The missing key?

[Amanda Sumner]

I don't see why Barnett's entrance into Mary's apartment would depend solely on having a key. What about simply knocking on her door and saying "Mary, it's Joe. I need to speak with you it's extremely important" or "I'm sorry about our argument. I have some money for you."

c.d.

Indeed, but as the key was not forthcoming and the door was locked, the police were naturally wanting to know who had it. They would certainly have asked Barnett about it during his interview. I think he must certainly have been in a state of shock, having undoubtedly seen the mess on the bed. Maybe he was not thinking straight and it was easier to say the key was missing and take the focus off himself. It seems odd that he did not show them how they got in without the key when they were pondering about how to gain entrance. As I still stand by my conviction that the window pane was too high to be able to get in that way, string or no string, and nobody has yet come back to me to prove otherwise, I think Barnett was lying, but not because he had killed her, but because he was afraid they were going to accuse him.

[c.d.]

I don't see why Barnett's entrance into Mary's apartment would depend solely on having a key. What about simply knocking on her door and saying "Mary, it's Joe. I need to speak with you it's extremely important" or "I'm sorry about our argument. I have some money for you."

c.d.

[lynn cates]

deflection

Hello Harry. Thanks.

I suppose I am missing something simple, but, at this point, it feels like this.

Suppose some bloke is a person of interest in an axe murder case. The police ask to search his house and he allows it. "You see. No axes." "Right. Sorry to have troubled you sir." "Um, care to see my collection of hatchets in my car?"

Should have kept his mouth shut.

Cheers.
LC

[Amanda Sumner]

Hey Lynn,

Barnett was at the scene but didn't think to tell the police that they could simply unlock the door through the window, instead of breaking in and needlessly damaging a crime scene? Why did any of the other locals advise them of this? Why didn't the landlord McCarthy? But it isn't until Barnett is taken in for questioning that the story of the missing key and the window trick is brought to light. Because at this point he was probably getting worried that the police were going to pin the murder on him. In Barnett's mind, the key (or lack thereof) had to be explained for otherwise he would've been a prime suspect.

Exactly. the key was never missing and he thought that one up while being questioned. I can hardly blame him. In those days with no forensics, fingerprinting and DNA, it did not take much to be found guilty.

[Amanda Sumner]

Hello Harry. Thanks.

OK, but my point is why not remain silent about the key and explain the window business--as he did?

Cheers.
LC

Because his girlfriend had been murdered, the police were under pressure to get these cases solved, and had he admitted he had the key...and he was number one suspect at the time...he would have been charged with murder, whether he was guilty or not. By saying that the key was missing and giving the window story, and establishing, presumably, an alibi, the police were satisfied and let him go. It's clear to me why he lied.

[Harry D]

Hello Harry. Thanks.

OK, but my point is why not remain silent about the key and explain the window business--as he did?

Cheers.
LC

Hey Lynn,

Barnett was at the scene but didn't think to tell the police that they could simply unlock the door through the window, instead of breaking in and needlessly damaging a crime scene? Why did any of the other locals advise them of this? Why didn't the landlord McCarthy? But it isn't until Barnett is taken in for questioning that the story of the missing key and the window trick is brought to light. Because at this point he was probably getting worried that the police were going to pin the murder on him. In Barnett's mind, the key (or lack thereof) had to be explained for otherwise he would've been a prime suspect.

[lynn cates]

silent

Hello Harry. Thanks.

OK, but my point is why not remain silent about the key and explain the window business--as he did?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Por que?

Hello Amanda. Thanks.

In which case, I cannot see why the lie.

Cheers.
LC

[Harry D]

Hello Harry. Thanks.

Very well. I see what you mean. But did he not compromise such vindication when he told how to gain entrance?

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

Not at all. That was all part of the ruse, because if anyone could just put their hand through and lock/unlock the door, the net of suspicion would be widened. Surely it would've been common knowledge how Mary & Joe let themselves into the room? Wasn't Barnett at the scene before they knocked the door down? Why didn't they ask him then instead of later on during his interview? As to Barnett's true motive, I can only speculate. Was he just covering for himself? Or was he afraid of someone else?

[Amanda Sumner]

[QUOTE=lynn cates;302955]Hello Amanda. Thanks.

"For three whole hours police hung around that building. Surely one or more of the residents would have shown them the technique to get in using string, or whatever?"

Only to have he police observe, "'Ere, now, that's a good bit you know about #13. And where were YOU last night?"

"I can't see a broken bottom pane, but if there was one, and it had been just a simple case of reaching in, wouldn't the police have done so?"

If you are aware of the system, of course. But were they?

It is easy to retrieve the key from under the mat--once you KNOW it's there."


Very true, but if I needed to get into a house in an emergency, under the mat would be the first place I'd look.

The point is, did Barnett do it? Was the key missing? Was Barnett telling the truth? I think not, is the answer to all three.

[lynn cates]

key observations

Hello Amanda. Thanks.

"For three whole hours police hung around that building. Surely one or more of the residents would have shown them the technique to get in using string, or whatever?"

Only to have he police observe, "'Ere, now, that's a good bit you know about #13. And where were YOU last night?"

"I can't see a broken bottom pane, but if there was one, and it had been just a simple case of reaching in, wouldn't the police have done so?"

If you are aware of the system, of course. But were they?

It is easy to retrieve the key from under the mat--once you KNOW it's there.

Cheers.
LC

[Amanda Sumner]

Hello Richard,

We meet again.

I can see that you have demonstrated, very clearly, just how easy it would have been had there been a bottom pane broken. However, I think only the top pane was broken. I have looked very carefully and I can only see the top right hand side affected. The other panes look intact.
If you are correct then it does not say a lot for the policemen that were standing around for three hours scratching their heads. If a simple task of reaching through a window and lifting a latch befuddled them, then it's no wonder the case remains unsolved!

I have had a good look at the window again,and fiddled with the contrast,etc, to get the best result within my limitations. However can someone please tell me how i can upload my picture on here as there seems no way I can do it! Nothing happens when I click on attachments...

[richardh]

Amanda
Have a look at my 3D models of Miller's court / No.13. You will see the lower window glass of the small window is broken. I've also posted some CGI images to demonstrate how easy it would have been to reach through the broken glass and unlock the door. In the 3D CGI's you can see that it's not really a stretch to reach the lock from outside the window.

Here's a picture and there are loads more online somewhere:
EDIT: Here's a link to more images:
http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=7233&page=2

[Amanda Sumner]

Hello CD.

"I could be wrong but I thought that both Joe and Mary let themselves in after the key was lost by reaching through the window and opening the door."

My recollection, too.

Cheers.
LC

Your recollections are correct, but only Barnett said that. Where is the evidence that shows that they did? For three whole hours police hung around that building. Surely one or more of the residents would have shown them the technique to get in using string, or whatever? I can't see a broken bottom pane, but if there was one, and it had been just a simple case of reaching in, wouldn't the police have done so?
I don't think that the key went missing at all before the murder. Most likely Barnett had it and got rid of it quickly after the discovery of the murder.
I would also like to know where the story of the string comes from....

[lynn cates]

recollection

Hello CD.

"I could be wrong but I thought that both Joe and Mary let themselves in after the key was lost by reaching through the window and opening the door."

My recollection, too.

Cheers.
LC