How is it a damning aspect to her theory? I mean, sure, that’s appropriate from the dramatic perspective, but every modern court would consider that very important and in the absence of other evidence, would be enough to convict.
1. Poisoning (unsuccessful, possibly to put her to sleep)
2. Needle in the eye (successful)
3. Harpsicord to the head (cover up).
How did the poison get in her food? If Maula was not there (or left right after getting her lunch), how did she manage to poison her lunch? The poison must have happened after the card-play in the morning.
Did Maula force feed her the poison, stick a needle in her eye, and then drag her outside and drop a harpsicord on her head? Without being seen?
I am making some assumptions, of course. But none of this sounds like Maula’s usual MO.
For Maula? Yes, although I can’t recall 2hich strip or rhe actual wording. Essentially, there is a centuries-long feud between the Bloodhands and Taurenil’s family or clan.And, as demonstrated when Jone was pushed off the cliff, or orcs embrace the vengence.
Also, courts do not need motive to convict. Only opportunity and method. It helps, especially with juries raised on the detective genre, but it’s not needed. I don’t know if courts would accept the Captain’s theory though, as too many lawyers could raise enough other possibilities to give reasonable doubt.
I feel like we should all be having tea in the drawing room together as we discuss the happy little murder.
I forgot the "feud", but what we know of Maula would still suggest that this would not be her work.
I agree that "beyond a reasonable doubt" would apply here. In this case, the evidence is circumstantial. I note as well that we have not yet seen Maula. I think a conversation with the accused would be in order.
My theory of the case still stands, though-someone poisoned her, stabbed her eye, killing her, and then covered it up by dropping a harpsicord on her head.
Except the head was intact–a botched cover up? The murderer’s first mistake?
Actually, Maula had no motive, and that is the hole in Cpt. Carruthers theory, that Lucas was referring to. As for one, she and Taurenil were attending these tournaments for many years, why not bothering to kill her before? Even more importantly, Abbott said, that Taurenil wasn’t in good terms with her family, thats why she wanted to be buried here. It wouldn’t make sense to take vengence on a family by killing someone who is not exactly part of it anymore.
> How is it a damning aspect to her theory?
>…every modern court would consider that very important and
> in the absence of other evidence, would be enough to convict.
That’s the whole point: it IS strong evidence. It’s a damning aspect OF her theory, not damning TO her theory…meaning that that it appears to damn Maula. Of course, Lucas still doesn’t believe Maula did it, but he’s acknowledging that the timeline looks very bad for her.
I’m fairly certain that the specific "damning aspect" is that Taurenil did not show up for <i>noon prayer</i>. The last Carruthers knows of Taurenil’s whereabouts is that she was fine at the end of the morning’s card play, but the noon prayer is <i>between</i> that and lunch, as evidenced by when Lady Maula took her lunch up to her room. This means Taurenil may very well already have been dead by the time Carruthers thinks she was killed.
Maula had her meal delivered to her. That means a brother could verify that she took her meal in her room.
Moreover, it suggests that Taurenil was killed before lunch was served. Whether this means one or more slipped out, or all committed the act in a Murder On The Orient Express manner, remains to be seen. We have the others to interview first. And I don’t want to railroad us to any conclusions.
Maula’s absence ‘proves’ nothing. IF Taurenil was present at morning prayers then her death occured sometime between then and when she didn’t show up for cards, she and/or others may have skipped lunch occasionally or taken their meal in their rooms, not an uncommon thing, but we haven’t been told she always ate then.
Anyone could have done the deed, not necessarily just one of the players, she might have interrupted a tryst between monestary workers (someone has to make meals and move harpsichords around) and they were afraid she would report them to the Abbot, one might have been named Lou 😉
Or she might even have stumbled across a gardener tending the unauthorized prattroot patch he was growing for profit using monestary land and plant food 😉
Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men and women and elves and orcs ?
Carruthers, dear, that thing you’re doing is called an assumption. It is a prolific old bird, being the mother of all screw ups.
The first thing to do is trace the victim’s movements from dawn prayers got everyone up until her body was found. Better than even money that Maula was never in a position to offer her anything spiked with prattroot.
Of course, it’s possible this is a take-off on the old Philo Vance movie, "The Kennel Murder Case", and THREE different people took a shot at poor Taurenil (one connecting).
Yeah that really doesn't seem to fit. If Taurenil didn't show up for lunch, why believe that she was killed *during* lunch? That would seem to suggest that she was killed before lunch, not during.
Pick up your copies of YAFGC Volumes 1 - 5 at our online store. Multi-book bundles and sketch editions available.
Another update so soon! You’re amazing! And thank you, because the suspense, aaaaa
Well, i am complete and absolutely lost. I have no idea what happens or when there goes.
Yo’re good, sir, Really good.
Wait. Does he suspect Carruthers of being the killer!?
No, I think he simply suspects that her assumption is a flaw in her logic. A killer could have orchestrated events to frame someone else.
OK, based on the timeline it was either Maula and anyone in the kingdom within 50 kilometers (and possibly the otyugh).
Sounds to me like she was killed before lunch.
Why do I feel that a kobold wearing a rumpled old trench-coat should come by, muttering, "Oh, one more thing…"
Captain Fang as Colombo? Sure, I could see that.
How is it a damning aspect to her theory? I mean, sure, that’s appropriate from the dramatic perspective, but every modern court would consider that very important and in the absence of other evidence, would be enough to convict.
There appear to be three causes of the murder:
1. Poisoning (unsuccessful, possibly to put her to sleep)
2. Needle in the eye (successful)
3. Harpsicord to the head (cover up).
How did the poison get in her food? If Maula was not there (or left right after getting her lunch), how did she manage to poison her lunch? The poison must have happened after the card-play in the morning.
Did Maula force feed her the poison, stick a needle in her eye, and then drag her outside and drop a harpsicord on her head? Without being seen?
I am making some assumptions, of course. But none of this sounds like Maula’s usual MO.
Did we ever get a motive?
For Maula? Yes, although I can’t recall 2hich strip or rhe actual wording. Essentially, there is a centuries-long feud between the Bloodhands and Taurenil’s family or clan.And, as demonstrated when Jone was pushed off the cliff, or orcs embrace the vengence.
Also, courts do not need motive to convict. Only opportunity and method. It helps, especially with juries raised on the detective genre, but it’s not needed. I don’t know if courts would accept the Captain’s theory though, as too many lawyers could raise enough other possibilities to give reasonable doubt.
I feel like we should all be having tea in the drawing room together as we discuss the happy little murder.
I forgot the "feud", but what we know of Maula would still suggest that this would not be her work.
I agree that "beyond a reasonable doubt" would apply here. In this case, the evidence is circumstantial. I note as well that we have not yet seen Maula. I think a conversation with the accused would be in order.
My theory of the case still stands, though-someone poisoned her, stabbed her eye, killing her, and then covered it up by dropping a harpsicord on her head.
Except the head was intact–a botched cover up? The murderer’s first mistake?
Actually, Maula had no motive, and that is the hole in Cpt. Carruthers theory, that Lucas was referring to. As for one, she and Taurenil were attending these tournaments for many years, why not bothering to kill her before? Even more importantly, Abbott said, that Taurenil wasn’t in good terms with her family, thats why she wanted to be buried here. It wouldn’t make sense to take vengence on a family by killing someone who is not exactly part of it anymore.
So the next steps, after we finish our tea, is to interview Maula, and then, maybe, probe for motive in the other attendees.
Say, why does this tea taste like almond?
> How is it a damning aspect to her theory?
>…every modern court would consider that very important and
> in the absence of other evidence, would be enough to convict.
That’s the whole point: it IS strong evidence. It’s a damning aspect OF her theory, not damning TO her theory…meaning that that it appears to damn Maula. Of course, Lucas still doesn’t believe Maula did it, but he’s acknowledging that the timeline looks very bad for her.
Re-read the comic; Lucas thinks it IS a damning aspect TO her theory.
Ah, you’re right. I missed that hyphen.
I’m fairly certain that the specific "damning aspect" is that Taurenil did not show up for <i>noon prayer</i>. The last Carruthers knows of Taurenil’s whereabouts is that she was fine at the end of the morning’s card play, but the noon prayer is <i>between</i> that and lunch, as evidenced by when Lady Maula took her lunch up to her room. This means Taurenil may very well already have been dead by the time Carruthers thinks she was killed.
Maula had her meal delivered to her. That means a brother could verify that she took her meal in her room.
Moreover, it suggests that Taurenil was killed before lunch was served. Whether this means one or more slipped out, or all committed the act in a Murder On The Orient Express manner, remains to be seen. We have the others to interview first. And I don’t want to railroad us to any conclusions.
Right now my theory was there were five different murder attempts by five different people.
Maula’s absence ‘proves’ nothing. IF Taurenil was present at morning prayers then her death occured sometime between then and when she didn’t show up for cards, she and/or others may have skipped lunch occasionally or taken their meal in their rooms, not an uncommon thing, but we haven’t been told she always ate then.
Anyone could have done the deed, not necessarily just one of the players, she might have interrupted a tryst between monestary workers (someone has to make meals and move harpsichords around) and they were afraid she would report them to the Abbot, one might have been named Lou 😉
Or she might even have stumbled across a gardener tending the unauthorized prattroot patch he was growing for profit using monestary land and plant food 😉
Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men and women and elves and orcs ?
Carruthers, dear, that thing you’re doing is called an assumption. It is a prolific old bird, being the mother of all screw ups.
The first thing to do is trace the victim’s movements from dawn prayers got everyone up until her body was found. Better than even money that Maula was never in a position to offer her anything spiked with prattroot.
Of course, it’s possible this is a take-off on the old Philo Vance movie, "The Kennel Murder Case", and THREE different people took a shot at poor Taurenil (one connecting).
LUNCH COUNTER!
… anyone? no?
t!
It’s quite the triple? quadruple? pun!
Pardine me for not expressing kudos prior, as I assure you this isn’t a fast, mealy-mouthed compliment 😉
(t!’s jokes are thin enough he has to point them out on those rare occasions they appear)
Applause for you right back!
t!
And I’m still having an amazing time enjoying everyone’s speculation.
t!
Yeah that really doesn't seem to fit. If Taurenil didn't show up for lunch, why believe that she was killed *during* lunch? That would seem to suggest that she was killed before lunch, not during.