Death in the Clouds - Agatha Christie [78]
‘That, as I say, was plan No. 1. But supposing that, as actually happened, the poisoned thorn was discovered before the murderer could retrieve it. In that case the fat is in the fire. The theory of the natural death is impossible. Instead of getting rid of the blowpipe through the window, it is put in a place where it is bound to be discovered when the plane is searched; and at once it will be assumed that the blowpipe was the instrument of the crime. The proper atmosphere of distance will be created and when the blowpipe is traced it will focus suspicion in a definite and prearranged direction.
‘I had now my theory of the crime, and I had three suspects with a barely possible fourth—M. Jean Dupont, who had outlined the “Death by a Wasp Sting theory”, and who was sitting on the gangway so near Giselle that he might just possibly have moved from it without being noticed. On the other hand, I did not really think he would have dared to take such a risk.
‘I concentrated on the problem of the wasp. If the murderer had brought the wasp on to the plane and released it at the psychological moment—he must have had something in the nature of a small box in which to keep it.
‘Hence my interest in the contents of the passengers’ pockets and hand luggage.
‘And here I came up against a totally unexpected development. I found what I was looking for—but as it seemed to me on the wrong person. There was an empty small-sized Bryant & May’s match-box in Mr Norman Gale’s pocket. But by everybody’s evidence Mr Gale had never passed down the gangway of the car. He had only visited the toilet compartment and returned to his own seat.
‘Nevertheless, although it seems impossible, there was a method by which Mr Gale could have commited the crime—as the contents of his attaché case showed.’
‘My attaché case?’ said Norman Gale. He looked amused and puzzled. ‘Why, I don’t even remember now what was in it.’
Poirot smiled at him amiably.
‘Wait a little minute. I will come to that. I am telling you my first ideas.
‘To proceed—I had four persons who could have done the crime—from the point of view of possibility: the two stewards, Clancy and Gale.
‘I now looked at the case from the opposite angle—that of motive—if a motive were to coincide with a possibility—well, I had my murderer! But alas, I could find nothing of the kind. My friend Japp has accused me of liking to make things difficult. On the contrary, I approached this question of motive with all the simplicity in the world. To whose benefit would it be if Madame Giselle were removed? Clearly to her unknown daughter’s benefit—since that unknown daughter would inherit a fortune. There were also certain persons who were in Madame Giselle’s power, or shall we say—who might be in Giselle’s power, for aught we knew. That, then, was a task of elimination. Of the passengers in the plane I could only be certain of one who was undoubtedly mixed up with Giselle. That one was Lady Horbury.
‘In Lady Horbury’s case the motive was very clear. She had visited Giselle at her house in Paris the night before. She was desperate and she had a friend, a young actor, who might easily have impersonated the American who bought the blowpipe—and might also have bribed the clerk in Universal Airlines to ensure that Giselle travelled by the 12 o’clock service.
‘I had, as it were, a problem in two halves. I did not see how it was possible for Lady Horbury to commit the crime; and I could not see for what motive the stewards, Mr Clancy, or Mr Gale should want to commit it.
‘Always, in the back of my mind, I considered the problem of Giselle’s unknown daughter and heiress. Were any of my four suspects married—and if so, could one of the wives be this Anne Morisot? If her father was English, the girl might have been brought up in England. Mitchell’s wife I soon dismissed—she