The First Bite

This blog is dedicated to the science of deduction. If you’re after adjective filled pages of exaggeration, slander and tabloid journalism please follow the link to my friend Dr John Watson. He is very happy to comply in all three categories.

Despite this it seems this blog has attracted quite a lot of attention, quite an audience in fact. Unfortunately one of you is a murderer. Strange, most murderers go out of their way not to attract my attention. The murderer obviously lacks the common sense to see that and as a result I shall pay them the attention they so obviously crave and dedicate a precious moment of my time to apprehending them.

I talk of course of the obituary that was tagged to my last post.

These are the facts of what I have deduced.

Richard Valence was killed by a spider bite. The hospital was unable to identify it and couldn’t administer the right anti-venom. He died. It was assumed to be accidental.

The police showed their particular form of ignorance and didn’t carry out an autopsy.

The spider that killed him was as Funnel Web. Found commonly only in Australia, they’re kept only by collectors and zoos here in the UK. Unlikely then for one to be found lurking in a suburban house. Therefore it must have been placed there deliberately.

The doors were not forced, nor any sign of break in. There is no obvious motive nor suspect; impressive as Valence was a banker. We also found this carefully notated quote:

‘When men are most sure and arrogant, they are commonly the most mistaken, and have then given views to passion, without that proper deliberation and suspense which can alone secure them from the grossest absurdities.’ By David Hume

I persuaded Lestrade to open the case. It would be foolish to speculate beyond what facts I have but I feel that this is just the beginning.

On lighter note, I now have a spider. For the time being it is quite happy in our microwave.

Act 2, Scene 1.

I am constantly intrigued by the delicate intricateness of this case. Nothing is random, each deduction is an element of the puzzle that I can't quite place together. He hasn't given me all the pieces yet.

The criminal ineptitude demonstrated by Scotland Yard forensic Officers had this case first laelled 'suicide'. It is in face cold, planned and perfectly executed murder. Lance Peterson, 56 year old, violent alcoholic. Discovered hanged inside his own house. Evidence suggests he was taken by suprise and couldn't put up a fight, as demonstrated by the light bruising aroudn his wrists from cloth restraints. Upon examining the rope used to hang him I discovered traces of silk fibre, also that the rope was powdered and it smelt of our illustrious alyssum flower.

So far I've uncovered at least three distinct individuals party to the murder. The lithe man who stalked Simon Brown, as its likely there were more than one involved in the actually stabbing. Impossible to single out individuals at this stage. The strong man that hoisted Lance Peterson and left his footprint behind. And the woman with a silk scarf who tied the knot around his neck. There is of course the fourth party that I know is involved, but I shan't go into him here.

These two cases are linked. I ask myself what motive would bring together two crimes that are different in every aspect: victim, murder weapon, killers etc. There is no apparent reason or motive as to why both men were killed in these ways. The only thing in common is the small alyssum flower. It is my belief that there is an element hidden in the past of the two victims that will justify such violent retribution.

I can but await the next piece of the puzzle.

-SH