Crime Investigation in Detective Stories - Essay Example

Crime investigation Mrs. Ariadne Oliver is a popular foremost who has written sensational stories like the detective stories for a long period. She usually appears in a panel of interview whenever there is a murder case of importance hitting the news headlines. She was a middle age woman, beautiful, substantial shoulders, grey haired, fine eyes, and continuously experimenting. Monsieur Hercule Poirot was dark and handsome man aged fifty who was always found on the Empire’s outpost. Doctor Roberts is a middle-aged man with highly coloured individual and very cheerful. He was bald headed and had small twinkling eyes. He is a medical practitioner by profession. He was also confident and cheerful (Yancey 2006). Mrs. Lorrimer was a lady at age of sixty with gray hair that were beautifully arranged, nicely cut features and clear voice. Mr. Despard was tall and handsome man with scar-marred face. Miss Meredith was a woman in twenties. She was beautiful and of medium height. She had gray eyes that were wide apart and large. She was rather shy and had a slow voice. Based on the purpose of the dinner and the backgrounds of the guests, the guests can be divided into two groups that are crime investigative specialists and characters that are used to develop the story. Mrs. Lorrimer and Poirot were professional because they were making judgments on the latest plays during the dinner. They drifted from books to the world politics. Mrs. Lorrimer was seen to be very intelligent and well informed about the various issues concerning crime. Mrs. Oliver was also a professional because she has written various articles about crime. Doctor Roberts was used to answer Shaitana thoughts on how medical practitioners can poison their patients. Meredith was used for this case to just develop the course of events during the dinner. Superintendent Battle had knowledge on criminal investigations. Shaitana gave some clues regarding one of the guests who had murdered previously. The hints implicate on Doctor Roberts. Shaitana claimed that had opportunities of killing their patients through poisoning. Roberts had to counter by responding that they do not poison their patients deliberately (Thomas 2000). From the guests’ arrangement for the game of bridge, several things can be learnt from the guests, basing on the devised groups. Firstly, women empower each other towards winning a race, for instance, Mrs. Oliver did not play the bridge game but she supports her fellow women, Mrs. Lorrimer and Anne Meredith who were playing against Doctor Roberts and Major Despard. She raised her feminist feelings and challenged the men that they cannot make by their own. The two groups were physically located at different points to where Shaitana was located. During that instance of time, various incidences occurred. When Shaitana protested that he would not play the bridge game because it does not amuse him, Mrs. Oliver and Poirot were playing against Race and Battle in the other room that Shaitana opened. When Shaitana sat down by the fireplace, many drinks had been placed on the next table. After Mrs. Oliver lost the game in the first bridge table, she went with superintendent Battle to the bridge table. Colonel Race went to sit next to Shaitana while Poirot sat behind him. Shaitana seem to have fallen asleep and Poirot went closer after Race signaled him. There was something in Mr. Shaitana’s shirt that resembled an extra stud. Major Despard said that each one of them had gone from the bridge table either to add firewood on fire or to get a drink. It was agreed that the man died one hour and twenty-five minutes before it was noticed (Swanson 2000). The death of Shaitana is linked to the conversation that the deceased had with Poirot at the Wessex House. Poirot retold the story when he was requested to do so by the investigation team. The four suspects gave a testimony and the number of times each player left the table. Superintendent Battle uttered that the deceased prided himself on his attitude towards issues dealing with life. He claimed that Shaitana was a man with sheer vanity. Mrs. Oliver argued that none of them was a criminal although Battle opposed and claimed that murderers are behaving just like any other people. Doctor Roberts said that he felt instinctively that something was wrong with the deceased, adding that his instincts have never lied. Colonel Race said that the deceased might have been right by suspecting that one of them was a murderer. Pairot argued that the late Shaitana had a strong sense of humor and a merciless reputation. Doctor Roberts recalled getting up three times to put wood on fire, pour whisky for himself, and bring drinks for two women. Despard had made two movements to fetch extra tray and to pour a drink for him. Mrs. Lorrimer said she got up once to the fireplace to talk to Mr. Shaitana. She also recalled Miss Meredith going round and looking at her hand, then further looking at the hands of the other people inside the room but she did not pay attention to what Meredith was looking for. Battle added that as she was sitting at that bridge table, there was no body’s chair facing the fire. Battle believed that Shaitama’s death was premeditated because he believed that it was possible to stab the old boy. He added that when people are playing bridge, they could not look around to notice what is going on (Woodford 2001). All the subjects that were around the table left at least once. For instance, Doctor Roberts left the table twice to go and fetch a drink for Mrs. Lorrimer and went to put wood on the firewood. Mrs. Lorrimer got up once and went to the fireplace to talk with Shaitana and explain her good feeling to see a wood fire. Major Despard went out of the table twice while Miss Meredith went out of her seat once to look the hands of her partner. Majority of the members that the man died one hour and twenty-five minutes before it was noticed agreed it. This was after they had taken the dinner and the groups were playing their game. Many deals were stroked in the bridge game. For instance, one of the women requested Doctor Roberts to fetch some drinks for her. A deal was also stroked between Mrs. Lorrimer and the superintendent when she gave him her telephone number so that she can be contacted on further investigation concerning the case. In chapter six, Ann Meredith gave her testimony concerning the case. Meredith who lived in her club for a day or two said that she did not know much about the deceased. She even thought that Shaitana was the most frightening man. She claimed to know him for about nine months and she met him during the winter sports in Switzerland and he asked her for parties but she thought that he was a shivery kind of a person. Anne lied at first that she did not leave her seat during the night when they were playing. Afterwards she admitted that she went round to look for her partners hands. That is when her cheeks suddenly flamed. Secondly, she lied that she could not remember walking over to Mr. Shaitana’s direction. She also lied that she had never seen the three people before. Chapter seven vividly explains the testimony of Major Despard who is the fourth suspect. Despard said that he met the deceased twice, a month earlier while dining at the same place. He claims that he had every motive of for disliking the late Mr. Shaitana. He continued to say that he would have enjoyed kicking him given the chance adding that he used to cause his toe to itch. He claimed that Shaitana died although he did not lead a dangerous life to mean that he meddled well with women before he met his death. Major Despard believes that Mrs. Lorrimer, little Miss Meredith and himself were not involved in the killing of Shaitana. Then he confirmed that he woke up twice to add wood to the fire and to fetch a drink for himself. What was so surprising about it is that he saw Mrs. Loirrimer going to talk to the late Shaitana and he did not suspect any ill motive intention in her. Miss Anne wandered about the place but he still did not suspect her. Despards testimony did not agree with other suspects because according to Despards, two women and himself are innocent while some of the suspects like Mrs. Oliver believe that no one among the suspects killed the man. In this chapter, the problem of the matter is the identification of the person who murdered Shitana .The methodology that is used to identify the murderer is by slowly eliminating the suspects who are innocent and narrowing down to investigating the remaining suspects. The investigators agreed to continue carrying out the investigation by allowing each one of them to give a testimony on the account of Shaitana’s murder and further give opinion of the possible suspect. From Despards testimony, a rudimentary hypothesis can be developed that Despard, Mrs. Lorrimer and little Miss Anne did not take place in the murder of Shitanna. Mr. Despards argued that Lorrimer remind him of his God fearing aunts. The hypothesis for each chapter is tested by various points of interest, which are used as the data. For instance, in chapter eleven, what was of importance is the help of Mrs. Lorrimer to accurately reconstruct the hands from the first three rubbers that were played as the bridge score were produced. Mrs. Lommirer was in a position to identify the first rubber. She recalls Miss Meredith and her playing the game against two men. She recalls the player who passed, those who missed, and those who gave a jump bid. This information was very vital during investigation because the investigators will be in a position to figure out the positions and movements of the suspects. In chapter twelve, the information that Mrs. Olive whispered to Anne Meredith was very crucial towards narrowing down the information to more accurate scale. Mrs. Oliver told the little Anne that she does not prefer beating about the bush but rather claimed that Doctor Robert was behind the killings of Mr. Shaitana. What was pending was the duo to come together and collect substantial evidence against the doctor (Palmiotto 2004). The hypothesis can be redefined by facing the facts on the new data. Mrs. Lorrinder met with Poirot to discuss some issues pertaining the investigation of the murder of Mr. Shaitana. This reflects the previous discussion that the duo had. For instance, they discussed the meeting between Mrs. Oliver and little Mademoiselle Merdith and the discussion that they had concerning the linking of Doctor Roberts to the murder case and how they planned to brings their heads together to find the truth of the matter. Furthermore, Mrs. Lorrimer sought to know how Superintendent Battle is fairing on with the investigation and Poirot informed her on his progress (Connelly and Brown 2006). Mrs. Lorrimeter openly told Mr.Poirot that it is his idea that she is the only suspect who could have murdered Shaitana successfully. The refined version of the hypothesis is the phrase that states that states that for a crime to be executed successfully, it is imperative that the planning be done carefully in every detail. There is also another form of successful crime: the crime, which is committed within a very short period. That may have been the type of crime that was used to kill Mr. Shaitana. It was done in a very short period that never gave any time for the murderer to pause or to think (Lyman and Boston 2013). In the last chapters of the book, the murderer is known after the investigation. The surprising thing is that most of the testimonies clashed due to the different opinions given out by the various suspects and the different ways that investigations were carried out until the right information concerning the murder id arrived. There are many lessons that one can learn from reading Christie. Firstly, one can be able to learn the most effective ways of carrying out an investigation and maintaining the law that a suspect is innocent until proved guilty. Secondly, one can learn ways in which crimes are carried out like in this Christie; Mr. Shaitana was murdered within a very short period. The lesson can apply in political science in such a way that the government investigation agency can effectively handle all the possible forms of crime (Welsh 2008). Works Cited Connelly, Michael. Crime beat: a decade of covering cops and killers. New York: Little, Brown and Co., 2006. Print. Fluke, Joanne. Cinnamon Roll murder. New York: Kensington Books, 2012. Print. Lyman, Michael D.. Criminal investigation. Boston: Pearson, 2013. Print. Palmiotto, Michael. Criminal investigation. 3rd ed. Dallas: University Press of America, 2004. Print. Scott, Gini Graham. American murder. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2007. Print. Swanson, Charles R., Neil C. Chamelin, and Leonard Territo. Criminal investigation. 7th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2000. Print. Thomas, Steve, and Don Davis. JonBenét: inside the Ramsey murder investigation. New York: St. Martins Press, 2000. Print. Welsh, Irvine. Crime. New York: W.W. Norton, 2008. Print. Woodford, Chris. Criminal investigation. Austin, TX: Raintree Steck-Vaughn, 2001. Print. Yancey, Diane. Murder. San Diego, Calif.: Lucent Books, 2006. Print. Read More