%20(1).png)
Murder In The Mitten
A historical Michigan true crime podcast
Murder In The Mitten
Flames of Deception - Nellie Leet 1902
A woman engulfed in flames, a husband claiming to be asleep, and a gallon of missing kerosene. These are the elements of a horrifying crime that shook Grand Rapids, Michigan in 1902.
Welcome to Murder in the Mitten, a historical Michigan true crime podcast. I'm your host, laura, and in today's episode we're headed to Grand Rapids in 1902. When a woman was found on fire in her own home, with her husband in the same room. Was it an accident or was it murder? On February 24, 1902, it was reported in the Grand Rapids Press that on Saturday, the 22nd, while carrying a lamp from one room to the other in an intoxicated condition, mrs Nellie Leet, 44 years old, fell on the ground in her Grand Rapids home. The lamp was overturned and exploded, setting fire to her clothing, and she was burned to death, while her husband, william Leet, 56 years old, lay sick on a bed in the same room, unable to move himself or protect his wife. The room was soon in flames and, but for a timely arrival of men on the scene, the husband and house would also have burned. An alarm of fire was immediately turned in and upon arrival, the department soon had the fire extinguished, confining it to the one room in which the woman lost her life. From the coroner's investigation so far, the occupants have been drinking all day, mary Morse, one of the women present, being sent up for 20 days of drunkenness in the police court this morning.
Speaker 1:As we know, the newspaper doesn't always get it right on the first try. What at first could have looked like a tragic accident soon had a lot of unanswered questions. Mary Morse, a widower, may have had more to play in the case than just being a drunken woman on the scene. This may have been a case of jealousy, it seems. Mary may have had reasons to get Nellie out of her way. Mary and Nellie reportedly had frequent quarrels over William and on the night of the fire Nellie had thrown Mary out of the house, according to neighbors. Looking back at old newspapers showed that this did not appear to be the best situation for anyone involved.
Speaker 1:Starting in 1897, william and Nellie showed up repeatedly for disorderly conduct and inappropriate language. The first report was in August of 1897 of William fighting with another man. He was fined $5 or 20 days in jail. In 1998, william was fighting with and yelling at Nellie and was fined $5 or 10 days in jail. Then acting disorderly in December that year resulted in six days in jail. In February of 1899, both William and Nellie were charged with disorderly conduct and fined $5 or 20 days in jail. Then in July of that year, william was fined another $5 or 30 days for the same conduct. In December of 1900, they were both fined $5 or 30 days when they had a domestic dispute at their home where William pushed Nellie against a hot stove and Nellie went into a rage and attacked him both verbally and physically. When William was brought in front of Judge Doyle he noted William was an old-timer who had been before the court any number of times in the last three years, so he was given a straight jail sentence of 15 days. Then in December they were both pulled in for disorderly conduct and fined $3.85 each.
Speaker 1:Several of the articles noted that they were inebriated at the time of the incidents. Several of the articles read like domestic abuse. So why would the women be fighting over this catch of a man? Eh money? William drew a large pension of $8 a month from the government for serving time in the army and navy. He also was soon to be the sole heir to $20,000 upon the death of his mother.
Speaker 1:This was not the only thing pointing the police to be suspicious. Coroner Wright said the body was saturated with kerosene and a blow on the breast was inflicted before the burning. There were also rumors going around the neighborhood that this was murder. When the nature of a death is in question, a coroner's jury is held to determine the cause of death. Pretty quickly it was confirmed that there was sufficient evidence and the coroner's jury returned a verdict that Nellie Leitz was murdered and recommended that warrants be issued for William Leitz and Mary Morse. Before the warrants were issued, prosecuting attorney Brown wanted to review all of the information and told the papers on February 27th that I shall probably not issue the warrants until tomorrow as I desire to talk with the witnesses in the case and make a further investigation. As both the Morris woman and Leet are safely locked up, there is no need to hurry about the matter.
Speaker 1:Mary was in the county jail under the 15-day sentence for drunkenness and Leet was confined to police headquarters. While they investigated, detectives McDonald and Young questioned Mary and she told them many conflicting stories about how Nellie lost her life. She stated she was in the back room asleep, but Dr Edwards, the first on the scene, said he found her with Leitz in the front room. According to Mary's statement to the Grand Rapids Press, we were just horribly drunk and I really don't know very much about what happened the night of the fire. Yes, I knew the Leitz for some years ever since they'd been here, I guess but I had not seen much of them just before that, for I had been working up north. It was Mrs Leet that got me the job up north. She was a very good friend of mine. I just got back from the north about that time and went down to see Miss Leet's. The newspaper interjected that, if what Miss Morris said is true, she could not have held her job very long, for the jail records show that she was released from there only last Wednesday after serving a 30-day sentence for drunkenness. Ma'am, you know they check these things right.
Speaker 1:Mary continued. We had a big celebration down there that night and we were all intoxicated. We drank alcohol and I remember that Mrs Leitz took me by the arm and asked me to go to bed and I did. I don't remember anymore what happened, only that the policeman got me afterwards. Yes, I have known Mr and Mrs Leitz for a long time and was on good terms with both of them. I guess they quarreled some and I remember that Mrs Leitz told me that day that Mr Leitz had struck her on the breast and it left a mark. He struck her so hard. I remember that Mrs Leitz sent for a doctor for Mr Leitz that night too. No, I don't know what doctor and I don't know whether he came because I laid down when Mrs Leitz asked me to. There was no one there but the three of us that I know of. When William talked to the press about Mary, he said that his wife had often thrown her out of the house but he had never done so. But when Mary talked to the coroner's jury, she stated that she had never been ordered out of the Leitz home except by Mr Leitz and that Mrs Leitz was always good and kind and acted like a mother to her.
Speaker 1:On March 1st warrants were issued for the charge of murder for William and Mary. When they were arraigned in police court the defendants looked careworn and crestfallen. Mary had been before Judge Doyle many times before and had never shown any signs of remorse or regret. Her normal demeanor in this situation was defiant, but on that day she sat with her head bowed down. It was commented that the realization of the crime she was charged with seemed to weigh on her and her hitherto for reckless spirit was not visible. On March 7th the examination of the defendants began.
Speaker 1:16 witnesses were called, beginning with Dr Edwards, who was first on the scene the night of the fire. He testified as to the condition of the house and where the defendants were when he arrived. He'd been called to attend to William Leet but upon arrival found the building on fire. He found Mary and William together, while Nellie was found burning on the floor. He also testified to the bruised condition of Nellie's chest and neck, stating that she was either choked or dealt a hard blow. There were two separate blood clots, one on the chest and the other on the neck. The strike to the chest had been hard enough to bruise the flesh to the bone.
Speaker 1:Another witness noted that there had been a gallon of kerosene oil purchased that morning, and the can was found empty by firemen upon arrival. The only explanation given as to where the contents of the can were was the fact that one small lamp had been filled. The prosecution believed the oil was poured on an unconscious Nellie and that one of the defendants lit her on fire. It was also noted that the doorway where the body was first discovered was aflame, but the carpet and floor in the vicinity were not. Maybelle Foster testified she sent a boy to the Leet House 20 minutes before the fire and that at the time Mary and William were not drunk. She was also the one who sold them the gallon of oil.
Speaker 1:The day of the fire, detectives William and McDonald presented a diagram of the interior of the house that was used significantly throughout the trial. When Detective McDonald testified, he discussed William's explanation for how the big spot of oil came to be on the floor, supposedly two weeks prior to the fire. A small lamp was on the center table. When the cat leapt from the bed to the stand and tipped over the lamp, the lamp broke and the contents soaked the carpet. Sir, do not blame the poor cat.
Speaker 1:On May 8th the trial finally went to court. The trials were separated and William was tried first. Both Dr Edwards and Dr Wright took the stand and shared their findings that Nellie was choked to death based on the bruising and the position of the cords and tissues of her throat. Arthur Forbes, a boarder next door to the Leet house, testified next. On the night of the fire he went to the Leet home to borrow an ironing board to press his trousers. He stated that Mrs Leet was sober and all right. This was used by the prosecution to clear up any accusations that she was drunk and at fault for the fire. The defense petitioned the court to allow the jury to go to the scene of the crime. The prosecution objected that the place had been entirely changed, but they were overruled. The jury, the attorneys and the judge all took a trip to the crime scene to get a feel of the area where Nellie had died.
Speaker 1:Once everyone returned to the court, william took the stand. He did not make a good impression. He repeatedly contradicted himself and made a poor impression generally because he was unable to remember, or professed to be unable to remember, material facts. There were some discrepancies around what was burned and where it was placed in the room. William stated that there were some decorations up on a shelf that partially burned, proving that Nellie was standing when she caught on fire. But other witnesses disagreed. William also testified that he had fallen asleep at four o'clock in the afternoon the day of the fire and he didn't wake up until the two doctors were in the room and several people were yelling fire. He said he was not conscious of anything being the matter until the undertaker came to him as he half laid on the bed and said your wife is dead. Leet said he responded no, she isn't the undertaker, leet said, pointed at his wife on the floor and said that she lie there dead. William said he was very confused by the situation. He also seemed a little excited at times and answered sharply to the questions of the prosecutor, especially when he couldn't remember things.
Speaker 1:Closing arguments were made and the judge explained the different charges the jury could consider. They were allowed to choose from murder in the first degree, murder in the second degree or manslaughter. Murder in the first degree showed the defendant was deliberate and had malice afterthought and required the court to sentence him to life in prison. Second-degree murder allowed the court to sentence him to life or a lesser term of years. Manslaughter might occur involuntarily and had a maximum sentence of 15 years. The jury was sent out to deliberate and it didn't take long. Two hours later the jury came back with a verdict of guilty of murder in the second degree.
Speaker 1:On May 19th William was sentenced. Judge Noonham asked him if he had anything to say why the sentence of the court should not be pronounced, and he replied only this that I am not guilty. The judge responded Mr Leet, you have been convicted of murdering your wife and I must say that I do not see how the jury could have otherwise determined and that in the verdict I heartily concur. How you could be so cruel as to deliberately choke Nellie Leet and then pour oil over her body and set her aflame is beyond understanding. The story which you have told is such that it is beyond contruence. That you slept calmly in the room while your wife burned to her death is absurd. Your life has not been the best in character. I do not expect, mr Leet, that you will ever live to come out of the place to which I shall send you, but I would give you this advice that you spend your time in the years to come in sorrow and repentance for the horrible crime which you undoubtedly committed. The sentence of the court is that you are remanded and confined in the state prison at Jackson at hard labor for a period of 30 years from and including today. At the age of 56 and due to his poor physical health, this is as good as a life sentence.
Speaker 1:Next it was Mary's turn. Her trial was pushed back several times. In January 1903, the charges were dropped and she was released. She spent almost a full year in jail. Prosecutor Brown stated that the direct evidence in the case showed that the offense was committed by William alone, he stated.
Speaker 1:At the time the arrests were made, it was shown that Mary Morris, nellie Leet and William Leet were together in the Market Street house and had all been indulging freely in alcohol. They got into some trouble and it was believed it was on account of the relation of the two to Leet and it seemed as though the two women were concerned in the trouble. The evidence in the case against Leet showed, however, that Nellie Leet came to her death by force of some blow to the chest and a choking at the throat. That death resulted from suffocation. It seemed that the death could come only from the one person, though the other might be present At the time. Mrs Morris testified that Leet was the offender and she has not since that time said anything implicating herself, and I have not been able to secure any new testimony.
Speaker 1:Should we go to trial on the theory on which the first trial was held? Presumption is the innocence of Mrs Morris would be established. While I am satisfied that she was present, I am also satisfied that the first theory was the correct theory and in that I am agreed with by some of the members of the jury in the Leet case. They say it was on the theory that Leet himself did the killing that he was found guilty. For this reason I am now moving to Nolpros.
Speaker 1:The case Judge Newham stated that he was found guilty. For this reason, I am now moving to no pros. The case Judge Newham stated that he agreed with the prosecutor that, should the people go ahead with the case, it would be doubtful whether the defendant could be found guilty and that there would be the expense to the county of the trial and the inconvenience to the defendant caused needlessly. He ordered her discharged. This is a sad story about substance abuse and domestic violence. Sadly, nellie was in a toxic situation she couldn't get out of. Luckily, william's plan didn't work and she got the justice that she deserved. Thank you for listening to Murder in the Mitten, a historical Michigan true crime podcast. I hope you all enjoyed this story and I look forward to learning more about my state's true crime history with you next time. © transcript Emily Beynon.