Anatomy of A Reality

Buried deep in the vast and uncompromising woods of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan is the story of one of America’s most unique murder trials. The relatively quiet and calm landscape of the Upper Peninsula, more commonly referred to by its residences as the “UP” was the stage for a story that would prove to be monumental in terms of its real life decision and its Hollywood depiction.

The film noir classic Anatomy of A Murder is a legendary piece of American cinema and has cemented itself in the canon of outstanding courtroom dramas for good reason. Since the film’s release in 1959, it has continually captivated audiences for decades. The movie weaves the tale of one man’s perceived justification for committing first degree murder and his attorney’s struggle to convince a jury to find merit in that argument. The film tackles the dichotomous situation presented by one man’s crime of passion. The dichotomy exceeded simply convincing a jury but convincing a jury comprised of the members of close knit and very unique community who were determining the fate of an outsider. This enthralling film follows the courtroom proceedings that follow the gruesome events that unfolded at the Big Bay Inn in Big Bay, Michigan.

On July 31, 1952, A Lieutenant in the US Army, Coleman Peterson shot and killed a man, former Michigan State Police officer Mike Chenoweth for allegedly raping and beating his wife, Charlotte Peterson. According to The News-Palladium, Benton Harbor, Michigan “Peterson’s wife went to the tavern last night to purchase beer to take back to the trailer camp, and Chenoweth offered to drive her home. On the way, she said, Chenoweth assaulted and raped her. In tears, she told her husband, who picked up his gun and went to the tavern. There he fired several shots at Chenoweth , striking him in the stomach, chest and right arm. There were a dozen a more patrons in the tavern at the time of the shooting, which occurred about 12:30 a.m.” (News Palladium, 1952) By August 7 of the same year the trial had begun and concluded with a verdict of not guilty for Lt. Peterson on the grounds of temporary insanity a mere six days later. The events that unfolded in the 25^th District Court (Michigan Courts, 2022) in Marquette County were the foundational groundwork for a story that was destined turn to gold on the silver screen.

Anatomy of A Murder and its depiction of the People of Michigan v. Coleman Peterson trial sets itself apart from many other factually based court room dramas due to the films deeply inherent roots in the truth of the matter. The film does not open with the typical “based on a true story” frame that have become a contemporary symbol of validity for most true crime dramas. But the absence of this cinematic commonplace does not cause the story to deviate too far from the truth. The movie was filmed in its entity in Marquette County, where the real trial occurred. The film is based on a book by the same name by an author named Robert Travers. However, a little research will prove that Robert Travers was a pseudonym. (Tribune, 1970) The author’s actual name was John Voelker. John Voelker was the defense attorney for The People of Michigan v. Peterson in 1952. Voelker’s identity was not the only name changed in his book. Every important person in the trial was given a new name and the filmmakers followed suit. In the film LT. Peterson is referred to as Lt.  Manion, Charlotte Peterson is portrayed as Laura Manion, Judge Charles O. Arch  was portrayed as Judge Weaver and the prosecuting attorney was given the name Claude Dancer. John Voelker is referred to as Paul Biegler. Voelker wrote this book in a semi-fictional fashion in attempt to tell the complicated story that envelopes this murder and consequential trial without possibly implicating any of the people involved. He had to be particularly careful with his depiction of this case because he had a seat on the Michigan State Supreme Court at the time his book was published. In fact, he was still on the Michigan State Supreme Court until the book had become a solidified hit. “Now assured of an adequate income, Voelker resigned from the Michigan Supreme Court in January 1960 to devote his time to fishing and writing.” (NMU, 2008) As this article expands on the various layers of this murder trial, it will begin to bring to light the realities of the crime that inspired Anatomy of a Murder while also highlighting the discrepancies that the film makers may have portrayed in the name of a dramatic effect. However, sandwiched between the truth in recounting of this story and the Hollywood flare that made it a hit, there is a very American lesson to be learned.

 From left to right: John Voelker, Lt. Peterson, (seated) Charlotte Peterson (NMU, 2008)

            The details and evidence of the murder were piling up in favor of the prosecution before the trial had even begun. But the most adversarial force Voelker was up against was a battle with the aforementioned tightly knit community that the deceased (Chenoweth) was a part of for his entire life. Chenoweth was a true Yooper.

Yooper: an endearing and self-proclaimed title that the residences of the UP wear with a badge of honor. The Yoopers are a unique group of Americans belonging to a portion of Michigan that is often forgotten by outsiders.

(Hannity, Nov. 19, 2020)
 

 But this sense of exclusion from the outside world has stretched over generations and given birth to an unparalleled sense of community that is exclusive to the Upper Peninsula. They care for one another in a manner that is dedicated and true because they have the resources to do so. The population in the UP is still small to this day and was significantly less in 1952. The upper Peninsula is a collection of various small towns that thrive in different ways from either mining or exporting iron ore or the logging industry. As if the arduous labor involved in mining and logging were not enough, the winter months are hard, treacherous, and long in the UP. There is a  communal sense of suffering among those that soldier through these blistering winters.  Facing some of nature’s harshest elements can really create cohesion that is unparalleled. This peculiar element of closely bound community was very important in the real trial and the depictions in the film. Far be it from anyone to associate them with the lower state of Michigan, they are a community and culture all their own.

The judge in this case was a lower statesman. He was called up to oversee the proceedings because the original judge, Judge Maitland had “an illness” (NMU, 2008) He recognized that his presence might cause some uneasiness with a jury and courtroom comprised largely of Yoopers. In the Judge’s opening statement he addressed his reason for travelling from up state to be a preside over the case and assured the all in attendance that his main objective was to find the truth above all else. In the film, Judge Weaver adds an element of comedic relief in his statement. “ One judge is quite like another. The only differences may be in the state of their digestions or their proclivities for sleeping on the bench. For myself, I can digest pig iron. And while I might appear to doze occasionally, you will find that I am easily awakened, particularly if shaken gently by a good lawyer with a nice point of law.” (Time-Life Multimedia, 1959) Judge Arch was portrayed as honest and integral throughout the film.  

            The defense had an out of town judge with the appearance of being less biased in their favor. Next, they had to ensure that the jury did not feel biased toward Lt. Peterson. After all, he was basically a stranger that had been placed in their community by the Army and were unfamiliar with his character. However, the Lieutenant’s service to his country seemed to have an impact on his appearance at the trial. The defense would not only mention LT. Peterson’s combat service in Korea, but the Lieutenant appeared at trial in his dress service uniform every day. He never appears in civilian attire in the film or over the period of the actual trial.  The only photograph of the Lieutenant in civilian attire was taken sometime shortly after his arrest.

 Pictured Above: LT. Coleman Peterson after being arrested for the shooting of Mike Chenoweth

           Voelker was crafting an excellent defense built on his clients proud military service and an out of town judge that was willing to maintain order in a seemingly chaotic courtroom. The courtroom was depicted as having hysterical outbursts in the film. One of which was over the use of the word “panties” which in the film is responded with laughter from those in attendance. But an interview that was conducted in 2008  with one of the jurors on the case. Shows that this famous scene had a little bit of hyperbole added by the camera. “The colorful person was John Voelker.” NMU, 2008) Max Mueller recalls after being asked about the courtroom hysterics. He said he remembered the courtroom to be relatively calm except when Voelker and Dancer would argue.

However, it does seem that Mrs. Peterson’s panties were in fact a piece of evidence. Apart from her actual underwear being retrieved and used as evidence. The film depicts behavior in the courtroom that would deemed as grossly inappropriate according to today’s standards. In the line of questions regarding Mrs. Peterson’s alleged rape, one question was in reference to what she was wearing that night. These questions stood without objection partially because it was the 1950’s and partially because Mrs. Peterson had a colorful reputation with men and alcohol. Especially, when her husband was absent. According to the Chicago Tribune “The reason that Lt. Peterson had shot Chenoweth that night was because Mrs. Peterson, who had been drinking and partying all evening at the tavern, came home with a black-eye. She told her husband that Mike Chenoweth raped her. It was later established in the court records that Peterson had a jealous streak. One night, outside the tavern, he struck his wife. Witnesses testified he accused her of flirting with one of the men stationed with him at the U.S. Anti-Aircraft Range near Big Bay.” (Chicago Tribune, 1970) 

            Voelker had a difficult situation on his hands as the Peterson’s dirty laundry was being aired out in front of the jury. Voelker and Lt. Peterson decided to plead that the murder was committed under a state of temporary insanity. Lt. Peterson plead that he did not remember the killing in any capacity.

            The lieutenant recalled the events of July 31, 1952, as such in the film:   

Lt. Manion: “My next coherent recollection is back in the trailer.

Paul Biegler: "Can you illustrate for us, Lieutenant, what position the deceased assumed when he turned around?"

The Lieutenant's words came in breathless spurts,

Lt. Manion: "As I say, he turned.. To the best of my recollection he turned to his right...

his left hand on the bar... I cannot recall seeing his right arm."

Paul Biegler: “You say his left hand on the bar or arm and hand?"

Lt. Manion: "His left forearm. He kind of leaned."

Paul Biegler: "State whether or not you remember driving back to the trailer."

Lt. Manion: "No, sir; I don’t-"

Paul Biegler: “What happened when you got back to the trailer?"

Lt. Manion: "I guess I came to.”  (Time-Life Multimedia, 1959)

According to the researchers at Northern Michigan University, the copy of Voelker’s testimony from the character dialogue between Lt. Manion and Paul Biegler does resemble his actual testimony given during the trial. “The lieutenant's testimony closely follows that of the actual trial, although it is condensed in places.” (NMU, 2008)

            Upon hearing everything the defense and prosecution had prepared and delivered, the jury returned with a decision of not guilty, on the reason of temporary insanity. That is not just the storybook ending that Lt. Manion received in Anatomy of A Murder but the real decision in The People of Michigan v. Coleman Peterson.

 The jury from the People v. Peterson trial (NMU, 1952)  

The unfolding of events behind the camera were not that much different than the reality that unfolded in the Marquette County courtroom. There were certainly many elements of Anatomy of a Murder that were accentuated for dramatic effect. But when it comes to watching courtroom deliberations, sometimes a little dramatic effect is needed. Despite any exaggerations of the truth used to create the film, the indisputable fact that a complete outsider murdered a Yooper in the UP, in front of a crowd of Yooper witnesses, then tried by Yoopers was ultimately found innocent is truly incredible. Despite overwhelming evidence that was not in the favor of the defendant. A jury comprised of close knit community members, people that were able to feel the ripple of the murder in their everyday lives, decided in the favor of Lt. Peterson. Lest it be forgotten that Voelker was also a Yooper, being born and raised in Ishpeming, Michigan. All of those factors in conjunction with one another, and he was still able to use all of his local charm and convince the jury that one of their own was not only capable of raping Charlotte Peterson but had done so beyond the shadow of a doubt. Therefore, deserving of his death at the hands of her temporarily deranged husband. Voelker’s work as an attorney was as equally stupendous as James Stewart’s on screen portrayal of him. Many things can be misconstrued through the lens of a camera as its directors attempt to simulate real court room proceedings, but what it cannot distort is the empirical need to hire an outstanding attorney when trapped in the grips of the law.