Lorraine Clark and the Murder of Melvin: When the Headlines Hardened into Fact

In 1954, Melvin Clark was murdered and his body dumped into the depths of the Merrimack River. His wife, Lorraine Clark, would ultimately plead guilty—and for decades, that plea has stood as the official ending to the case.

But the record tells a more complicated story.

In this episode, we take a closer look at the murder of Melvin Clark, the investigation that followed, and the media narrative that quickly hardened into “fact.” We examine the unanswered questions that were never resolved in court: the missing motive, the car mysteriously abandoned in Everett, and the physical realities that never quite lined up with a lone perpetrator.

We also explore how sensational newspaper coverage distorted public understanding of the case, and how those manufactured stories have persisted as "truth" to this very day.

Two years after her guilty plea, Lorraine Clark would repudiate her confession and implicate a man who had hovered around the case from the beginning. By then, the legal system had already decided it was finished listening.

This is the story of Lorraine Clark and the murder of Melvin—not as it was printed, but as it truly unfolded: fragmented, unresolved, and still asking questions no one ever fully answered.

Transcript

0:00

What do Hudson Hornets, parties, and birdwatching have in common? You're about to find out on this episode of Forgotten Felonies! Welcome back to Forgotten Felonies. I'm Monica. And I'm Olivia. And this is where we take you back in time to rediscover the tales of vintage villainy that time forgot. This episode features the most recent crime that we've ever covered so far. This one happened in 1954. Yes, prior to this one, the most recent crime we'd covered was the murder of Charles Alma Sanders in 1940. That's right. If you haven't listened to that episode yet, I highly recommend it. This one is extra special, though, because it's the first time one of our listeners, Raymond, reached out and suggested a case for us. We take requests and would love to hear from more listeners for more suggestions. We want to cover what you want to hear. We also have a long, long list of cases that we've found and will potentially be episodes in the future, but we don't have them laid out in a particular order. So if you... Have heard something like, I don't know, a family rumor that your great great uncle was the victim of a murder back in the early 1900s, just drop us a line and we will see if there is enough old newspaper coverage to dig up all the details for you. It would be our pleasure. So this case has not been forgotten, not by a long shot, but I found that the actual facts were ignored. And dismissed. So what you think you know about this case is probably fiction. This happens to you more often than not. It's true. true. All of that being said, we know that there are a lot of descendants still alive and potentially listening. All of the information we are using is from newspapers. You want my sources? Ask and ye shall receive. But let me tell you... soon as I caught wind of this case, I smelled something fishy, and I was very excited to sniff out the fact from the fiction. Sniffing out liars and debunking popular perception has actually become a favorite pastime of mine. So without further ado, Raymond from New Hampshire, this one's for you. Life could be a dream—if I could take you up in paradise up above—if you would tell me I'm the only one that you know. She had gone out early in the morning, before the day had fully decided to begin. It was June 2, 1954, in West Newbury, Massachusetts. The marsh was still holding on to the night. Perhaps there was some fog lying over the reeds that morning. She moved slowly and deliberately, walking as carefully as she could so the mud wouldn't pull at her shoes and so the birds wouldn't scatter. The sounds around her were likely familiar and comforting, because this wasn't the first time she'd gone out this early. Bird watching had become one of her favorite pastimes. She could hear the soft lapping of the river water against itself, and the calls of the birds as they began to wake up. She knew that somewhere deep in the marsh, she'd find what she was looking for, a great blue heron. She wanted to hear the sound of those slow, deliberate wing beats as it lifted off into the air. She likely stopped and looked through her binoculars several times as she made her way deeper and deeper into the marsh. She would have scanned from left to right, looking for movement or the elegant line of a heron's neck. At one point, she saw something through those binoculars. At first, she may have thought it might be a bird, but it wouldn't have taken her long to realize it was something else. Even though it wasn't a bird, she knew she needed to get a closer look because this object did not belong here in the marsh of the Merrimack River. She probably adjusted the focus on her binoculars. She most likely got closer to the object. She undoubtedly felt a rush of overwhelming fear and panic when she confirmed that what she thought she saw was what she really did find. The corpse of a man. She had gone out that morning looking for herons, but instead she found evidence of a murder that would turn the surrounding communities completely upside down. Now we need to introduce you to the Clark family. Melvin Warren Clark Jr. was the son of Melvin Warren Clark, a lineman, and Blanche Estelle Buswell, a homemaker. He was born October 17, 1929. 1923 in Amesbury, Essex, Massachusetts. He was an only child. At some point after high school, he joined the Navy and served in World War II for three years before coming back to Amesbury, Massachusetts. Lorraine Ina Eaton was the daughter of Samuel Lowell Eaton, a worker in a shoe factory, and Alberta Elsie Hudson, a homemaker. She was born January 13th, 1926, in Amesbury, Essex, Massachusetts. She and Melvin were most likely high school sweethearts in the early 40s and got married on July 8, 1944, in Newburyport, Essex, Massachusetts. They purchased a lovely white frame cottage with five rooms located on the shores of Lake Aditash. Lake Aditash straddles both Amesbury and Merrimack, Massachusetts, and is surrounded by residential communities. A lot of these homes are used as vacation homes, but the papers often pointed out that the Clarks lived in their lakefront home year-round. Melvin and Lorraine eventually had three children together, Marlene Clark, Sally Clark, and Michael Clark. By 1954, when the kids were ages 8, 7, and 5, the kids spent a lot of time at the home of their maternal grandparents on Maple Street near the center of Amesbury. The home of Grandma and Grandpa Eaton was about a mile and a half away from Melvin and Lorraine's cottage on Lake Attitash. They also spent time with Melvin's parents on Main Street, but mostly with Lorraine's. The reason they spent so much time over at the homes of their grandparents is because both Melvin and Lorraine were employed outside of the home. Melvin was making very good money as a night production man at the CBS Heitrin plant in Newburyport, which is a 10-minute drive or less from Amesbury. This was an electronics firm. He brought in about $135 per week. That's equivalent to $1, 584 in 2026 American dollars. Making that much per week would come to roughly... $6, 652. 80 per month today. That is not bad at all. Then in the summer months, he also ran a boat rental business for tourists who came to the lake. Lorraine was working as a waitress at the Merrimack Diner to bring in even more money. So we have Melvin working a night shift and Lorraine working a day shift a few days per week, which means the grandparents needed to help out with the kids quite a bit while Melvin slept. With all of this money at their disposal, they could afford nice things. They had a late model Hudson Hornet convertible. I encourage all of you to Google a 1953 Hudson Hornet convertible. Based on picture comparisons, I believe theirs was the 1953 model. And listeners, if you ever have to buy... a present. I want one of those. Melvin also had a scooter and he would take his kids as well as the neighborhood kids on rides. Now Melvin didn't drink alcohol at all, and he only smoked occasionally. Any spare time he had was spent playing with his kids, tinkering around with his boats, or helping his neighbors with their home improvement projects. He sounds like a really great guy and a great neighbor to have. I agree. There's a family picture from 1952. in the papers. The kids would have been six, five, and three when it was taken. They look like a normal, lovely, happy family. Lorraine and Melvin were both attractive high school sweethearts who were making it work for the long term, and their kids were just simply beautiful. It's every high school girl's dream come true. As long as she actually likes her boyfriend. Lorraine and Melvin also had an active social life. They were friends with quite a few other married couples, and they would have social gatherings every two to three weeks. These typically took place at the Clark Cottage on Lake Aditash, since it was a very large home on a lake, and the gatherings were usually on Saturday nights. The eve of a holiday. It was a bring your own beer sort of situation because remember, Melvin didn't drink. There was always just a small amount of drinking. There was some music and dancing, and of course, snacks and good conversation. In late February of 1953, Lorraine and Melvin attended a wedding. At the wedding reception, Lorraine was introduced to a man named Arthur G. Jackson and his wife, Shirley Ann Sargent Jackson. Arthur was 22 years old and Shirley was 21. At this time, in early 1953, Melvin was 29 and Lorraine was 27. Melvin and Arthur actually worked together at the CBS Hydron plant in Newburyport. They both worked the same night shift from 11 o'clock p. m. to 7 a. m. Melvin and Arthur were already acquainted, you know, they worked together, and Lorraine and Shirley hit it off. So the next time they had a party at their home on Lake Atatat, they invited Arthur and Shirley Jackson. They all got along very well, and so Arthur and his wife Shirley continued to be welcome guests at the frequent social gatherings. And life continued on as usual, until one day, when Melvin's father, Melvin Clark Sr., walked into the Amesbury police station and reported his son as missing. It was the morning of Monday, April 12th, 1954, when Melvin Clark Sr. reported to Chief Edmund McLaughlin that the CBS Heitrin plant officials had called him to let him know that Melvin had missed his shift the night before. Melvin was supposed to have worked the night of Palm Sunday, April 11th at 11 p. m., but he was a no-show. This wasn't like his son. He checked at the Lake Aditash Cottage, but he got no answer. The article didn't specify if he went there in person or just called off. On the phone, but nobody was there either way. The police went to Lorraine's parents' home on Maple Street and found her there with her kids. When asked about Melvin's whereabouts, Lorraine said, 'We had a quarrel last night and my husband walked out of the house. He took the car too.' She was saying that Melvin stormed out on the night of April 11th, took the car, and now nobody had heard from him. She moved herself and her children into her parents' home that day, taking a couch, an overstuffed chair, and a twin-sized bed and bedding with her. Also on April 12th, Lorraine said that Melvin had beat her during that nasty quarrel the night before. Dr. James F. Witten took a look at her to treat her for her injuries. He said they were just superficial scratches on her chin and her chest. No real sign of a beating per se, but clearly something had taken place. Five days later, on April 17th, the Hudson Hornet convertible was located at an MTA transit lot over in the city of Everett. This is 35 miles away from Amesbury. Lorraine said that, whenever Melvin traveled to Boston, that is where he would leave his car and then take the train the rest of the way. When they asked the attendants at the MTA lot about the arrival of the car, they said it had been dropped off by a man very early in the morning of April 12th. Around 2 o'clock a. m., and the man was talking about being in the Navy. The man said, 'Somebody will be by to pick it up in a day or two.' But when five days had gone by and nobody had come for the car, they decided to contact the police. Lorraine went and signed for the car on April 19th and drove it back home to Amesbury. On May 6th, 24 days after Melvin was reported missing, Lorraine filed for divorce. She listed the grounds as cruel and abusive treatment. Where it asked for his whereabouts, she checked the box for unknown. And then, for Lorraine, life carried on as before. She would take care of her kids when she was home. work at the diner when she was scheduled for a shift, and go out socially with her circle of friends. Life really just went on. For almost everyone. About four weeks after filing for divorce, an unidentified birdwatcher made the gruesome discovery in the marshes of the Merrimack River, about 75 feet from the shore. It was the morning of June 2nd, 1954. The body, which was floating face down, was not in good shape. It had clearly been in the water for several weeks. The corpse was still wearing a maroon corduroy shirt jacket. Two parts of the body were missing altogether. The right hand was missing from the elbow down, and the left foot was missing from above the ankle. Thank you. The right ankle had some insulated electrical wire wrapped around it, and it was clear that something, most likely a weight of some sort, had been tied to the ankle with the wire. After the medical examiner took a look, the body went to a funeral parlor in Newburyport, and an autopsy was performed. They found two bullet holes. One was just above the bridge of the nose and did not penetrate the skull, while the other had gone through the left eye and caused death. Only one bullet was still present, the one that hit him between the eyes and did not penetrate the skull. The bullet was so completely smashed against his bone that they could not identify it. The caliber by sight. They instead weighed it and determined that it was from a . 22 caliber gun. They also found two stab wounds in the chest. These sound more like deep puncture wounds to me. They were just three quarters of an inch apart, and they were just one and a half inches deep. The punctures were so small that they immediately thought they must have been caused by an ice pick or perhaps a pair of very narrow scissors. They said that these stab wounds were not of too much consequence and would not have caused death. The death was, for sure, caused by the gunshot through the left eye, and this was most certainly a homicide. Sergeant O'Leary from the Massachusetts State Police was able to get two good fingerprints from the left hand. The first step was to check and see if there were any missing persons reports in the Newburyport area. There weren't, so surrounding communities were contacted. They were able to rule out at least one missing person, and then they invited Melvin Clark Sr. to come and inspect the clothing that was found with the body. He went in on June 4th and recognized the maroon corduroy shirt jacket as one that Lorraine had given to Melvin a year and a half earlier for Christmas. 1952. This dead man was estimated to have been about 5 feet 10 inches and to weigh approximately 160 pounds. Also had brown hair, and in addition to all of that, the estimated length of time this body had been in the water matched up with the last time Melvin had been seen. Everything, absolutely everything fit Melvin Jr. to a tee. Lorraine had also been contacted about the body and asked if she would come and take a look. She was very dismissive and said that her husband was not dead, he had simply left. When her father-in-law had identified the shirt, the information was taken to Lorraine. She said that it couldn't possibly be the same shirt because she'd donated that shirt several months back. The investigators wanted to be sure, though. They had those fingerprints, and they knew that Melvin had been in the Navy for three years. With help from both the FBI and the FBI, and the Navy, they were able to confirm on June 5th, just three days after finding the body, that their deceased man was indeed Melvin W. Clark Jr. And this just raised another question for the investigators. If that body was Melvin, and that was the shirt that Lorraine gave him. Then why did she make up the story about donating it? What was Lorraine hiding? A real man's chair. Rugged yet luxuriously comfortable. An attractive addition to any living room. Ideal for the TV performance. A chair that's built to last with full spring construction in both back and seat. Rubberized hair and cotton filling. The frame of hard wood. Versatile, too. It's a rocking chair. It's a reclining chair. It's a regular chair for reading or just to be comfortable in. Three important covers. Boucle, tapestry, or plastic looks like leather. The famous Birkloch chair in Ottoman, $69. 50. The body had been identified June 5th, and that's when the investigation officially began. The investigation was being conducted by State Detective Lieutenants Ray Foley and James Leary from the Essex County District Attorney's Office, Sergeant Arthur O'Leary, and Police Chief Edmund McLaughlin. Lorraine, upon finding out that her husband had been murdered, was beside herself. She was so upset that she was under the care of a physician. Still, she wanted to help catch Melvin's killer, and she was willing to help as much as possible. Up until this point, everything about Melvin Clark's disappearance was somewhat flexible. It was unclear and up in the air, but once police turned their attention back to the cottage at Lake Aditash, that flexibility began to disappear. The cottage started telling a story of its own. Investigators began finding bloodstains on the walls, on various pieces of furniture, all down the hallway leading toward the rear door. These weren't from little paper cuts or a random bloody nose, and it was clear that someone had tried to clean them up. To the naked eye, they weren't even visible. But to science, they were plain as day. And then there was the furniture. Lorraine had already moved several pieces out of the cottage and into her parents' home after Melvin disappeared. She moved a couch, an overstuffed chair, and a twin-sized bed with the bedding. Well, the police wanted all of it, because it was now part of the crime scene. All of this was impounded. They didn't just examine the furniture, nor did they just examine the walls of the cottage. They actually brought in portable X-ray machines from state headquarters in Boston. To x-ray everything where a stray bullet may have lodged itself. Every surface from floor to ceiling was x-rayed. Unfortunately, they did not find any additional bullets. But the cottage wasn't the only thing telling a story. Police were also examining an unregistered car. There was an unregistered car that had been parked outside the Clark Cottage for months by this time, owned by one of their friends who went to their house quite often. Inside the trunk of this unregistered car, investigators found bloodstains. It wasn't road grime. It wasn't oil. It was actual human blood. And just like that, the story extended beyond the walls of the house. The investigators previously thought that Melvin could have been killed somewhere else and dumped in the river. river. They even had a theory that perhaps a hitchhiker had killed him and then left the car at the MTA parking lot. But now they knew. Melvin Clark wasn't killed elsewhere and dumped in the river. He had been killed right there in his own home. The blood pattern suggested a violent struggle. One officer described it as Melvin having put up a bitter defense against his killer. It led from the living room, down the hallway to the rear door, and picked up again in the trunk of the unregistered car. A lot of puzzle pieces were falling into place. Once they had the crime scene nailed down, suspicion narrowed quickly. If Melvin Clark was murdered inside that cottage, there were only so many people who could have been there when it happened, and Lorraine was at the center of them all. Lorraine was questioned again, and then again. Sometimes for hours at a stretch, and sometimes until one day turned into the next. The tone started to shift a little, though. They knew she knew more. More than she was letting on. On June 25th, Lorraine agreed to take a lie detector test,

and she was taken to the state police headquarters in Boston at 10: 21:53

10. Commonwealth Avenue. The test was conducted by State Detective Lieutenant Michael J. Cullinane, who was the polygraph expert. When it was done, they took her back Back to District Attorney Hugh A. Craig's office in Lawrence, where she was put through an interrogation that went through the night and into the early hours of Saturday morning when she finally broke down and told them that she had indeed shot Melvin on the night of April 10th. She was awake all through the night, didn't have a lawyer present through any of this, but that didn't seem to bother the investigators. Now, the district attorney called this a statement. He would not call it a confession. They said that it was simply a statement describing her movements from the night of April 10th into the early morning hours of April 11th. And according to the statement, she had waved a gun at Melvin during an argument. Melvin scoffed at the absurdity of her thinking she'd be able to shoot him, and then she shot him. She said she waited a few hours afterward, not sure of what to do, and then she dragged his body down to the garage, which is beneath the house, placed his body in the trunk of her car, drove to the Rocks Village Bridge, tied two cement blocks and an anchor to his limbs, and pushed him into the Merrimack River. Then she said she went home and went to sleep, and then she woke up and went to work at the diner. After telling this story, she signed her statement around 2 o'clock a. m. on June 26, 1954. Four hours later, she was officially arrested. Lorraine was then put into a patrol car and taken to her home on the lake to reenact exactly what she said had happened inside. Then they drove the same six-mile route that she said she drove to Rocks Bridge, where she tied two concrete blocks and one mushroom boat anchor to his limbs, and then hoisted his 160-pound body up over a four-foot, three-inch railing and let him fall into the raging river below at about 2 a . m. on the morning of April 11th. Wait, hold on. How big was Lorraine? She wasn't big. He was 5 '10", and she was shorter than he was, and she weighed 120 pounds. And she said she lifted a 160 pound man over a four foot three railing. Yep. With weights on him. They said that with the weight. it would have been more like 300 pounds. But they said that she first pushed the weights over, like lifted one weight at a time and put it over, and then the weights acted as counterweights, and that made it easier for her to push the body up and over the railing. Do we think this is true? I personally don't think so, but that's what she said, and the prosecutor ultimately believed it 100%. Also, did he just float up from under the bridge? Or was he still by the bridge? Well, he had floated down the river about a mile and a half before getting caught over in the marshes. If he hadn't gotten caught in those reeds, he may have washed out to sea because the Merrimack River feeds into the Atlantic Ocean right there in Newburyport. So, like, he was right there. It's very lucky that he got caught in that marsh, or they may never have found him. They would never have known what on earth happened to Melvin Clark. So after reenacting the scene on the bridge, the investigators drove Lorraine to her parents' home on Maple Street. She went inside, changed her clothes, and tearfully said goodbye to her three children. She was then put back in the patrol car, and they headed back to Lawrence so she could be officially arraigned before a judge. After getting into a fender bender in the police car on the way, which delayed them by two hours, she was arraigned just before noon on June 26th. And still, she had not slept a wink. As far as the police were concerned, the investigation was no longer about what might have happened. Now it was about whether or not someone else had been involved. After all, how did her car end up at the MTA station in Everett? Let's talk about evidence that they found they had a professional diver by the name of James F. Cahill, who had been a frog man in the navy. They had him searching the bed of the Merrimack River foot by foot, looking for the 22 caliber pistol that Lorraine said she tossed into the river with the body. District Attorney Craig said that if they could find the gun and prove it belonged to Melvin, it would corroborate her story. If it belonged to someone else, then they'd have pretty strong evidence. suggesting there was an accomplice. James Cahill found a lot of things down there. He found a maroon knitting needle, which they thought may have been used to stab Melvin in the chest. He found one of the concrete blocks that had been used as a weight. He found the mushroom anchor that had also been used as a weight. He found a house radiator as well, which they decided was unrelated to the case. And he found a . 32 caliber gun. Something funny happened with that gun. When she was subjected to her marathon interrogation, they had shown her both the knitting needle and the . 32 caliber revolver. revolver. The newspapers say it was this— putting these two items in front of her— that got her to confess. And they knew very well that this gun could not have been the murder weapon, because he was shot with a . 22, but Lorraine supposedly didn't realize that this was a completely different gun. And through all of the confessing and volunteering of information, there is one thing that Lorraine denied until she was blue in the face. She absolutely... insisted that there had been no stabbing whatsoever. She had not stabbed him with a knitting needle, an ice pick, a pair of scissors, or anything else. Stabbing just was not a part of this. Then how do you explain the two stab wounds? I don't know. I feel like, if she was sitting there telling them that she shot him twice, twice in the head and then dumped his body, you know, this weighted body in a river, there would be no reason for her to deny stabbing him as well. So I kind of believe that she didn't stab him. The two stab wounds were, again, less than an inch apart and only an inch and a half deep, if the measurements were accurate and if... the newspaper reported that correctly. One article said that he had been stabbed four times in the chest, but the article about D. A. Craig talking about the autopsy to the judge said that there were just these two and those were the measurements that the autopsy had. Now I have to wonder if his body caught on something like while he was being dragged or if he caught on something down in the river. My medical examiner friend said it would be very difficult to determine if these wounds were pre-or post-mortem wounds since the body was in the river for seven weeks. So I do really have a strong suspicion that this was damage inflicted on the body after being in the river. I mean, like the arm and foot coming off, you know, that was due to the river. During her arraignment, there was no dramatic scene. She was formally charged with first-degree murder in front of Judge Martin F. Connolly in the Amesbury District Court. Flaint said that she did assault and beat her husband with the intent to murder him and did murder him on April 10th. She was ordered, held without bail, and then put back into a... patrol car and driven two hours away to the Essex County Jail in Salem, Massachusetts. The city jail in Lawrence was much closer to Amesbury, but they had gone through some budget cuts and they had eliminated the position for a jail matron, which meant they couldn't accommodate female inmates anymore. That meant Lorraine had to stay in jail two hours away from her kids and her parents. Still, by the time she arrived at the county jail in Salem in the middle of the afternoon on the 26th of June, she had not slept. She'd been awake for at least a day. Day and a half by this point. She went through all the procedures. She was weighed, measured, booked, given instructions. And it was only during this process and when she was led to her cell that she quietly cried. She cried so quietly that nobody could hear a sound, but she held her handkerchief to her face and her shoulders shook as she silently sobbed. Lorraine Clark was put in a small cell on the women's tier. There were only seven other women there, and they were all there for short periods of time. Lorraine was the only one there awake. She was tried for murder, and she was actually the first female inmate to be held in that jail for murder since the 1933 trial of Jesse Costello. Jesse Costello was acquitted of murder in 1933. She was accused of poisoning her husband, William, who had been a Peabody fire captain. A powerful British drama, coming to us from across the pond, The Weak and the Wicked, starring Glynnis Johns and Diana Doors. It's considered the sensational naked shame expose of women in prison and hailed as the picture that separates the girls from the ladies. An unflinching story of women behind barred doors. Their hopes, their heartbreak, their fight for dignity. See the weak and the wicked now playing at the Metropolitan, the showplace of New England. Very interesting. I wonder what actually happened. We might wanna look into that. Yes. Lorraine was now locked behind bars and restrained. The public story was not restrained, however. Lorraine was unable to speak freely, and the police... were reluctant to release any details. DA Craig outright refused to make any comments or give any hints or snippets about what was contained within Lorraine's statement. And so the newspapers rushed to fill in the space. What they printed became something much more than reporting. It became a complete fictional narrative. And sadly, if you were to Google this case today, that's the narrative you would find. Buckle your seatbelts, because Monica is about to blow some people out of the water. Yeah, it just makes me so mad. So, case in point, a blog and— on a blog called Mid-Century Page, written in 2022, just summarizes an article written about this case in March of 1959. Which wasn't even that long after it happened, because remember, this happened in 1954, so just five years later. This article was written for Cosmo Magazine, and the article is called... quote, the sordid end to the swapmate scandal. It was written by George Scullin in 1959 and then posted and summarized on this blog in 2022 by someone named Janet. And all of it is wrong. Yet this post is labeled as true crime, and nobody who stumbles upon this blog entry would have any idea that it's complete fiction. So here's how this happened. Articles began to circulate immediately after Lorraine's arrest, describing a lurid confession, full of lurid revelations. District Attorney Craig was actually quoted as saying, 'I will not disclose what is in the complete confession because it contains information so horrible and lurid it would be unfair for her three children to repeat it.' This article goes on to say that Craig then said the killing was a premeditated, vicious, atrocious killing. That was committed after a four-hour argument about Lorraine's interest in other men and how Melvin was unhappy with the monthly wife-swapping parties that they attended. Wife-swapping? Yeah, you know, it's funny this happened in Massachusetts because it's very, very reminiscent of a witch hunt. So that's one thing that D. A. Craig... did not say. It was printed in the Monday, June 28th, 1954 edition of the Berkshire Eagle. Page 24. Now, there's no name listed for the reporter, so I can't drag him through the mud, but that was printed just two days after Lorraine's statement and arrest. The following day, June 29th, the Standard Times printed something similar. This one said that Craig mentioned the lurid revelations in her statement. And this one also said that the phrase 'lurid revelations,' which it still claims was made by Craig, was interpreted by other sources as referring to wife-swapping parties, in which the defendant, but not her husband, took part. Then it went on to say that Lorraine has been the subject of a lot of gossip and wisdom because of her affairs with multiple men for more than a year. And it says that Craig claims she admitted to him that she has an uncontrollable infatuation for another man. It goes on to say that the police have gathered a list of 12 men she has slept with, and if it was that easy for them to do, then her husband could have done it as well and all of that is nonsense. Every single word of it—Craig was literally only saying 'no comment' every time he was asked a question. And this just continued. Finally, on July 15th, a reporter by the name of Westbrook Pegler wrote an article in the Standard Times. He openly ate a piece of humble pie. Keep in mind, one of those ridiculous stories had been printed in the Standard Times just two weeks prior, and it's possible that he had been the author, but there was no name on it. Pegler began this article with, 'It will be remembered, I think, that when this young woman was arrested, a wave of sensational, scandalous stories went out across the country concerning an alleged fad among an undefined group of young married couples of swapping spouses for the night at drinking parties.' The reports were circumstantial and unsubstantial. But they left me with an impression that they had been released or leaked to reporters by some person connected with the police authority or the prosecuting authority. Pegler goes on to say that even though he believes he's a better critical thinker than most, he found himself to be misled right along with everyone else. Pegler was under the assumption that this leak of information must have come from D. A. Craig's office so that the public would be very biased against Lorraine and that she would be convicted. In a heartbeat. But it turns out that Lorraine's defense attorney, C. Francis Leary, made some accusations against the press over this matter, and he asserts that D. A. Craig had no part in it. Attorney Leary said that one day he came out of the Salem House of Correction after visiting Lorraine and a group of newspapermen from two big cities started asking him questions. He said no comment three times. And then the next morning, he read all of these quotes that he supposedly had said. And he had not said any of it. And then that night, another reporter called him to ask him about one of those quotes that he never even said. And he again said, 'No comment.' And that reporter said to him on the phone. 'If you persist, we will create prejudice in the mind of every prospective juror in the county of Essex.' So they were making up these stories to try to pressure the attorneys into giving them details? Exactly. And the media played other dirty tricks too. The man who lived in Newburyport had disappeared after having been terribly ill and having six or seven operations. He was depressed and he wound up committing suicide. The newspaper headlines tried to tie his suicide in with this case because it happened just a few days after Melvin Clark's body had been identified. So they tried to make it sound like he had a part in this murder. And now that it was found out, he had to go kill himself. Now, the good citizens of Amesbury were shocked and appalled by the immoral activities of the young adults in their town that were, you know, now making headlines. But absolutely none of it was supported by what investigators or even witnesses had actually said. One investigator told reporters that he had read through the entire three and a half page statement made by Lorraine and there was not a single. Thing in it that would count as a lurid revelation. When interviewing friends who attended the house parties, they all said there was no sort of wife swapping or funny business at all. None of them were into that sort of thing. One of their friends said that he had heard of a sex club, you know, in a couple towns away. And he said, maybe that's what they were thinking of. But as far as he knew, a person had to be single in order to be a part of it. But it was all a bunch of lies just to make this look worse than it already was. It was pretty sickening. And Lorraine was reading all of the coverage as she sat in the Salem House of Correction. It was printed only minimally— that state officials confirmed that there was no evidence of any wife-swapping parties, but it was just too late to make a statement. A difference because the wild, inflated, salacious headlines were the ones people wanted to read. People were writing magazine articles about it,

adding details like: 39:46

'There was a bowl that everyone put their house keys in and you randomly pull out a set of keys and that's your partner for the night. Like seriously, Google Lorraine and Melvin Clark and you are bound to see that it is referred to as the wife swap murder.' It's crazy how something like that can happen when it's just completely fake. Yeah, and it's really frustrating, and it angers me, and also it feels really good to debunk all of this garbage. Anyway. Now, everyone wanted to catch a glimpse of this woman. Crowds gathered on the street outside of the jail. I have a picture that was printed in the paper. showing the jail with an arrow pointing to the precise location where her cell ought to be and so I'm sure people were like, 'Oh, so if I stand here I can see it' And so they would stand down on the sidewalk and look up, hoping to see her. But yeah, she's no longer a person at this point. She is a full-on spectacle because of just... all of these wild stories. Now, I imagine this has plagued the Clark kids and their descendants. You know, I'm telling you right now, I have done the research. There were no swinger parties happening in that social circle or in that cottage on Lake Aditash. Coverage of the court appearances was also pretty crazy. They always talked about how attractive she was, like the pretty widow, you know, always. They talked about her looks and whether or not it looked like she had gained weight. One article said something like, you know, if anything, her time in jail has has. added to how attractive she is. They were always talking about it. And they were talking about her clothes, like describing her clothes, because she was allowed to wear very fancy. You know, dresses and jewelry to her court appearances. And so there will be several pictures that we will share where she's dressed up in court, but they would describe, like, you know, 'It was made of chenille or whatever it was.' Now, as Lorraine Clark remained in custody, investigators continued to pull at loose threads. There were still the same unanswered questions. Even though District Attorney Craig said he was ready to go to the grand jury, he also kept the diver searching for the missing gun. He told media outlets it was just in case there might be someone else involved, even though he was still pretty convinced Lorraine had acted alone. But there was this interesting man who just kept popping up. Police had looked into that unregistered car and its owner. The newspapers never named this man, but did eventually say that he lived in New Hampshire and had been dishonorably discharged from the Army in the past. That car had sat outside the Clark cottage for months and months. It didn't belong to Melvin. It didn't belong to Lorraine. And it sat there through the winter and the spring and even for a while after Melvin had disappeared. And while it had been unregistered that whole time, the owner decided to get it registered and drive it away on May 20th, about five and a half weeks after Melvin was murdered, but before the body was found. When investigators impounded that car and inspected it, they found human blood in the trunk. And when they questioned this man, which they actually did quite often, Often, he gave them a satisfactory explanation for the presence of blood in the trunk and investigators simply dropped it. They did hang on to his car, though. They wouldn't release his car. At the same time, they were trying to identify the man who drove the Clark's Hudson Hornet into Everett and left it at the MTA. Lot in the very early hours of April 12th. Obviously, it hadn't been Melvin. You know, we know he was at the bottom of the Merrimack River by that point. Someone else had taken that car, and we know it was a man, not Lorraine, because he had spoken to Burt Murray, the attendant on the lot that morning. And Lorraine obviously knew that Melvin was dead in the river and he hadn't taken the car. She just needed to have the car taken there so it looked like Melvin left rather than died. Right. It was part of the alibi. And obviously, someone had helped her. But there was another odd development. On July 2nd, a man, also unnamed by the newspapers, showed up at the jail in Salem asking to see Lorraine. The newspapers described him only as a 22-year-old Haverhill man. He told the jail officials that he was Lorraine's lover. Now, Lorraine refused to see him, but he had a gift for her. He gave it to the warden to give to her, and it turned out to be a gift. It was a musical compact that he had given to her a few months prior for her wedding anniversary, and it was a reminder of happier days between her and Melvin. I don't like that. I do not like that. It just, it seems like a very odd thing. Yeah. I'm her boyfriend on the side. And so I gave her. This thing, just happiness with her husband, it just seems super weird. Anyway, the newspaper journalist spoke to one of the neighbors on Lake Aditash about this, and that neighbor said that this man, who showed up at the jail, was the same man whose unregistered car had been on the Clark's lawn all winter long. Later, on July 16th, there was a newspaper article that I thought was going to be completely irrelevant, but I went ahead and read it anyway. It said that a 23-year-old woman from Newburyport had reported that a youth in Merrimack Valley told her that he had killed Melvin Clark, not Lorraine. So I see this and I'm like, 'What?' A kid that killed him? Come on now. But hang on. The youth said that Melvin walked in on the two of them, Lorraine and this youth, in the Lake Aditash cottage. Melvin then pulled out a gun from his own collection. The youth disarmed him after a struggle, and then Melvin wound up shot in the head. Now, this must have been the shot between the eyes that did not penetrate the skull. So his story goes on. Melvin broke a beer bottle for a weapon, and that was taken from him as well. Melvin was then stabbed with the jagged edge of the broken bottle. Melvin crawled toward the door, and then the youth threw an iron pipe at his head, which struck him in the back of the neck and killed him. Then the youth wrapped his body in his navy raincoat, put his body in Melvin's automobile, and drove him to Rock Bridge, then dumped him, weighed down with a house radiator and concrete blocks, into the Merrimack River. Wait, a house radiator? They found one of those in the river, correct? Yes, they did, and only one concrete block, as well as the boat anchor. And apparently, another woman came forward and talked to the police and said that the same youth had asked her to be an alibi witness for him that night. On April 10th, 1954. Very peculiar. He asked this married woman and her husband to tell people that he was at their house April 10th and 11th. She said this youth had been there on the afternoon of April 10th, but not that night or on the 11th at all. He was at their house a lot, she said. One night he whispered to me that he had killed Clark in a fight. He said he was making love to Lorraine when Clark caught them together. Melvin had then gotten one of his guns from his own collection. She said that the youth told her that Clark said, 'You've beaten me at everything, even with my wife.' But you won't get the best of me anymore. The youth says that he then told Lorraine to leave, and he tried to reason with Melvin, but a fight over the gun ensued. The gun went off in the struggle and he was shot between the eyes, but he continued to fight. The blood blinded him and the youth was able to disarm him. He thought Melvin was dead, but then he got up on his knees and started crawling to the front door. Then the youth picked up an iron pipe and threw it at him, hitting him in the back of the neck and Melvin dropped dead. He told this woman that he wrapped him in the Navy raincoat, dragged him down the stairs into the garage and put his body in the trunk. Then he went back into the cottage and put on clothes. Clark's red hunting jacket and red cap, then drove the car to the rock bridge and dumped the body himself. He said Lorraine wasn't there for the fight or the body dump. It's very interesting that these two stories are very, very similar. Mm-hmm. Very similar to two different people. Mm-hmm. So that was a very interesting article, I thought. You know, he's telling two different people the same thing and even asked this couple to be his alibi. Well, the police called in this youth and decided that his confession was nothing more than a hoax. And it turns out this same youth had been questioned four times previously. And he said that he had made up this story to impress a girl who then told a priest and the priest told her to go to the police. Wait, so they had already questioned this youth four times already? Before this? Yes, because this youth was the same 22-year-old man who showed up at the jail saying he was Lorraine's lover, and he was the same man whose unregistered car had blood in the trunk. The police were also still questioning whether or not Lorraine actually could have acted alone. Not in theory, but in practice. She was 120 pounds, and Melvin was 160 pounds. And that's ignoring that his body was weighted. The bridge railing stood over four feet high, so the investigators went out and retraced the route that she took. They photographed everything along the way. They measured distances, tested angles, calculated everything that would have been required for a person to pull this off alone. They never did announce anything, but D. A. Craig said that he had evidence to prove Lorraine acted alone and was able to hoist that man's body over the railing all by herself. I used to think I would strangle. Now, blush open tough clogged drains like magic. and without messy tools or sickening odors. For Plumite's revolutionary one-second action starts to work instantly, dissolving the most stubborn dirt and... And presto! Standing scummy water goes swirling down the drain. Works without spattering. 100% safe on porcelain. Plumbing and septic tanks. Get Plumite from your grocer today. Absolute money back guarantee. Plumite. A million little plumbers in a can. By September, the investigation moved into its final formal phase. There was a grand jury hearing. The grand jury would hear the evidence and officially decide. If this was a strong enough case to take to trial. The state called 30 witnesses. There were no cameras, no seats open to the public. In fact, each witness went in to testify to the jury alone. They talked to neighbors, friends, co-workers, police officers, experts. No stone was left unturned. There was testimony about bloodstains, timelines, cars, and Lorraine's statement was read aloud in its entirety. Now remember, they weren't calling it a confession, just a detailed account of what happened that night. It described the argument, the shooting, the wait while she figured out what to do, the drive, and the bridge. And most importantly, it did not mention anyone else. Jurors listened to the story they thought they already knew, but there was no lurid language, no wife swapping, none of the invented motives or headlines. It was just the record. In the end, the grand jury issued just one indictment. Lorraine Clark would stand trial for first-degree murder. The maximum penalty for this was death. The trial was set for November 29th. The defense attorney and the prosecution both seemed incredibly excited to get this case before a judge. Both were very confident in their cases. Lorraine's attorney planned to fight to get the statement entirely thrown out, based on the fact that she was questioned for 14 hours, was kept awake all night, and didn't have a lawyer present. DA Craig had gathered experts and evidence to prove that Lorraine, at 120 pounds, very well could have tossed her 160-pound husband's weighted body over the 4-foot-3-inch high railing unassisted. They were chomping at the bit, both very seasoned and successful lawyers. When November 29th arrived, tensions were high.

It was around 12: 53:05

15 in the afternoon when Court Clerk Archie Frost of Essex Superior Court called the case. 44706, Lorraine I. Clark. At that moment, Craig leaned forward and whispered to the clerk, 'Ask her if she wishes to plead anew.' This was out of the ordinary because she'd already pleaded not guilty at her arraignment. But as directed, Frost turned to the defendant and asked, 'I'll plead you now to this indictment charging you with the murder of your husband.' In a firm, clear voice, but not without a moment's hesitation, she replied, 'Guilty. Guilty in the second degree.' There was an audible gasp in the courtroom. Newsmen rushed for the doors to get the story out. Lorraine had been thinking about changing her plea. Mostly because of how the media had turned this story into something so vulgar and disgusting. She was worried about how it would impact her parents, her in-laws, and most of all, her three children. She said she wanted to protect them from any further notoriety. Apparently, Melvin Clark's father, Melvin Sr., had gone to DA Craig and said, 'My boy is gone.' And no doubt Lorraine will be punished. All that is left of this wreck are these three children. If a plea to second-degree murder is acceptable, I think it should be done. Lorraine sat down after making her plea in court that day, and then Judge Charles Fairhurst turned to District Attorney Craig and said, 'I'll hear you on the matter of sentence.' This is when Craig revealed to the court that Lorraine put in her signed statement that she had acted alone, that she reenacted all of it for the police, and he even shared details from the autopsy of Melvin Clark. The mandatory sentence for a second-degree murder plea is life imprisonment. The only way Lorraine could be with her children again is if she's granted parole. Kids would be raised by her parents where they'd been living ever since her arrest at the end of June. They hadn't even visited her since her arrest because she didn't want them to see the bars in the jail. In fact, they thought that she was staying at a hospital for a while. When she would get to the Framingham Women's Reformatory, she'd be able to visit with her kids. Because there weren't any bars. She was very excited to see her kids again. And in fact, immediately after sentencing, she asked her lawyer, 'When do I get to see my children?' It was that evening that she was taken to the reformatory. Where she would begin to serve her life sentence. Lorraine's guilty plea accomplished a couple things. First, it took the death penalty off the table and gave her a chance to be free again someday. Second, it meant that all of her secrets could remain secrets. Once that plea was accepted, she would be under no obligation to answer any more questions about anything. Truth be told, Lorraine had just dodged a bullet. That's until the next day. Yep. Those secrets that she wanted kept quiet— all came out the very next day, November 30th, 1954. And by this point in the story, you've probably all noticed that there's one man circling through the case from the very beginning. A youth, one might say? Yes, and that is Arthur G. Jackson. Arthur George Jackson was the son of Henry Earl Jackson and Antoinette Louise Reno. He was born July 24, 1931, in Manchester, Hillsborough, New Hampshire. He had five older half-siblings from his mother's first marriage and one younger sister. Arthur had been questioned over and over again. It was Arthur who was parked at the Clark home. It was Arthur who showed up at the jail and said he was Lorraine's lover. It was Arthur who told two different women that he had been the one to murder Melvin and dispose of his body. Again and again he was questioned, and his ability to smooth talk anyone convinced the police that he had nothing to do with it, despite the human blood in the trunk of his unregistered car that he just so happened to move from the Clark home two weeks before Melvin's body resurfaced. Well, the district attorney had to trick up his sleeve. He had secret indictments sworn out for Arthur G. Jackson. No, not for murder. Not even for... accessory after the fact. Instead, Arthur would be charged with adultery. There were five counts against him, four with Lorraine and one with a woman who lived in Newburyport. The date of this last adultery charge was... April 10th, the night that Melvin was murdered, his alibi was adultery with an additional woman. Hadn't he asked that other married couple to be an alibi for him? Yes, and instead they went to the police. So it sounds like this other lady said yes, and now he was facing charges for it. So they called his bluff. He was arrested on October 14th. Of course, his plea was innocent, but Judge Charles Fairhurst wasn't buying it, and he held him over on bail for $2, 500 until his trial. Whoa, that's like $30, 123 in 2026 United States currency. That seems like a lot, but I think by this time, they were pretty sure Arthur had something to do with the Melvin Clark murder, and they wanted to make sure they kept a tight leash on him. Thank you. His adultery charges with Lorraine were for the dates October 16th, November 9th, and December 16th of 1953, and then again on May 19th of 1954. And that's after Melvin's murder, right? Yeah. Melvin had been murdered on April 10th, and his body wouldn't be found for another two weeks after... that last time that Arthur and Lorraine were together. So those are the four adultery charges he had with Lorraine. And then he had the fifth adultery charge with a woman named Janice Ferruolo. Arthur decided to waive his right to a jury trial and instead made a go of it with a bench trial in front of the same judge who had presided over Lorraine's case, Judge... Fairhurst. District Attorney Hugh A. Craig was actually sick and tired of this whole affair by now, so he allowed his assistant district attorney to try this one. And his assistant district attorney was a man by the name of Donald Craig. It was Hugh Craig's own son. Well, there you go. Yeah. Now, I'm sure Lorraine was absolutely horrified when she found out, but every single thing that she hoped would never become public was hung out for the whole world to see. Thanks a lot, Arthur. Yeah, they started referring to him as the kiss and tell lover. So to briefly recap, he had worked with Melvin Clark at the CBS Heitron plant and had made himself part of the Clark social world. His unregistered car was parked on their lawn, so he had kind of a semi-permanent tie to them. Like he had a reason to be at their house and he had a reason to talk to Lorraine. Arthur and his wife, Shirley, had met Lorraine for the first time at a wedding reception in late February of 1953. The next time there was a party at the house, the Jacksons were invited, and it may have started gradually, but by the end of May 1953, Arthur was calling Lorraine from work on a nightly basis during his work hours. He knew Melvin wouldn't be home because, remember, he and Melvin worked the same shift. Exactly. So it was very calculated. He'd find time to slip away to a phone and call Lorraine. Well, evidently, it didn't take long to convince Lorraine to make a date with him because it was early June, so a week or two later, when she agreed to meet up with him. He took her out in his car, and that's where they began to have sexual relations. They would meet in his car like this twice a week. In late 1953, Arthur decided to leave his wife Shirley, and he rented an apartment at 35 Washington Street in Newburyport. Having a place of his own, he gave a key to Lorraine. She was soon meeting him there two, three, or sometimes four days per week to bring him groceries, cook his meals, and to have sex. It didn't take long for this 28-year-old mother of three to fall completely and hopelessly in love with 23-year-old Arthur G. Jackson. Arthur Jackson had been questioned more than any other witness during the investigation. Four days after Melvin's body was found, he admitted to patrolman Wilford Parent that he'd been sleeping with the victim's wife. He didn't, however, kill her husband, he said. When questioned by Detective James E. Leary around the same time, though, he denied having relations with her, but then he admitted it to Detective Leary on June 12th. When talking about Lorraine, Jackson said that she was emotionally immature and, you know, he had to teach her how to love. He said, 'Lorraine thought more of me than I of her.' He said he wasn't in love with her, but she was in love with him. This wasn't all just hearsay either. There was physical evidence in the form of love letters, birthday greetings, and poetry. One birthday card from Lorraine to Arthur was signed 'Angel.' The most damning piece of evidence, as far as I can see, would be the love letter. And here's what it says. 'Hello, darling. Somehow I can't get over being regretful that I told you that you should see more people. Today I can't imagine why I should have said so.' I feel terrible to think— that you misunderstood and thought I didn't want to see you as often. I want to see you every noon and every evening, but it isn't easy for me to have the car days as well as nights. I can't risk upsetting things at home because then I won't be able to see you as often as I do. My love, I don't want to share you with anyone. And now, today, you said that you will be going out alone after you get your license back, and I feel lost already. Is that how you felt last evening? My darling, why do I spoil things for us every now and then? And to think that you said I sounded like Shirley. No wonder I couldn't eat lunch. Can't we overlook the things I said? I want only that you be happy, but I sure do think of the darndest things, don't I? I'm trying to think of some way that I can see you again today, even if it is only for a few minutes. And I think that I shall simply drive along Merrimack and Water Streets around 4 o'clock, and maybe I'll be lucky enough to drive you home. The children will be with me, and I won't be able to say that I love you, and that I don't want to be away from you today. During this day's work, it keeps us apart. Bye, love. I am not very consistent, am I? One moment I tell you to go out more, and then in the next I want to see more and more of you. I'd like to be putting my arms around you at this minute and holding you close. And would you be kissing me if I were doing all this? I certainly hope so. Couldn't we pretend anyway? I will if you will, my darling. How? Love. X, X, X, X. Signed, Princess. When she referred to not liking the day work, I believe that was in reference to the fact that Arthur was no longer working at the CBS Hytran plant. He had left that job in Newbury. and was by this time a shoe salesman in Haverhill, working regular daylight hours. When she referred to him getting his license back, I have no idea what that was about. But this letter was supposedly written from Lorraine to Arthur after the murder of Melvin Clark. That's what he told the judge on the stand anyway. Arthur was a horrible defendant during his trial. He had multiple outbursts on the stand and was repeatedly scolded by Judge Fairhurst. At one point he was pounding the railing of the witness stand and the judge had to summon two court officers to come and restrain him. Luckily, he stopped his pounding as he saw them approaching. It was just a major brouhaha in the courtroom that day. When Assistant DA Donald Craig was done presenting all of the evidence, his father, District Attorney Hugh Craig, made a dramatic appeal for the maximum sentence. This is an unusual situation. Yesterday in court, we saw a climax to a most serious case. This morning we are here with a case that most certainly comes from it. There is no doubt in my mind that this defendant is responsible, if not directly, then indirectly, for the death of Melvin Clark Jr. His conduct was such with Lorraine that she felt this was the individual she wanted in her life. And he was only playing, toying with her. His conduct was most certainly responsible for the tragedy of this case. He went on to say that there was no reason to be lenient with this type of individual, and he asked for the maximum sentence. Judge Fairhurst completely agreed that Arthur was a major factor in the murder of Melvin Clark. He decided to give him three years in prison. He sentenced him for three individual counts of adultery, though, because he didn't want there to be any chance of early parole. Early parole was only available for sentences longer than one year and one day, so he got just one year sentences on three counts to be served consecutively. And just like that, it was wrapped up by the end of November, 1954. Two weeks later, Mrs. Shirley Ann Jackson went to the Essex Probate Court in Lawrence to charge her husband, Arthur George Jackson, with cruel and abusive treatment. She was seeking a divorce and also wanted to go back to her maiden name, Sergeant. She said that he had struck her nose and left bruises on her body during fights over attention that he was giving other women. She said she was in fear for her life as a result of his beatings. The last time he had beaten her was August 31, 1954, just a couple weeks before he was arrested and jailed on those adultery charges. Yeah, it probably goes without saying, but I am not on Team Arthur, respectfully. In May of 1956, a year and a half— This case reared its ugly head again when Lorraine said she was finally ready to tell the whole truth. She was being represented by Attorney General George Fingold, who really wanted to get some justice for Melvin Clark. He had reopened the case and was taking it before the grand jury. Lorraine pointed the finger at Arthur G. Jackson and even took two more polygraph examinations. The results were not released publicly, but the grand jury studied the results while making their decision. Lorraine testified before the grand jury for four hours, spanning over May 17th and 18th, 1956. She had clearly been crying when she came out. and even several of the women on the jury had been crying. Her new version of events was never fully published, but she said that she did not shoot Melvin at all. She did not fire that gun. Unfortunately, by that time in 1956, the moment had already passed. The system had already chosen its version of events. Arthur G. Jackson remained exactly what he had been from the beginning, present everywhere in the case, yet accountable nowhere. The 1956 grand jury failed to indict Arthur George Jackson on first-degree murder charges. He was released from jail on January 17, 1956. After serving 25. 5 months of his 36-month sentence. After that, it looks like he relocated to South Bend, Indiana. He eventually remarried and was a stepfather, and then he and his wife had a child of their own. He died on April 2, 1989, at the age of 57. It is unknown if his family in Indiana knew of his previous run-ins with the law, because his obituary says he had moved to Indiana from Miami rather than from a lengthy jail sentence in Massachusetts. Lorraine returned to prison and continued to serve her sentence. In July of 1957, after her daughters were being teased at school, Lorraine and her parents decided it was time to tell them that she was actually imprisoned for the murder of their father. Lorraine was eventually released in April of 1963 when she was reunited with her teenage children in Amesbury, Massachusetts. The whole community seemed to rally around her and ask that the world simply leave her alone. When all of this was over, when the statements had been signed and the doors closed, there were still questions no one ever answered. The first was motive. No official motive was ever introduced in this case. That door slammed shut the moment Lorraine Clark pleaded guilty. What actually triggered the violence inside the cottage that night remains unknown. The second question was the car. Melvin Clark's Hudson Hornet did not drive itself to Everett on the morning of April 12th. A man brought it there, a man who talked about the Navy, likely trying to create the impression that Melvin himself had dropped it off. So how did Lorraine manage that all by herself? She didn't. She couldn't have. At the very least, someone helped her move the car. And then, there is the bridge. A 160-pound bridge. man. A four foot three inch railing. Even if you accept the counterweight theory, it doesn't explain how she got his body into the trunk alone. Physics doesn't. bend that way. And layered over all of this was a public story that simply wasn't true. Newspapers printed lurid details that never appeared in any official statement, and frankly, never happened. Quotes were invented, motives were assigned. Once those stories... were in print, they hardened into fact, whether they were true or not. Those fake facts are still presented as true all over the internet right now. More could have been done in this case and more should have been done. But sometimes the justice system doesn't fail dramatically. Sometimes it simply decides it has heard enough. Justice for Melvin Warren Clark Jr. and justice for Shirley Ann Sargent. Yes, they both deserved so much better than they got. Big shout out to Raymond from New Hampshire for being the first fan to suggest a case. Thank you, Raymond. Yay, Raymond. Woo. Shout out to newspapers. com. Shout out to findagrave. com. Shout out to ancestry. com. Ancestry really came in clutch this time, honestly. Shout out to FamilySearch. Shout out to my brother Christian for voicing all the mail quotes and our ads. Shout out to John Martin from our Baby John case for helping us with this one by mapping out the route to the bridge. Follow our socials. Our Facebook is Forgotten Felonies. Our Instagram is forgotten underscore Felonies. And our threads account is forgotten underscore Felonies. Send us some fan mail or email us your suggestions. Our email is ForgottenFelonies at gmail . com. Leave us a review. That would help us. And tell your friends about us. Yes, please do. We would like to have more people listening. and learning all of this cool history. Spreading the word and writing the historical wrongs. Correcting the record. I find that important. You're a 1900s journalist's worst nightmare. It's true. It's true. I'm coming for him. Good thing they're dead. They should be happy. Ugh. Oh boy. Anyway, all respect to the living descendants. Yes. Yes. All respect. true crime story from Massachusetts. And it was all the wife swapping all of this. And it's like, do your research. It didn't even happen. That's nuts. Geez, that's nuts. Wow, that's wild. Super annoying. Wonder... What things I believe that are also just like... made up like that. I know. It's been quite a learning experience for me. You've rewritten Wikipedia articles. Yeah, doing this podcast, because I never would have thought that true crime could be... you know, fake. Yeah, yeah, seriously, right? So, I mean, it's been very, very eye-opening to be like, 'people are making up.' It's wild. But, okay. No, that is. Yeah.