Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added line(s) 5 (click to see context) :
[[folder:Beroldy case history and fame]]
Added line(s) 5 (click to see context) :
[[/folder]]
[[folder:Lead pipe better than a dagger]]
[[folder:Lead pipe better than a dagger]]
Changed line(s) 5 (click to see context) from:
*** That doesn't quite work because [[spoiler:Renauld didn't kill the tramp, he faked the whole thing. The coroner said that the tramp was already dead at the time Renauld stabbed him. But why stab the corpse when he was already going to disfigure it? That's the part that bugs me]].
to:
*** That doesn't quite work because [[spoiler:Renauld didn't kill the tramp, he faked the whole thing. The coroner said that the tramp was already dead at the time Renauld stabbed him. But why stab the corpse when he was already going to disfigure it? That's the part that bugs me]].me]].
** If I recall the story correctly, the tramp had died of an epileptic fit. Stabbing the dead body would give the impression that he was stabbed, and other set-up evidence would contribute to Mrs Renauld's testimony - a repeat of the first plan with Georges Conneau and Jeanne Beroldy. Since times have changed since then, the same plan was not going to work twice, because it was too similar to the other plan and because of unplanned evidence Poirot found, like the still-working clock and the wrong coat. You could say that Renauld may have thought of using the lead pipe if he hadn't thought stabbing would be more convincing and make a better impression with the police.
[[/folder]]
** If I recall the story correctly, the tramp had died of an epileptic fit. Stabbing the dead body would give the impression that he was stabbed, and other set-up evidence would contribute to Mrs Renauld's testimony - a repeat of the first plan with Georges Conneau and Jeanne Beroldy. Since times have changed since then, the same plan was not going to work twice, because it was too similar to the other plan and because of unplanned evidence Poirot found, like the still-working clock and the wrong coat. You could say that Renauld may have thought of using the lead pipe if he hadn't thought stabbing would be more convincing and make a better impression with the police.
[[/folder]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 4 (click to see context) from:
** Maybe [[spoiler:the lead pipe was ''intended'' to be the murder weapon but something went wrong and he stabbed the tramp on impulse in self-defence and subsequently had to adapt his plan accordingly]].
to:
** Maybe [[spoiler:the lead pipe was ''intended'' to be the murder weapon but something went wrong and he stabbed the tramp on impulse in self-defence and subsequently had to adapt his plan accordingly]].accordingly]].
*** That doesn't quite work because [[spoiler:Renauld didn't kill the tramp, he faked the whole thing. The coroner said that the tramp was already dead at the time Renauld stabbed him. But why stab the corpse when he was already going to disfigure it? That's the part that bugs me]].
*** That doesn't quite work because [[spoiler:Renauld didn't kill the tramp, he faked the whole thing. The coroner said that the tramp was already dead at the time Renauld stabbed him. But why stab the corpse when he was already going to disfigure it? That's the part that bugs me]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 3 (click to see context) from:
* Something that bugs me about [[spoiler:Renauld's original plan]]: if he was planning to use the lead pipe to [[spoiler:disfigure the dead tramp's face and prevent identification]], why did he bother to [[spoiler:stab the dead tramp with the letter opener and make it look like that was the murder weapon]]? It would be much easier to make it look like [[spoiler:the ''lead pipe itself'' was the murder weapon. Stabbing the corpse was not only unnecessary (and therefore would appear suspicious), but also risky, as the letter opener could easily implicate Renauld's wife or son, which is not what Renauld wanted]].
to:
* Something that bugs me about [[spoiler:Renauld's original plan]]: if he was planning to use the lead pipe to [[spoiler:disfigure the dead tramp's face and prevent identification]], why did he bother to [[spoiler:stab the dead tramp with the letter opener and make it look like that was the murder weapon]]? It would be much easier to make it look like [[spoiler:the ''lead pipe itself'' was the murder weapon. Stabbing the corpse was not only unnecessary (and therefore would appear suspicious), but also risky, as the letter opener could easily implicate Renauld's wife or son, which is not what Renauld wanted]].wanted]].
** Maybe [[spoiler:the lead pipe was ''intended'' to be the murder weapon but something went wrong and he stabbed the tramp on impulse in self-defence and subsequently had to adapt his plan accordingly]].
** Maybe [[spoiler:the lead pipe was ''intended'' to be the murder weapon but something went wrong and he stabbed the tramp on impulse in self-defence and subsequently had to adapt his plan accordingly]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 2 (click to see context) from:
** Giraud has preconceived ideas of whodunit; he accepts any clue that verifies his deductions and ignores those that don't. On the other hand, Poirot, when faced with an unexplained clue, decides that the deduction is wrong if it doesn't take the clue into account. Therefore he's more likely to dig deeper for an answer.
to:
** Giraud has preconceived ideas of whodunit; he accepts any clue that verifies his deductions and ignores those that don't. On the other hand, Poirot, when faced with an unexplained clue, decides that the deduction is wrong if it doesn't take the clue into account. Therefore he's more likely to dig deeper for an answer.answer.
* Something that bugs me about [[spoiler:Renauld's original plan]]: if he was planning to use the lead pipe to [[spoiler:disfigure the dead tramp's face and prevent identification]], why did he bother to [[spoiler:stab the dead tramp with the letter opener and make it look like that was the murder weapon]]? It would be much easier to make it look like [[spoiler:the ''lead pipe itself'' was the murder weapon. Stabbing the corpse was not only unnecessary (and therefore would appear suspicious), but also risky, as the letter opener could easily implicate Renauld's wife or son, which is not what Renauld wanted]].
* Something that bugs me about [[spoiler:Renauld's original plan]]: if he was planning to use the lead pipe to [[spoiler:disfigure the dead tramp's face and prevent identification]], why did he bother to [[spoiler:stab the dead tramp with the letter opener and make it look like that was the murder weapon]]? It would be much easier to make it look like [[spoiler:the ''lead pipe itself'' was the murder weapon. Stabbing the corpse was not only unnecessary (and therefore would appear suspicious), but also risky, as the letter opener could easily implicate Renauld's wife or son, which is not what Renauld wanted]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 1 (click to see context) from:
* The Beroldy case is famous enough, for the story at least, that a police officer like Giraud must have known something of it. How could Poirot make the connections to the Renauld case faster than him?
to:
* The Beroldy case is famous enough, for the story at least, that a police officer like Giraud must have known something of it. How could Poirot make the connections to the Renauld case faster than him?him?
** Giraud has preconceived ideas of whodunit; he accepts any clue that verifies his deductions and ignores those that don't. On the other hand, Poirot, when faced with an unexplained clue, decides that the deduction is wrong if it doesn't take the clue into account. Therefore he's more likely to dig deeper for an answer.
** Giraud has preconceived ideas of whodunit; he accepts any clue that verifies his deductions and ignores those that don't. On the other hand, Poirot, when faced with an unexplained clue, decides that the deduction is wrong if it doesn't take the clue into account. Therefore he's more likely to dig deeper for an answer.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* The Beroldy case is famous enough, for the story at least, that a police officer like Giraud must have known something of it. How could Poirot make the connections to the Renauld case faster than him?