“Good evening Lord Todd.”
He was, as usual, sat in his favourite chair in the
reception room with a large glass of whiskey.
“Oh, is it that time already? Alright, proceed with your
report.”
“Not just a progress report this time Lord Todd. I have a good
theory of who attacked Arthur Court and how they got away with it…until now.”
“Have you indeed! Well….?”
“Let me first outline what I see as the relevant facts and
the conclusions I have drawn from them.” I got out my notepad with all the
material I needed so carefully prepared.
“There are some facts and some conclusions I have either
induced or deduced from them.
1. Arthur
Court was stabbed once. There were no signs of a struggle. Whoever attacked him
did not make sure he was dead by stabbing him again for example. My induction
from these facts is that this was not a frenzied attack.
2. Arthur
Court could not – according to the medical people – have screamed when
attacked. Everyone heard a scream though: it was what made them all rush to
Arthur’s room. My deduction from this is that the scream everyone heard was not
made by Arthur when he was attacked. My induction from this is that everyone
heard someone else’s scream or a recording of Arthur’s scream.
3. There
are cameras covering all the hallways, stairs and rooms apart from bedrooms.
Analysis of the camera recordings against witness evidence yields no material
discrepancies. My deduction from this is that the attacker did not access
Arthur’s room via the hallways and stairs. My induction is that the attacker
used another route, and the only other route is outside the building.
4. There
are motion activated security lights mounted on Todd Towers pointing out. There
were no unexplained activations during the evening and night. There were no
signs of unexplained activity around the outside of Todd Towers. The induction
from this is that no-one approached Todd Towers by foot or in cars etc. And of
course there were no unexplained helicopters hovering over Todd Towers either!
As far as we know there are no unexplained tunnels. Given this, it is
reasonable to assume that the attacker was already on the premises that night
and did not need to gain access. If I’m wrong in this assumption then the whole
theory is at significant risk of being wrong.
5. There
are fire escapes outside the building that connect every room directly or
indirectly with every other room. There are 4 unexplained camera observations
of movement along these structures around the time of the attack for the night
in question. These 4 observations can be broken down in to 2 sets: 1 of an
assumed figure moving along the side of the house and one of an assumed figure
moving across the front of the house. The movement along the side of the house
is of no interest because it was the wrong side of the house to Arthur’s room
and there are no unexplained camera observations in the halls and stairs of the
house (as there would need to be if someone did move along the side of the
house outside, then came in and made their way to Arthur’s room). My induction
is that the movement at the front of the house was the movement of the attacker
as they crossed the front of the house and
entered Arthur’s room through the window at the front of the house in
Arthur’s room. Furthermore, given that there were no unexplained internal
movements in the house, find where this movement outside the house originated
from and we will know from who was in that room who the attacker was.
6. The
room that the unexplained movement originated from is located at the front of
the house. The rooms with windows at the front of the house are Brian’s,
Danny’s, Frank’s…and yours.
7. Brian
Bates lost c£1,500 to Arthur playing cards and disliked Arthur. Brian had a
motive but not a very strong one. Also, Brian is ex-army. Knows how to fight
and has experience of it. You’d think and I have assumed that he’d know how to
stab someone properly.
8. Danny
D’Eath wants a relationship with Erica…Arthur knew about this and could have
told you. It is against the rules of employment for staff to have romantic
relationships. Arthur had never said or hinted he would though. However, Danny
may have known (from Erica) that Arthur may have liked Erica as well. Danny is
also is ex-army. Knows how to fight and has experience of it. You’d think and I
have assumed that he’d know how to stab someone properly.
9. Frank
Flowers grows and sells fruit and veg on your land but sells some for personal
profit. Arthur knew and could have told you and threatened to. Also, Arthur
teased Frank about his employment position (Arthur thought Frank has the lowest
status job of the employees). In addition Arthur had (according to Frank) “landed”
Frank in trouble a couple of times with you. Even putting these factors
together hardly gives the strongest of motives.
10. You,
Lord Todd – well I thought you had no motive. But Ms D proved me wrong about
that.”
“Really?”
“Yes, really.”
“And what possible motive
could I have for trying to kill my own butler?”
“Ah – well, you see, that’s
the point. We have all – me included – been assuming
that the intention was to kill
Arthur.”
“Silly me. Here I am thinking
that sticking a knife in someone is an attempt to kill them.”
“This attack was planned. It
was not a crime of passion with a fight, no-one came rushing from Arthur’s room
covered in blood, and so on. On the contrary. Someone planned it. They put a
lot of thought in about how to get in to Arthur’s room, attack him and escape unseen
with the knife. And after all that thought and planning, they decided that a
knife was the best weapon and that
one strike would be enough. If it was me, and even if I chose to use a knife, I
would make sure I had killed whoever it was. But, supposing the assumption is false: supposing that the
intention was not to kill Arthur – quite the reverse in fact. Suppose the
intention was to not kill Arthur?”
“If the intention was to not kill Arthur, best to not stick a knife in him?”
“Or best do it where you
think it will look convincing as a serious attack but do no harm. Maybe a
single strike to the sturnum – the breast bone? But then what happens if in the
heat of the moment the strike is a couple of centimeters too low? Well, the
knife might go in just below the sturnum…and might graze the heart.”
“So someone careflly planned
and executed an attack with a knife on my butler to try and not kill him? That
is your theory?”
“Yes.”
There was a long pause.
“And you know why?”
“I think I do…you had paid him £3,500 to let you attack him.”
There was another pause. A
shorter one. “Actually I paid him to stab himself which he did in the end but I
take your point – as he did mine, ha ha! But he was a clumsy idiot …and he was
a greedy man.”
“And you are – as Ms D
pointed out – paranoid.”
“Paranoid…or just careful?”
“Paranoid. Unless there is
someone specifically out to get you that you have not told me about?”
“Just because you are
paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out
to get you.”
“So, you attacked Arthur –
well, got him to attack himself! – and got me in not (as I had assumed, dammit!) to solve the case, but
to do a thorough, objective review of your security and plug the gaps! You
didn’t want me to solve the case, you wanted me to do a detailed analysis your
security motivated by a crime to solve. Of course, you were interested in the security
gaps you didn’t already know about, not the ones you exploited in this
debacle. Good grief, you even spelt it out for me the first time we met. You
told me:” I glanced at my notepad and found the relevant quote. “ ‘I couldn't give a flying shit
about the butler. What I "care"
about is that someone got in to this house, put my butler in to a coma and got
out without being detected despite the (as you have already observed and
experienced) stringent security I have. That puts me at risk. I cannot and will
not tolerate that. Yes find the bastard who did it and hang him/her/it out to
dry with the pigs but what I want to know is how they did it - what holes in my security are there? How do I
fix them? Are there any others?’” I shut the notebook. “You laid the motive out for me.”
“And what about the
scream?”
“I don’t know…no
evidence at all…but my theory (little more than a guess really) is that after
the attack, the plan was to have Arthur scream at a point when you were in your
room hiding the knife so that you had an alibi. To ensure a loud enough scream
it was amplified – using the cd player. So you had recorded a scream on CD –
maybe with Arthur’s help or just using a scream taken from the internet. After
the stabbing, you set the CD player playing the CD and left the room with the
knife. You had recorded silence for a few minutes before the scream to give you
time to get back to your room, hide the knife, then you rushed with everyone
else to Arthur’s room and – in the confusion – retrieved the CD. As it happens,
Erica thinks she saw you doing that although she doesn’t realise that is what
you were doing.”
“And what about the
unexplained movement on the fire escapes at the side of the house?”
“I didn’t say
‘unexplained’ – I said of no interest. I strongly suspect we would find that
Danny and Erica have been using that route for some time to keep their
relationship secret…which we could verify if we questioned them, but I won’t as
it is not relevant.”
Lord Todd smiled. “Very
good. Better than I had planned for, obviously.” He paused, then looked up. “Although
it seems to me you might have failed in achieving all of our agreed objectives
as you called them.”
I referred to my
notepad again.
“I don’t think so.
Our agreed objectives, Lord Todd, were
1. increase
knowledge on
1.1. How Mr Court's assailant gained entry to his room – done that! The assailant was always in Arthur’s room (it was his room after all) and his accomplice and employer used the bedroom windows and fire escapes.
2.1. How Mr Court's assailant left the premises – done that! Ditto 1.1.
1.1. How Mr Court's assailant gained entry to his room – done that! The assailant was always in Arthur’s room (it was his room after all) and his accomplice and employer used the bedroom windows and fire escapes.
2.1. How Mr Court's assailant left the premises – done that! Ditto 1.1.
2. Increase
knowledge on
2.1. Who carried out the attack – done that! The answer is (I am embarrassed to say) the butler did it! But – indirectly – it was you.
2.2. Are they a threat to Lord Todd based on why they carried out the attack – done that! The answer is no.
2.1. Who carried out the attack – done that! The answer is (I am embarrassed to say) the butler did it! But – indirectly – it was you.
2.2. Are they a threat to Lord Todd based on why they carried out the attack – done that! The answer is no.
3. increase
knowledge about security issues/faults – done that! Your fire escapes are not adequately
covered by cameras and your cameras should have night vision. Seems to me all
objectives achieved.”
Lord Todd sighed
and raised his eyes to the ceiling. I had been missing that reaction. “What an
annoying person you are.” He sighed again. “So what now – call the police?”
It was my turn to
sigh. “No. I will hand over all my information to them but I doubt they will be
able to do much with it – it’s all circumstantial and the key points inductive,
not deductive. Ultimately, your crime was to not call an ambulance as soon as
Arthur stabbed himself but your no doubt highly expensive and highly efficient
lawyers would be able to get you off that. But at least it will all be on
record. Any more strange occurrences at Todd Towers will attract a LOT of
attention.”
“Thank-you.”
For once I allowed
my anger to show: “Don’t thank me. If I could have shopped you I would. Plus,
you will pay double my fee and you will find the contract binding you to
TripleA at triple the rate on your desk in the morning. Plus you will be making
substantial payments to Arthur’s family and all your staff and tripling their
salaries. Plus I will be watching you Lord Todd. You were instrumental in
killing a man and you got away with it. I don’t like that.”
Lord Todd shrugged
as if … as if he didn’t care … and there was probably a simple explanation for
that!
“And what if I
don’t do as you say?”
I shrugged back. He
didn’t have the monopoly on not caring: “It’s a good story for the newspapers.
‘Paranoid Recluse Rock God Pays Butler to Kill Himself’ – something like that.”
“I’d call that
blackmail.”
“I’d agree.”
Epilogue.
Things rarely turn
out as I expect. Too many variables, too little deduction. And the assumptions!
Oh how they had lead me astray: I had assumed that someone had tried to kill
Arthur. Wrong. I had assumed that Lord Todd had wanted me to solve the case.
Wrong. I had even assumed that there was a rational motive for the attack.
Wrong, wrong, wrong!
There are no guarantees
in life and there are no certainties in analysis. Analysis is hard, it can be a
slog, and it can be deadly boring…but then look at the alternatives to
analysis…try stumbling towards a solution by using trial and error, by blind
guessing and blind, dumb luck, or by following some gobbledygook blarney method
that relies on you trusting (assuming!) that it will work…now that would be murder!
… and finally…
If you have enjoyed
this story and want to know more about business analysis, pick up free articles
and training materials, maybe even contribute your own stuff, then head over to
the author’s website at www.smart-BA.com – everything is free (including a pdf of
this blog in book format) and no need to register.
