. I think it deserves a rating of five stars.

 

PS # 1. In 2002, this film won an Academy Award (an Oscar) as the best documentary film of 2001.

 

PS # 2. Brenton Butler tells his story in the following book: They Said It Was Murder (2004).

 

PS # 3. Eyewitness identification is highly unreliable. A famous case involves Jennifer Thompson-Cannino and Ronald Cotton. See their book Picking Cotton: Our Memoir of Injustice and Redemption (hardcover 2009, paperback 2010).

 

PS # 4. For information about false confessions, see the following books:

 

** True Stories about False Confessions edited by Rob Warden and Steven A. Drizin (2009)

 

** How the Police Generate False Confessions: An Inside Look at the Interrogation Room by James L. Trainum (2016)

 

PS # 5. For information about wrongful convictions, see the following books:

 

** Wrongful Convictions: True Murder Cases – Unbelievable Miscarriages of Justice by Jack Smith (2015)

 

** Blind Injustice: A Former Prosecutor Exposes the Psychology and Politics of Wrongful Convictions by Mark Goodsey (2017)

 

PS # 6. The French film-maker Jean-Xavier de Lestrade is perhaps best known as the man behind several documentary films about the death of Kathleen Peterson in 2001: Death on the Staircase.

 

*****

 

 

 

The cover of Brenton Butler's book

 

(published in 2004)

 

*****

 

 

 

 The French film-maker 

Jean-Xavier de Lestrade (born 1963)

*****