User:SteamWiki/Reported kidnapping: Short Version

Reported kidnapping
[EDITOR NOTE this is the current version appears April 2 2017 in article Aimee Semple McPherson. A more abbreviated article is desired to lay out the --essence of the McPherson claim --followed by the prosecution theory, --McPherson defense rebuttal (their official statement?) --and some type of public reaction and aftermath, but VERY SHORT since most of all detailed information is in the main article Reported kidnapping of Aimee Semple McPherson ].

Disappearance from Venice Beach
The reported kidnapping of Aimee Semple McPherson caused a frenzy in national media and changed her life and the course of her career. After disappearing in May, 1926, she reappeared in Mexico five weeks later, stating she had been held for ransom in a desert shack there. The subsequent grand-jury inquiries over her reported kidnapping and escape precipitated continued public interest in her future misfortunes.

On May 18, 1926, McPherson went with her secretary to Ocean Park Beach north of Venice Beach to swim. Soon after arriving, McPherson was nowhere to be found. It was thought she had drowned. Searchers combed the beach and nearby area, but could not locate her body. The Angelus Temple received letters and calls claiming knowledge of McPherson, including demands for ransom. McPherson sightings occurred around the country, often in widely divergent locations many miles apart on the same day. As a precaution, the ransom notes were sent to the police who investigated at least one of them. Mildred Kennedy, though, regarded the messages as hoaxes, believing her daughter dead.

As the Angelus Temple prepared for a memorial service commemorating McPherson's death, Kennedy received a phone call from Douglas, Arizona. Her daughter was alive. The distraught McPherson was resting in a Douglas hospital and related her story to officials.



On the beach, May 19, 1926, McPherson said she had been approached by a young couple who wanted prayer for their sick child. McPherson went with them to their car and was suddenly shoved inside. A cloth, presumably laced with chloroform, was held against her face, causing her to pass out. Eventually, she was moved to an adobe shack far in the desert. Two kidnappers, Steve and Rose, were her constant companions, with a third unnamed man, occasionally visiting. When at last, all her captors were away on errands, she escaped out a window.

Using a mountain as a landmark, she traveled through the desert for around 11–13 hours across an estimated distance of 20 miles (32 km). Around 1:00 am she reached Agua Prieta, Sonora, a Mexican border town, and collapsed near a house there. She was assisted by the residents and finally taken to adjacent Douglas.

Return to Los Angeles
After leaving Douglas, McPherson was greeted at the Los Angeles train station by 30,000–50,000 people, more than for almost any other personage. The parade back to the temple even elicited a greater turnout than President Woodrow Wilson's visit to Los Angeles in 1919, attesting to her popularity and the growing influence of mass media entertainment. Already incensed over McPherson's influential public stance on evolution and the Bible, most of the Chamber of Commerce and some other civic leaders, saw the event as gaudy display; nationally embarrassing to the city. Many Los Angeles area churches were also annoyed.

The story received nationwide coverage. Then, speculations, together with alleged witnesses, began to emerge that her disappearance might have been caused by other than the kidnapping event McPherson described. Against her mother's wishes, who thought the press would continue to unfavorably exploit the story, McPherson decided for vindication and presented her complaint in court. A grand jury inquiry convened to determine if enough evidence could be found to indict any kidnappers. However, pressured by various influential community groups, the court instead intensely investigated McPherson, her family, and acquaintances to determine if the kidnapping was fabricated. District Attorney Asa Keyes led the prosecution against her. He was known for winning convictions, but six persons he sent to prison were found to be innocent and pardoned by the state governor.

Grand jury inquiry
The grand jury inquiries were first convened in July 8, 1926, adjourned and reconvened, holding sessions through the summer of 1926 accompanied by intense media interest. The proceedings were supposed to be secret as per California law, though the Los Angeles court spoke about it to the newspapers. Issues of trial by media and court of public opinion were apparent, as much of the proclaimed evidence against McPherson came from reporters who featured it in their news articles and passed it on to the police. McPherson also eschewed secrecy and freely used her radio station to broadcast her side of the story. Evidence and testimonies were hotly debated by an evenly divided public. On November 3, the case was determined to be moved to jury trial set for mid-January, 1927. Along with McPherson and her mother, several other defendants were charged in the inquiry. If convicted, the counts added up to maximum prison time of 42 years.

Various speculations were proffered by the news media and prosecution as to the reason for McPherson's disappearance. The one they settled on most strongly was she ran off with an ex-employee, Kenneth Ormiston. She was accused of staying with him in a California resort town cottage until May 29. The time frame of Ormiston's seaside cottage rental coincided with the first 10 days of her disappearance. However, a missing three-week period afterwards was not accounted for with any evidence in court by the prosecution. In response, the evangelist maintained all along, without changing anything in her story, that she was taken, held captive by the kidnappers, and escaped as she originally described.

As the prosecution tried to break down her story, defense witnesses corroborated her assertions   or McPherson herself demonstrated how the disputed parts were plausible  In contrast, the prosecution's case developed serious credibility issues. Witnesses changed their testimonies and evidence often had suspicious origins or was mishandled while in custody Finally, on January 2, 1927, Ormiston identified Elizabeth Tovey, a nurse from Seattle, Washington, as his female companion and the woman who stayed with him at the seaside cottage. All charges against McPherson and associated parties were dropped by the court for the lack of evidence on January 10, 1927.

After the case dismissal
Regardless of the court's decision, months of unfavorable press reports fixed in much of the public's mind a certainty of McPherson's wrongdoing. The newspapers had a vested interest in keeping the controversy going, since it generated huge sales. The bulk of the investigation against McPherson was funded by Los Angeles-area newspapers at an estimated amount of $500,000.

Some supporters thought McPherson should have insisted on the jury trial and clear her name. The grand jury inquiry concluded while enough evidence did not exist to try her, it did not indicate her story was true with its implication of kidnappers still at large. Court costs to McPherson were estimated to be as high as $100,000. A jury trial could take months. McPherson moved on to other projects. In 1927, she published a book about her version of the kidnapping: In the Service of the King: The Story of My Life.

Various influential individuals offered their opinions on the inquiry. In a letter to the Los Angeles Times, a few months after the case was dropped, the Reverend Robert P. Shuler stated, "Perhaps the most serious thing about this whole situation is the seeming loyalty of thousands to this leader in the face of her evident and positively proven guilt."

H.L. Mencken, noted journalist, satirist, cultural critic, and scholar and an ideological opponent of McPherson, opposite each other in the 1925 Scopes "Monkey" trial, also commented. He wrote that since many of that town's residents acquired their ideas "of the true, the good and the beautiful" from the movies and newspapers, "Los Angeles will remember the testimony against her long after it forgets the testimony that cleared her."