INVESTIGATIONS 101
GUIDANCE FROM FIVE FURTHER OF AGATHA CHRISTIE’S HERCULE POIROT ADVENTURES
Gilles Renaud | Ontario Court of Justice (Retired)
INTRODUCTION
This is the third article dedicated to the instruction police officers may gain from a study of the fictional cases of this great Belgian detective, the most talented in Europe according to his own modest assessment. As he noted in the short story “The Chocolate Box”, "… I, who have undoubtedly the finest brain in Europe at present …” Indeed, the character of Poirot is famous for his belief that all crime is solved by use of the “little grey cells”. Of note, Hercule was seen at the start of his career as a charming and bon-vivant type of investigator who would not look through a magnifying glass or examine the ground for clues, in stark contrast to Sherlock Holmes’ dark and brooding personality and fondness for collecting blood samples. Poirot’s sidekick is Captain Hastings who writes of their adventures as did Dr. Watson, Holmes’ confidant and partner. Together the Poirot-Hastings team solved numerous crimes in the context of fifty-one short stories, the main interest for our proposed series of studies on police work.
To be precise, this article seeks to examine another five of the adventures published over a century ago, mid-year of 1923, and now in the public domain. They are: “The Mystery of the Hunter’s Lodge” (May 16, 1923); “The Chocolate Box” (May 23, 1923); “The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb” (September 26, 1923); “The Veiled Lady” (October 3, 1923) and “The Adventure of Johnnie Waverly” (October 10, 1923). For ease of cross-reference, here are the titles reviewed thus far:
1) “The Affair at the Victory Ball”;
2) “The Disappearance of Mr. Davenheim”;
3) “The Jewel Robbery at the Grand Metropolitan”;
4) “The Plymouth Affairs Case“,
5) “The Tragedy at Marsdon Manor”.
6) “The King of Clubs”;
7) “The Adventure of ‘The Western Star’”
8) “The Kidnapped Prime Minister”,
9) “The Million Dollar Bond Robbery”
10) “The Adventure of the Cheap Flat”.
As noted earlier, my objective is to provide guidance to investigators based on the writings of Dame Agatha, in the same way that I have examined the works of Shakespeare and of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.[1] As in the prior contributions, the valuable lessons are grouped within thematic discussions involving demeanour evidence, human nature, interviewing skills, judgment and professionalism in investigations. In sum, I suggest that modern-day investigators can gain valuable insights from this great fictional investigator as to what to do and what not to do, as well as enjoying several good yarns.
DISCUSSION
Demeanour evidence
Introduction
I have written extensively, and critically, of demeanour evidence in other publications and little is gained by repeating those observations in this article.[2] It will suffice to point to an interesting passage in “The Jewel Robbery at the Grand Metropolitan (1)[3]”: “Although this harangue was uttered in rapid and virulent French, Célestine had interlarded it with a wealth of gesture, and the chambermaid realized at least a part of her meaning. …” In effect, demeanour involves non-verbal communication, let us say the dragging of a finger horizontally across one’s throat, that is expressive and may denote thought, or betray it!
Of note, in some cases below, I merely list the relevant passages as the illustrations provided are self-evident. For investigators, the object is to identify all potential elements of demeanour that you might encounter in person, at the scene or the police station, or in assessing filmed behaviour in your police at your leisure. For example, did the person blush or put a hand to their heart when told “x” or “y” fact, and in all cases, what does this non-verbal communication mean? At bottom, you seek to discover if the demeanour evidence betrays deceit and if so, is the deceit relevant as either showing a wish to send you down a rabbit hole away from the truth to protect themselves or others from criminal involvement. The deceit is not relevant if unrelated to crime, such as attempting to cover-up an affair.
Elements of demeanour
- Acting
In “The Adventure of Johnnie Waverly”, we read what follows: “Poirot hastily composed his face and looked the picture of earnest sympathy again …” Stated otherwise, acting is often deceit!
- Astonishment
“’Well, I’d got my eye on Havering to begin with. Oh, yes!’ noting my exclamation of astonishment.” …” [The Mystery of the Hunter’s Lodge (2)]
- Bit her lips
"’Possibly, mademoiselle. Nevertheless, he was an old friend of Monsieur Déroulard's. There may be things he can tell me - things of the past-old grudges-old love affairs.’ The girl flushed and bit her lip. …” [The Chocolate Box] Obviously, she was troubled but was it by reason of a wish to deceive police or help a criminal, or because she thought if he committed a crime, she will lose her job or must find a new home?
- Blanching
“I blanched. All around me I seemed to feel an atmosphere of evil, subtle and menacing. A horrible thought flashed across me. Supposing I were the next?” [The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb (2)]
- Brooding
“… Her words, and the brooding way she uttered them, sent a chill to my heart. I was incapable of speech.” [The Chocolate Box]
- Cheeks
“A slight colour rose in her cheeks. ‘I thank you, monsieur. It is the death of Monsieur Paul Déroulard that I ask you to investigate.’" [The Chocolate Box]
- Colour
“Mr. Waverly’s face was quite two shades redder as he remembered his just wrath.” [The Adventure of Johnnie Waverly.]
- Expression
“Our fair client came in with an anxious expression on her face which changed to one of delight on seeing the letter and the box which Poirot help up….” [The Veiled Lady (4)] The difficulty for investigators is that if either object, the letter or the box, is incriminating, you must be able to point to which one brought about the change in demeanour.
- Eyes
“… the green light I knew so well stole into his eyes …” [The Veiled Lady (3)]
- Face
“Lady Willard was a tall, thin woman, dressed in deep mourning. Her haggard face bore eloquent testimony to her recent grief.” [The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb (1)] A few pages later, one reads: “An expression of conscious heroism spread over Poirot’s face…” [The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb (1)] “I saw symptoms of anger gathering on Poirot’s face…] [The Veiled Lady (3)]
- Gesture
“Poirot hastily stemmed the reiteration with an eloquent gesture …” [The Adventure of Johnnie Waverly]. “Poirot gesticulated reassuringly …” See again: “The Adventure of Johnnie Waverly”. This was in response to a despondent mother, fearing that her son was to be kidnapped.
- Grave
“… This, then, was the British expert described by Lady Willard as being a minor official at the British Museum. There was something at once grave and steadfast about him that took my fancy … [The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb (2)]
- Look
“I asked for an interview with Mademoiselle Mesnard. She came at once. I demanded of her the address of Monsieur de Saint Alard. A look of trouble came over her face.” [The Chocolate Box] It might have been a manifestation of her concern that the police were closing in or a bit of heartburn that flared up just at that time… Can you ever be certain? Noteworthy as well is: “Poirot looked at it discontentedly.” [The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb (2)] “He introduced his two companions, Dr. Ames, a capable looking man of thirty odd ….” [The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb (2)] “Poirot looked at me reproachfully …” [The Veiled Lady” (1)] “She looked appealingly at Poirot…” seeking assistance as her child was the victim of kidnapping threats. [The Adventure of Johnnie Waverly.] Consider also the reference to a “ruffian-looking fellow” later in “The Adventure of Johnnie Waverly.”
- Manner
“For my part I had never before suspected that Poirot had so deep a vein of superstition in his nature. I tackled him on the subject as we went homewards. His manner was grave and earnest. [The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb (1)] A little later, we read: “… There was a certain impulsiveness in his manner which reminded me of his mother …” [The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb (2)] Still later: “There was a nervousness about his manner which rather belied the words …” [The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb (2)] “… But he only laughed in a horrid, sneering manner…” [The Veiled Lady (1)] “He was blustering and overbearing in manner …” [The Veiled Lady (2)]
- Nodding
“I nodded approval. …” [The Mystery of the Hunter’s Lodge (2)]
- Stranger versus familiar observations
“… the green light I knew so well stole into his eyes …” [The Veiled Lady (3)] In effect, demeanour elements are apparently easier to identify if you are familiar with the person which makes your work more difficult as you interview strangers. You know what your children look like when they say they did do their homework.
- Stupefied to speak
Poirot was explaining why he suspected that the lady was no “Lady” in the sense of upper class due to her cheap shoes. Which no member of her class will endure. Thus, I quote: “… the shoes were wrong”, while I was still to stupefied to speak …” On occasion, witnesses will not be in position to respond to your questions, and this may not be an indication of a lack of desire to cooperate, but due to surprise, shock, etc.
- Surprise
“… I looked at him in surprise. I should never have credited Poirot with being superstitious. But the little man was obviously in earnest.” [The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb (1)] As it turns out, his earnestness was a matte of deceit and Hastings was mistaken in judging his demeanour.
- Voice
“Her voice was firm and unfaltering, her head held as high as ever. …” [The Chocolate Box]
- Wince
“… They were not exactly reassuring words, and I observed Lady Willard wince as he uttered them. Yet, at the same time, the fact that he had not pooh-poohed her fears seemed in itself to be a relief to her.” [The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb (1)] This kind of mixed reaction is typical of so many situations in which elements of demeanour are in play, so to speak. In fact, it is always a question whether one winced due to being “caught up in a lie”, or in reaction to the police getting closer to arresting the person wincing.
Human nature
- Distancing yourself from the crime you have committed
Most persons act in what the philosopher Jeremy Bentham described - with a view to further your best interests. Accordingly, you wish to avoid arrest, trial and jail. “... A man who has committed a murder with a revolver which he found on the spot would fling it away at once, he would not carry it up to London with him…” [The Mystery of the Hunter’s Lodge (2)]
- Distrust of the police
Expressed in this fashion in “The Adventure of Johnnie Waverly”: “… I won’t have anything more to do with the police. We trusted to them and look what happened! …”
- Evil is punished
“’The wicked flourish like a green bay tree,’ I reminded him. ‘But at a price, Hastings, always at a price, croyez-moi!” [The Mystery of the Hunter’s Lodge (2)] One hopes so.
- Good luck, not always available
"Innumerable times, my friend. What would you? La bonne chance, it cannot always be on your side …" [The Chocolate Box]
- Hard work is required in all things
As Poirot suggested, “… the solution does not leap to the eye…” [The Veiled Lady (1)]
- Imagination
These “extra” qualities may now be seen as commonly found within the broad ranks of the class of detectives that defend and safeguard our communities. “You are, I am aware, a detective, but it is not only as a detective that I wish to consult you. You are a man of original views, I know, you have imagination, experience of the world …” [The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb (1)]
- Jealousy
“… The Duke is a rather peculiar character, jealous and suspicious and prone to believe the worst…” [The Veiled Lady (1)] This is an important factor in terms of your exercise of judgment in accepting or rejecting statements or important parts of them.
- Mother’s love for her child
This is well expressed in the short story. “The Adventure of Johnnie Waverly”. Thus: “You can understand the feelings of a mother, said Mrs. Waverly for perhaps the sixth time.”
- Psychology
Consider this interesting passage: “Also, my psychology was at fault. Had Monsieur de Saint Alard been the criminal, he would never have kept an incriminating bottle. Finding it was a proof of his innocence.” [The Chocolate Box] Some police officers testify in such cases that “… criminals are stupid…” and no doubt some are. And, if this is correct, the best means for a criminal avoid prosecution is to retain incriminating evidence! It is always a case of careful consideration of the facts that you have uncovered.
Interviewing skills – witnesses and suspects
- Brevity
“… Perhaps you can tell me briefly what occurred last night.” [The Mystery of Hunter’s Lodge (2)] The difficulty with this point of view from the perspective of a successful investigation is that you are at the mercy of the witness who is free to interpret “briefly” as they see fit. I had a client who answered “engine” when asked by a mechanic what was wrong with his car; I also heard of persons at the other end of the spectrum who explain how a wristwatch works when asked what time it is. From my perspective observing litigators for over four decades, the greatest concern is that when a witness adds information at trial “out of nowhere”, they often say “No one asked me” when they are asked, “Why did you not the police detective about that?” You wish to be exhaustive to avoid surprises.
- Clarifications
Interviewers must always seek to obtain precise information and if a witness provides vague or speculative information in their statement, it is your responsibility to get details, to obtain the basis of the opinion or conclusion. For example, if you hear “… He went off to the gunroom, and I went back to the kitchen, but after a while I heard loud voices, as if they were quarrelling, and I came out into the hall…”, you must get clarification. [The Mystery of the Hunter’s Lodge (2)]
With greater experience, you will learn whether it is wise to ask the follow-up question right away, or if it is more helpful to wait, after making a note of the need to do so. It is often better to consult with your colleague who is making notes as well on the foundation that the immediate question might detract the witness from the flow of information, and this negative result might arise on a secondary question.
- Details, obtain as many as possible
“The main facts I know, of course, but recount to me the whole story, monsieur … And in detail if you please.” [The Adventure of Johnnie Waverly.]
- Honesty
Investigators must impress upon witnesses the moral and legal requirement of responding truthfully to any questions. No one is legally bound to help the authorities, save in child protection cases, but they cannot mislead the police if they choose to communicate information. In this context, note: “’But you must be frank’…” [The Veiled Lady” (1)]
Judgment in investigations
- Continuity, in terms of evidence
Detective novels often are correct in insisting on this element. “… it took me a long time to find the last link which made my chain of evidence against the murderer complete.” [The Chocolate Box]
- Detective novel may include a fictitious suspect who disappears
It is a fascinating aspect of much detective fiction that the person most likely to have committed the crime recently appeared in the vicinity of the victim, often a servant or a neighbour, and who disappears shortly after the crime. The reason they cannot be located is that the killer created their identity and went about in their guise to make them act suspiciously and then makes all of their possessions and their person disappear… For example:
“Oh, no, that was not her part! Her part was what you have just mentioned, to provide an alibi for Mrs. Havering at the moment the shot was fired. And no one will ever find her, mon ami, because she does not exist! ‘There’s no sech person,’ as your so great Shakespeare says.”
“It was Dickens,” I murmured, unable to suppress a smile. “But what do you mean, Poirot?”
[The Mystery of the Hunter’s Lodge (2)]
- Examination of facts methodically and in order
“Your illuminating answers to my wires supplied me with the truth. See here, Hastings, let us examine the facts methodically and in order…” [The Mystery of the Hunter’s Lodge (2)] in “The Adventure of Johnnie Waverly”, the following dialogue is found:
… You don’t imagine –
Never do I imagine. Only – I employ the little grey cells. …”
See “The Adventure of Johnnie Waverly.”
- Experts may be mistaken with catastrophic consequences
I begin with this commonsense observation: "Doctors may be mistaken. …” [The Chocolate Box] In fact, by way of limited example, one pathologist was mistaken in many cases investigated in Ontario and contributed to several miscarriages of justice and all of this is documented in The Goudge Inquiry, available on the Web and Ontario Archives. I need only refer to one to illustrate the nature of these errors: R. v. Shepherd, 2016 ONCA 188.
[18] Among the experts whose evidence has been tendered on appeal, there is unanimity about several flaws in Dr. …’s evidence about cause and mechanism of death. They include:
i. the overlaid diagram of hemorrhage in the right occipital scalp is medically unsupportable and cannot be matched to Ms. Shepherd’s watch;
ii. no pathological determination can be made that this hemorrhage was caused by a fall, an accidental impact or an intentional impact;
iii. Dr. …’s opinion that a significant degree of force was necessary to cause this injury is unsupportable; and
iv. what Dr. … described as a subdural hemorrhage in the right occipital region is not a subdural hemorrhage, rather blood that pooled there during dissection.
Suffice it to say that errors occur in all walks of life by the most eminent experts. Police must be vigilant lest they too easily adopt flawed reports. Obviously, the science may be daunting, even overwhelming, but all investigators are competent to review reports to ascertain factual errors.
Further, note that an expert would be criticized today for expressing an opinion is so categorical a manner: “Are you certain …” “Absolutely plumb certain. He had a scratch upon his thumb which became poisoned, and septicemia set in. It sounds pretty much the same to a layman, I dare say, but the two things are entirely different.” [The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb (2)]
- Hiding nonsense behind multisyllabic words
On occasion, detectives must be mindful that persons, including so-called experts, will hide their absence of knowledge by means of a cloak of big words. As we read, “… Next I called upon the doctor who had attended Monsieur Déroulard. With him I had a difficult task. He entrenched himself prettily behind a wall of learned phraseology, but I fancied that he was not quite as sure about the case as he would like to be. [Emphasis added] [The Chocolate Box]
- Interpretation of information is a subtle exercise
Not everything is a zero or 100% result in the exercise of judgment. For example, we read: “… there are phrases in it which might bear a different interpretation.” [The Veiled Lady (1)]
- Logical course of investigation
“We must proceed logically – however absurd it may seem …” [The Adventure of Johnnie Waverly.] Thus, if the child kidnap victim was taken without a sound within meters of others, was it because he knew and trusted the person who invited him to leave? If the hidden room was swept recently, but poorly, was it an inside job by one who did not sweep often?
- Making things more difficult, so an inside job
“The Adventure of Johnnie Waverly” includes suggestions towards the end of the short story to the effect that the kidnapping was an inside job, added to the fact that the would-be kidnappers “... were making a thing difficult that was perfectly easy.” Why specify when the kidnapping would take place as opposed to simply kidnap the victim? Because you wished a large payment well knowing that the victim’s mother had money and would pay!
- Objectivity
“… so far there was nothing to support Mademoiselle Mesnard's theory. I could not but believe that it was a delusion on her part. Evidently she had entertained a romantic passion for the dead man which had not permitted her to take a normal view of the case…” [The Chocolate Box] Above all, investigators must be objective and not allow public opinion, the depravity of the crime or the genuine sorrow for the victims that is experienced to blind one’s judgment. A crime followed by a miscarriage of justice leads to more victims, assuming that the original tragedy was, in fact, criminal in nature and not accidental.
- Point of view
Poirot suggests that it is poor judgment to argue with someone’s point of view in “The Veiled Lady (4)”. It is best to obtain all information and render a judgment after all secondary information has ben obtained.
- Trusting your own judgment
In some cases, detectives must trust that the rapport they have developed with informants, with defence lawyers, with members of the community who keep an eye out on certain places, will yield good results. In this vein, note what follows: “He’s the goods, Monsieur Poirot! If he says so, there’s something in it…” [The Mystery of the Hunter’s Lodge (2)]
- Why certain events took place? You might never know
“… why the murder?” [The Mystery of the Hunter’s Lodge (2)] It is no doubt frustrating that certain grave acts, notably murder, cannot be explained or that no motive is ever ascertained. In this context, I recall a person stating that if they were ever the subject of a terrorist plot to have them drive into their security building with a gun-wielding person behind them in the car, they would rather refuse and be found dead in the woods, without anyone ever suspecting their heroism…
Professionalism
- Balanced view of things in your difficult profession
“… Twice have I been stricken down with illness just as I was on the point of success. One must take the downs with the ups, my friend." [The Chocolate Box] On a private note, I recall a friend being terribly upset with a jury verdict when a person he thought “guilty as sin” was acquitted – later, the correct offender was identified and not only confessed but had proof of their involvement seized by the authorities. One must be prepared to accept that a criminal justice system based on reasonable doubt will produce just verdicts that will see persons who are guilty be set free, to avoid the spectre of innocent persons being convicted in error.
- Dogged determination
Many can be inspired by the quote that is next: "’Mademoiselle’, I said, ‘it is sometimes difficult for a dog to find a scent, but once he has found it, nothing on earth will make him leave it! That is if he is a good dog! And I, mademoiselle, I, Hercule Poirot, am a very good dog.’" [The Chocolate Box]
- “Not a detective novel” life
Whatever may be the glamour that one associates with police detectives in the world of television, film, sand literature, the reality is that it is hard work. As noted by Captain Hastings, with respect to investigations, “… I may as well confess at once that they were rather disappointing. In detective novels clues abound, but here I could find nothing that struck me as out of the ordinary …” [The Mystery of the Hunter’s Lodge (2)] It is hard work, but you are serving and protecting the community. In this vein, note what follows: “There were no clues, false or otherwise, to consider…” [The Chocolate Box]
- Patience
“… I was in a fever of impatience to get at all the facts. …” [The Mystery of the Hunter’s Lodge (2)] There is nothing wrong with exuberance but “haste makes waste” and deliberation in work is a more professional perspective that handing in a poorly thought-out report based on a poorly understand factual basis.
[1] Interested readers may consult the Index of my contributions in Mack’s Criminal Law and as well in Blue Line.
[2] Refer to Gilles Renaud, Demeanour Evidence on Trial: A Legal and Literary Criticism, Sandstone Academic Press, Melbourne, Australia, 2008.
[3] The inclusion of a number refers to a Part of the short story as noted by the author and is included for ease of cross-reference. Not all short stories were organized in parts.