The Case of the Demure Defendant

Perry Mason #51

by Erle Stanley Gardner

Lawyer Perry Mason believes Nadine Farr did not poison Mosher Higley. Under truth drug, she confesses to Dr Denair, who brings the tape recording to Perry. As usual, secretary Della Street and PI Paul Drake help, Lt Tragg and DA Burger hinder. Is the killer her fiancé Locke, Higley niece Sue Newburn and hubby Jackson, man of work Cap'n Hugo, or a nurse?

Genres: Mystery, Fiction, Crime, Novels, Detective, Classics, Legal

154 pages, Hardcover

First published November 1, 1956

About the author

Erle Stanley Gardner was an American lawyer and author of detective stories who also published under the pseudonyms A.A. Fair, Kyle Corning, Charles M. Green, Carleton Kendrake, Charles J. Kenny, Les Tillray, and Robert Parr.

Innovative and restless in his nature, he was bored by the routine of legal practice, the only part of which he enjoyed was trial work and the development of trial strategy. In his spare time, he began to write for pulp magazines, which also fostered the early careers of Dashiell Hammett and Raymond Chandler. He created many different series characters for the pulps, including the ingenious Lester Leith, a "gentleman thief" in the tradition of Raffles, and Ken Corning, a crusading lawyer who was the archetype of his most successful creation, the fictional lawyer and crime-solver Perry Mason, about whom he wrote more than eighty novels. With the success of Perry Mason, he gradually reduced his contributions to the pulp magazines, eventually withdrawing from the medium entirely, except for non-fiction articles on travel, Western history, and forensic science.

See more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erle_Sta...

Reviews

[Bill Riggs · Rating 4 out of 5]

Gardner is a master whodunnit storyteller. The investigative suspense, courtroom drama, and legal maneuverings in his writings are second to none.
When a young girl accidentally confesses to a murder Perry takes up the case. Unfortunately, all evidence points to the fact that she is guilty. Has Perry finally taken on a case that he can’t possibly win?

[H (trying to keep up with GR friends) Balikov · Rating 3 out of 5]

Criminal attorney Perry Mason is one characters most recognized by Americans (of the middle of the twentieth century) who read Erle Stanley Gardner or listened to the Perry Mason radio show or watched Raymond Burr play him on television. Gardner was an even more prolific writer than Rex Stout and that is saying a lot!

By the time he wrote The Case of the Demure Defendant, Gardner was as interested in exploring certain aspects of the intersection of law and science as he was in just writing popular mysteries.

“Well,” Mason said, “for your information, Paul, that is not a typical Perry Mason trick. I sometimes do things that will expose the weakness of the police theory. I sometimes cross-examine a witness by bringing him face to face with physical conditions which demonstrate the fallacy of his testimony, but I don’t go around planting evidence in order to compound murders.”
Mason is in big trouble because that is what district attorney Hamilton Burger believes he can prove and he has Lt. Tragg and the Los Angeles police out gathering evidence and witnesses to corroborate. This all came about because of a psychotherapy session where a doctor administered some medication to his patient, Nadine Farr, and under which, she said that she had murdered an elderly man with whom she had been living. He, “Uncle Mosher,” had been thought to have died of natural causes several months before. The doctor consults Mason about what his responsibilities are with this information. But soon after Mason agrees to advise the doctor, the police become informed about this “confession.”

There are a lot of suspects and not one can tell “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth” as is required in a court of law. Mason is very vulnerable because it suits the district attorney just fine if part of this case makes Perry the goat. Mason has embarrassed Burger in court many times during the first fifty books that Gardner has written.

But our hero is the idealized, honest, knowledgeable, dedicated attorney that Gardner wants everyone to have. That’s why he has Mason say: “Get this straight, You’re dealing with a murder case. No matter how awkward the truth is, you can’t fabricate a situation that will meet all of the requirements. You can’t get a falsehood that will dovetail with all of the facts. Sooner or later all of the other facts will be known. If your story doesn’t dovetail you’ll have to change it. If you change it under pressure the truth will then be ten times more awkward.”

The plot is clever enough to have kept me interested. The book is short and things move along rapidly. There is no real character development or much that Gardner shares about Los Angeles in the 1950s. As he says in the Forward, he is very interested in exploring the developments in medical science and their impact on the law. I think this took precedence over the story itself.

[Dave · Rating 4 out of 5]

In “The Case of the Demure Defendant,” Mason is faced with what looks like an unwinnable case. His client confessed to a murder under truth serum and divers found evidence at the bottom of the lake confirming the details she confessed to. Of course, Mason figures his way out of this dilemma, but not before being accused of Concealing evidence, planting evidence, and being an accessory after the fact. What Gardner teaches us in this easy to read short novel is that the obvious answer, the one right in front of your face, isn’t the only answer and sometimes not even the right answer.

[SeriouslyJerome · Rating 4 out of 5]

Given to me by Alison - maybe as a gag gift? It started a Perry Mason obsession - tv show included. I've watched/read so many Perry Masons I can now watch contemporary murder mysteries & figure out who done it within a half hour - not because I'm so smart, but because they're still following a basic formula.

[Josh Hitch · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well done court room drama, with a nice reveal in the normal Mason way. In this case he is defending a woman who admitted to killing someone while under a truth serum. The serum was administered by a psychiatrist as a way to try to help her with what he thought was a mental block. The conversation was recorded and the doctor went to Mason to see what the legalities were. Later Mason finds himself in a fix and has to defend the woman in a murder case.

Highly recommended, not read a bad Mason novel yet and this was one of the better ones.

[Donna · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very confusing plot line, but of course a great courtroom scene with so many legal citations being made that I thought I was back in law school.

[Anne Patkau · Rating 3 out of 5]

Perry Mason believes Nadine Farr innocent of poisoning wealthy Mosher Higley three months ago. She confessed murder on tape to psychiatrist Dr Denair while drugged with "truth serum". But truth serum is not true. http://thebrainbank.scienceblog.com/2...

Nadine did blackmail Higley with proof he shot her father, his business partner, dead, so Nadine was born out of wedlock, and swindled her mother, their secretary-plus. After Higley demanded Nadine leave her fiance John Locke, she stole cyanide pills from John's lab to commit suicide. After dying Higley accused her of murder, she found the bottle moved. She weighted the bottle with gunshot, and threw it into the lake.

Higley's niece Sue Newburn knows her husband Jackson has a soft spot for Nadine - indeed he tells Perry he threw a bottle of fake sugar pills in the lake. But Perry retrieved sweetener, police found the poison, and accuse Perry of planting sweetener.

In the courtroom, Perry points out the lead shot in the poison bottle comes from Jackson's club, used to dry pen nibs of ink, finer than gun shot Nadine got from gun room pellets. Jackson says his wife Sue had cyanide and killed neighboring dogs yet decided not to doctor Higley's nightly chocolate. Perry realizes Higley's servant Cap'n Hugo abstracted the required four tablets before giving Nadine's bottle to John, suggests PI Paul Drake inform DA Burger later to put him under obligation.

[Thom Swennes · Rating 3 out of 5]

When Dr. Logbert Denair decides to use a truth serum to treat a patient suffering from a deep seeded sense of guilt, he uncovers more than he had bargained for. Nadine Farr, a young, single and very attractive woman had come to him with feelings she could not explain and had problems coping with them. With her consent he gave her a diluted solution of sodium pentothal and began to question her. Her answers led to a confession of murder. Dr. Denair consults Perry Mason as to eventual implications and legal obligations. This is the beginning that leads Perry Mason to the defense of a confessed murderer. Things are not always as they seem and it takes a colossal effort to uncover the truth. Unlike many courtroom dramas that are written today, the district attorney (Hamilton Burger) has no respect for Perry Mason and is often openly hostile when pitted against him in the halls of justice. This is a good read and bound to appeal to a wide reading audience.

[Bob · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've been reading Gardner's Perry Mason books off and on for a long time. Many years ago, I was an intense fan of the series. Now, after a lot of water over the dam, I'm looking at them again.

Those who are used to really fine mystery writers may find Gardner's writing style a bit stiff and mechanical. Nonetheless, I still love the general setting: the characters of Perry, Della, Paul, Lt. Tragg, and Hamilton Burger. That, and the ingenious plots, are why I read Perry Mason.

On the whole, the ones written by around 1953 are the best. This one was written in 1956, just before the TV series started. It's very good and very clever. The writing is a bit dry and repetitious. It has probably the longest courtroom scene in the entire Perry Mason canon. In fact, many people will be turned off by the long legal debate about what, if anything, can be used in a court of law from a communication between doctor and patient. I debated giving this story four or five stars, finally settling on five.

The plot is quite complex and ingenious. I'll try to summarize it as briefly as I can.

A young demure but despondent woman, Nadine Farr, has been seeing a psychiatrist, Dr. Denair, who gives her truth serum to learn more of her underlying problem. He is amazed when she says she murdered someone, her "uncle" Mosher Higley, three months earlier. Nadine thinks she accidently poisoned him with cyanide. The doctor tape records the session, and a nurse is present who is clearly shocked by the revelation.

How did Nadine murder Uncle Mosher? She says that three months earlier she accidentally used cyanide instead of a sugar substitute in making hot chocolate. Mosher Higley drank it and promptly died. The doctor who was called passed it off as a heart attack. But where would she have gotten cyandide? Turns out her boy friend and fiancee, John Locke, is a chemist. One time when she visited his laboratory she took some cyanide, because she was then contemplating suicide due to pressure she was under from Mosher Higley. When she got home she put the pills in an old empty bottle of sugar substitute and put it in her room.

Pressure? From what? We slowly learn the long complex story. Twenty five years earlier Higley was in a partnership. His secretary was a woman named Rose Farr. Long story short, the partner died, Rose delivered a baby, Nadine, then Rose died, all tragically and perhaps suspiciously. Nadine learned some of the details a couple years ago and was virtually blackmailing Higley. Though they lived in the same house, she and Higley hated each other.

Dr. Denair consults Perry Mason about whether he can legally keep all this secret. Perry advises caution, and says he will have Paul Drake investigate the events. Unfortunately, the nurse spills the beans and the police pick up the tape recording.

In her session with Dr. Denair, Nadine reported that after the death, she went to the pantry and found the bottle she put cycanide in close by a new bottle of sugar substitute! She says somehow that bottle got from her room to the pantry, where she belives she inadvertently used it to make chocolate. She wants to get rid of it, toss it into a lake, but she realizes it would float. So, very astutely, she goes into Higley's gun room, opens a shotgun shell, and pours some of the lead shot into the bottle, thereby making it heavy. She then drives out to a nearby lake, and throws it off the boat dock.

Perry goes to that lake, finds some boys swimming, and pays them to dive down to look for a bottle. One boy finds it, and Perry takes it to a chemist he knows to have it analyzed.

Meanwhile the police are investigating. They learn what Perry did and think he is illegally manipulating evidence. But is this the only bottle that was tossed into the lake? There are Perry Mason stories featuring gun swaps, fingerprint swaps, even an icepick swap. This one has a bottle swap.

I will say no more about the complex plot. The book is a page turner!

The early Perry Masons were film noir suspense mysteries, with little, sometimes no, courtroom scences. The later books emphasized courtroom drama. This one may be the primary canonical example of that. Some readers may be turned off by the back and forth citing of legal precedents by Perry and Hamilton Burger. I love it!

Some Sgt Holcomb, a little Lt. Tragg, excellent Hamilton Burger. There are no interesting little embellishments. No exotic locations, but diving into the lake is a bit exotic.

Recurring theme: Mason in some jeopardy for suspected illegal activities.

There aren't many suspects. I thought the culprit was obvious, one of the most obvious of any Perry Mason story.

Definitely recommended.

The cast:

Nadine Farr, demure young woman who visits a psychiatrist and undergoes truth serum.
Dr. Logbert Denair, the psychiatrist, with a legal question for Perry.
Mosher Higley, older "uncle" of Nadine Farr who dies of a heart attack -- or something else?
John Locke, fiancee of Nadine.
Elsa Clifton, nurse of Dr. Denair.
Cap'n Hugo, jack-of-all-trades houseman for Mosher Higley.
Jackson Newburn, husband of
Sue Newburn, niece of Mosher Higley.

[Vincent Darlage · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the best of the Perry Mason series. This is one of the first Perry Mason novels I ever read, back in 1991 or so. It impressed me then - and it still impressed me 20 years later.

[Serdar Poirot · Rating 4 out of 5]

Denair adında bir doktor hastası Nadine Farr'ı doğruluk serumu ile incelerken amcası Mosher Higley'i öldürdüğü itirafını alır. Ne yapacağını bilemez ve Mason'a gelir. Bu itirafın yalan olabileceğini de düşünse de Mason, Paul ve Della ile araştırmalara başlar. Mosher bir kaç ay önce Captain Hugo, Nadine, akrabası olan Sue ve kocası Jackson Newburn ile aynı evde iken ölmüş ve mumyalanmıştır. Potasyum siyanür ile öldürdüğünü düşünen Nadine, sevgilisi John Avington Locke adlı kimyagerin ofisinden siyanür tabletleri çalmıştır. Ama bunlar kayıptır. Evin yakınındaki göle atıldığı düşünülür. Göle giden Mason, çocuklara para vererek dalmalarını ister ve Arthur Felton adlı bir çocuk bir şişe bulur. Bunu bir kimyagere götürür ve analiz etmesini ister. Sonra polisler bu şişeyi ele geçirir. Mason cinayet masasına gittiğinde Hamilton Burger ve Teğmen Tragg'i orada bulur. Sonuç geldiğinde şişenin içinde sakarin olduğu ortaya çıkar. Artık Nadine saklanmasına gerek kalmamıştır. Ama polis o gölde siyanür dolu bir şişe daha bulur. İlk şeker şişesini Mason'ın attığını iddia edeceklerdir. Nadine ve Locke evlenmeye giderken Yuma yolunda yakalanır. Her ne kadar Mosher'ın nasıl öldüğü bilinmese de Nadine tehlikededir. Aslında şişelerden birini Jackson Newburn atmıştır ama bu şahit olmadığı için Mason ilk etapta bunu ispat edemez. Ama sonrasında şişe boyutlarından yola çıkarak onun itiraf etmesini sağlar. Mosher'ın ortağı ve annesinden olan çocuğu Nadine'dir. Mosher'ın ortağının ölümüne sebep olmuş ve paralarını da çalmıştır. Nadine de şantaj yapmaktadır. Sue öldürmüştü diye şüphelenen Newburn de karısınkı korumak için bir şişe atmıştır. Peki Locke'un Hugo'dan aldığı şişede kaç tablet vardır? Cinayeti kim işlemiştir? Hamilton Burger mahkemede yediği tokadı nasıl telafi edecektir? Mason ona yardım edecek midir? Keyifle bir solukta okunan bir roman.

[Tom Donaghey · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Case of the Demure Defendant (P. Mason #51) (1956) by Erle Stanley Gardner. A young woman confesses to poisoning a man is the case set before Perry mason. That she was in a psychiatrist’s care at the moment and she had been under the influence of a “truth” serum at the time, and the entire conversation was tape recorded, is not the big problem. The problem is the moral dilemma facing the doctor. Should he tell the police or is the confession well within the rules of patient-doctor confidentiality?
Turns out that doesn’t matter when the nurse who was present for the exam blabs to her boyfriend, a police detective.
Yet another nice setup for a very amazing case that before it ends has Mason up against a wall. The D.A.’s office spreads the word that the famous lawyer has stopped beyond the bounds, well beyond them, when Mason might very well have manipulated the evidence.
A quote from the book: ‘Hamilton Burger said, with what amounted to as a sneer, “Counsel has continually resorted to all sorts of ingenious trickery in connection with his cases. This is one time he went too far and now that he is trapped he realizes that his entire professional reputation is at stake, It is distasteful to me to have to make these comments but I suggest that the court consider the motivation.”
Like every other Stanley novel this has many twists and turns, the evidence points every which way and the truth seems to be too well hidden for justice to be properly served. But Mason, Street and Drake are on the case and nothing will stop them from bringing the lying perpetrators out of hiding and into prison.

[Robert Palmer · Rating 4 out of 5]

I grew up watching the very popular Perry Mason television series (1957-1966), and it played a significant role in my decision to become a lawyer. Later, while in law school, my Evidence professor recommended that we watch Perry Mason re-runs to practice our objections. He told us that Erle Stanley Gardner, the author and creator of Perry Mason, was actively involved in production of the television series, that he was an attorney himself, and that the courtroom scenes were accurate, at least insofar as procedure and objections (but not necessarily in the level of drama involved). Still later, as a practicing trial attorney, I referred to my best courtroom moments as "Perry Mason moments."

Although I grew up on the television series, I had never read even one of the more than 80 Perry Mason novels penned by Erle Stanley Gardner. Recently, I decided to delve into these books which I understand are still among the top bestsellers of all time. This is the fourth one I have read.

The Case of the Demure Defendant was one of the earliest Perry Mason television episodes (Season 1, Episode 16). The novel, however, is much more complex and interesting. Indeed, in the novel there is even an extended discussion of case law in oral argument on a motion heard outside the presence of the jury. As a trial lawyer, I found the argument quite interesting, but I cannot judge what effect it might have on a lay audience (I have been an attorney for 40 years, more than half my life).

I enjoyed the novel and would recommend it to anyone who enjoys reading mysteries and courtroom drama.

[Amit Bikram · Rating 4 out of 5]

Unlike most other books involving the intuitive and resourceful lawyer, this book is a slow burner for a large portion of the case. Initially dictated by the peculiarities of the case, and later on, by the threat of being caught in the cobwebs of the police, Mason and Della bring forth their tenacity to pull through in such a situation. Drake, the ever-present encyclopedia/internet full of accurate information, continues to make life easier for the charismatic lawyer.

There is the slated courtroom scene, with its fireworks and clashing of personalities(Burger and Mason) at the very end, as usual, though Mason's trump card, his ability to process new information at a superhuman speed, saves the day. It doesn't just save his client, but also saves his entire professional career and prevents him from going to jail.

One issue that stands out as a sore thumb is associated with crimes committed in the past, as was the case in this book. Some of Mason's stronger and more heroic traits, such as thinking on his feet and legal jumbling of evidence, are not brought forth in such a case, thus leading to the plot losing a bit of sheen.

Overall, it is one of the stronger cases in the series, and well worth reading once.

[Barney · Rating 5 out of 5]

Nadine Farr fell in love with John Locke, but Mosher Higley, family friend of Locke and present unwillingly guardian of Nadine, did not want this to end up in marriage since he knows Nadine is an illegitimate child. Also he was blackmailed by Nadine as Higley defrauded Nadine's father and Nadine knew it. So Higley asks Nadine to vanish away within 48 hours so that Locke will not marry her so Nadine chooses to commit suicide and for that, takes some cyanide pills from Locke's lab.
On the day of 48 hours time limit, Nadine gives usual hot chocolate to Mosley who dies immediately on consumption. Nadine checks for the cyanide pills which is missing and thinks she had put them in the hot chocolate thinking them as the usual sugar substitute. However the doctor rules the death as natural.
Two years later, driven by guilt, Nadine confesses the crime to a psychiatrist over a truth serum test. This comes to Mason who starts investigating the case and simultaneously police also knows about this and arrests Nadine.
Higley's neice Sue Jackson has interests in Higley's properties and death of Higley would make her the heir to his property.
Who is the murderer? Nadine or Sue?

[Edmund Kubiak · Rating 4 out of 5]

I've been watching the old TV shows, and I noticed this one had a book version. Curiosity got the better of this cat, so I checked the book out. It was a short, enjoyable read. For many reasons the book and the show are different (fewer characters, changes in characters' names, that sort of thing) but one problem I had with the book is plot confusion. The book's plot gets very convoluted somewhere around 1/3 of the way into the book. Hamilton Burger doesn't appear until the (very late) court scenes of the book and it seems that he's trying to cement his reputation as DA but why is not clear. He talks about Mason's courtroom theatrics as if he's bumped heads with Mason at least some several times before, so why is he STILL trying to prove himself? There's almost no "spoiler alert" needed with anyone even vaguely familiar with the Perry Mason canon-- Burger loses. What bothered me was the self-congratulatory tone the narrative takes with this fact. (Even though Burger is portrayed as something of a self-centered jerk, I still kind of felt sorry for the guy!)
Still, taking the minor faults this work has, it is still an interesting read. Afterwards, go watch the show, if you can.

[Rupesh Goenka · Rating 3 out of 5]

Nadine Farr, a pretty young woman, confesses to killing her uncle Mosher Higley with cyanide while under the influence of drugs given by her psychiatrist, Dr. Logbert Denair. The doctor chooses to administer the so-called truth serum test in order to identify a treatment for the mental stress and inner turmoil that are affecting her health. She is proven guilty when a bottle containing the poison is recovered from the bottom of a lake, seemingly validating her confession. Despite the mounting evidence, Perry Mason is convinced of Nadine’s innocence and takes on the daunting task of defending a client who has already admitted to the crime.

"The Case of the Demure Defendant" is a satisfying, fast-paced whodunnit mystery with a smart and unexpected ending. The courtroom scenes are powerful, hilarious, sometimes overdramatic and occasionally a bit confusing due to an excessive number of judicial references. The novel stays entertaining and captivating throughout, in spite of these minor shortcomings. A FAIRLY IMPRESSIVE READ.

[Eileen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another classic Perry Mason, but this time his neck's in the noose! A psychologist comes to Mason with a baffling question: if a patient admits to murder while mostly unconscious, must he legally inform the police? Does he have to hand over the taped interaction or do the laws of patient confidentiality apply?

Since there is a slight chance that the admission is false, Mason counsels the doctor to investigate before doing anything, and the doctor hires an expert--Mason--to find out more. The police learn of the tape, though. During his investigate the potential murder confession, Perry Mason is accused of tampering with and planting evidence.

He has to straighten out the tangle of blackmail, murder, hatred, and distrust not only to save his client, but his own skin! As usual, he must rely on the law and its technicalities to find and prove the truth.

[Chazzi · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dr. Denair's patient, Madine Farr, has made some seriously incriminating statements during a session under the influence of truth serum. The doctor is using it to unlock what is in her mind that is causing her such stress that affects her health. What makes things so difficult is these statements have been recorded.

Dr. Denair consults with Perry Mason for advise on what to do. When Mason speaks with Nadine, she is very matter-of-fact about the whole thing.

Mason doesn't feel her statement is true and sets out to prove it. Doing this puts him in a compromising situation that could cost him his livelihood. Something the DA would love to see happen.

I've been a fan of Perry Mason since I first read him in my teens and still enjoy the books.

[Katy Koivastik · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another well told legal drama from the canon of lawyer-turned-writer Erle Stanley Gardner. Defense attorney Perry Mason is at the top of his verbal game, squaring off in court against prosecutor Hamilton Burger.

Keeping track of what famed movie director Alfred Hitchcock would call “the McGuffin”, in this case a vial containing cyanide tablets, and its twin, but instead containing a sugar substitute, kept this reader riveted.

Written in 1956, the novel contains cringy descriptions of the female form and now verboten hugs between client and counsel. Giving ESG the benefit of changing times, I did not deduct a star for these transgressions.

[Tim Deforest · Rating 4 out of 5]

A woman confesses to murder to her doctor while under the influence of a drug. The doctor seeks legal advice from Perry Mason, who soon establishes that no murder took place.

EXCEPT the murder turns out to have indeed taken place! (Well, probably.) And it also appears that Perry Mason has been caught tampering with evidence.

With both his client's life and his career on the line, Mason goes to trial with the odds stacked against him. As usual, he will pull a metaphorical rabbit out of his metaphorical hat just when it seems all is lost. But this formula works, because we never know the form that rabbit will take and we also have fun getting there.

[Jon · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Oh, if the court pleases," Hamilton Burger said, "this is very evidently a technicality."
"The defendant serves notice," Mason said, "that under the circumstances of this case the defendant intends to rely upon every technicality which the law gives for her protection. These things the prosecutor sneeringly refers to as technicalities are simply the safeguards that the law provides a defendant to prevent a defendant from being unjustly convicted. The defense intends to insist that none of these safeguards be ignored."

[John Bunyan · Rating 3 out of 5]

A novel set of circumstances with very routine plot development. Police and prosecutors continue to argue that Mason uses nefarious means to obscure the truth and get his clients off, when what actually happens is that he reveals the truth and finds the actual culprits. By now Sergeant Holcomb, Lieutenant Tragg, and Hamilton Burger should be soliciting Mason’s help or resign because they never get it right.

[Jc · Rating 5 out of 5]

What do confessions mean? How does do judges and juries determine if one is valid? How does a lawyer defend an already confessed client? To find out, Mason must do a little fresh-water fishing for some unusual fish. DA Hamilton Burger is sure that Mason can’t get away with this one—he knows that both Perry and his client are guilty, Burger has them dead to rights … or does he? Read Demure Defendant and find out. Top-notch Gardner.

[Gary Anderson · Rating 5 out of 5]

A quote from the book The Case of the Demure Defendant sums up my review -- "...one newspaper subsequently stated, 'broke all records for pandemonium even in a Perry Mason case.'" This one starts with a confession under a truth serum and ends with the truth. Perry Mason, as usual, is the only one who can solve the case.

[Mark Phillips · Rating 4 out of 5]

Both Perry and his client are in so much trouble in this one that poor Della is in tears at one point. Hamilton Burger positively beams that he has such a slam-dunk case. All the evidence seems to point to Nadine Farr murdering her patron with cyanide capsules she stole from her boyfriend's lab. Can Perry clear a defendant who has confessed to the murder under truth serum to her psychiatrist?

[Richa · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very good, face-paced mystery. I kept oscillating between guilty and not guilty till the very last page! The cross examination, though highly technical, was a personal treat. It was sharp, fast, accurate and exciting!

[Indu · Rating 5 out of 5]

like all perry mason books this one was fast paced and had a really unexpected twist to the tale. I have probably read all of the Perry Mason novels when i was young , but i still go back to them for a light read and enjoy them just as much.

[Shailesh Dhume · Rating 4 out of 5]

A quick breezy read. a very ingenuous plot with all the twists and turns. This is Perry Mason in top form here. It is very interesting to read how first he gets into a bug mess and then cleverly extracts himself and his client from it.

[Ruta · Rating 3 out of 5]

My first ever mystery book. Nadine Farr, a demure lady who, under a narcotic method, confessed to a murder she may or may not commit.
Small hints given along the story pretty much sums up who the real murderer is.