Thursday, September 2: Femme Fatale

LONE STAR SLEUTHS

by Deborah Elliott-Upton

Like most Criminal Brief readers, I’m always on the lookout for a new book to read. First on my list are mysteries (although I am open to all sorts of genres). In my search, I found Lone Star Sleuths: An Anthology of Texas Crime Fiction, a collection of excerpts of some fine novels. This book is an introduction to mystery writers I know well and some others that are new to me, which is always a treat.

According to the book’s website , Texas has seen fictional crime stories staged from “the highest point of the Guadalupe Mountains in West Texas to the Piney Woods of East Texas, from the High Plains of the Panhandle to the subtropical climate of the lower Rio Grande Valley.”

The Table of Contents reads:

  • Track of the Cat by Nevada Barr
  • Camino del Rio by Jim Sanderson
  • Time Bombs by Nancy Herndon
  • Bordersnakes by James Crumley
  • Death of a Healing Woman by Allana Martin
  • The Killer Inside Me by Jim Thompson
  • A Twist at the End by Steven Saylor
  • The Rock Critic Murders by Jesse Sublett
  • Buck Fever by Ben Rehder
  • Rosemary Remembered by Susan Wittig Albert
  • Armadillos and Old Lace by Kinky Friedman
  • Heat from Another Sun by David L. Lindsey
  • Interstate Dreams by Neal Barrett, Jr.
  • Drowned Man’s Key by Ken Grissom
  • Bay of Sorrows by Gaylord Dold
  • Umbrella Man by Doug J. Swanson
  • Prime Suspect by A. W. Gray
  • The Sheriff and the Panhandle Murders
  • The Two-Bear Mambo by Joe R. Lansdale
  • Gone Fishin’ by Walter Mosley
  • Funny as a Dead Relative by Susan Rogers Cooper
  • Death on the River Walk by Carolyn Hart
  • The Last King of Texas by Rick Riordan
  • The Case of the Hook-billed Kites by J. S. Borthwick
  • Partners in Crime by Rolando Hinojosa
  • Winning Can Be Murder by Bill Crider
  • Hot Enough to Kill by Paula Boyd
  • Do Unto Others by Jeff Abbott
  • Agatite by Clay Reynolds
  • The Red Scream by Mary Willis Walker

Recognize many names or titles? While some of my favorite authors are included here, several authors or titles were new to me. Although I enjoy crime stories from many locations, I look forward to reading these stories about my home state and hope you will, too.

If this listing tempts you, ordering from the website offers a 33% discount on the paperback book. I think you might find it a killer read, Texas style.

Wednesday, September 1: Tune It Or Die!

TIME WARPED

by Rob Lopresti

Time is on my mind this week, though not on my hands, or on my side. So let’s spare it a minute or three.

Zoning out

As you may remember I was recently in Copenhagen. One of the interesting consequences of having easy wireless access in our apartment there was the constant reminder that I was nine hours away from my usual time zone.

I would get up in the morning and check Criminal Brief and often be met by yesterday’s column, because it was still yesterday where James lives. And even if the column had been updated before I got there, there would be few if any comments, because our readers were mostly asleep.

In the same way, all my email habits were reversed. I got most of my mail at night and very little during the day. We all know the world is facing a different part of the day than us, but somehow the Web made it more obvious than ever before.

Lagging ahead

But that was nothing compared to the trip back home. Twenty-four hours of travel (Memo to Scotty: We need that transporter online now.). Several days of jet lag. I truly felt like I could feel my brain adjusting bit my bit. Now it’s over the mid-Atlantic. Now it’s reached the East Coast. Maybe by tomorrow it will hit the Pacific time zone.

Sometimes our bodies seem to say, okay, you can zip around the world in a day, but I don’t have to like it, and you ain’t gonna either.

Writing time

So how does all this relate to writing? Glad you asked. I am in the middle of first drafts of three stories. By sheer coincidence they are set in:

    Victorian England

    Turn of the Century California

    1967 New Jersey

That’s three different environments, vocabularies, moods, to throw myself into, not even mentioning all the research I need to do. I feel like the science fiction writer Howard Waldrop who used to lose money on his stories, because he spent so much time digging up the details he needed.

Time travel is so broadening

And speaking of science fiction, a couple of decades ago Spider Robinson wrote a story called “Time Traveler,” about a man who was locked in a South American prison for twenty years with no news from the outside world. One day he was released and felt exactly as if he had jumped ahead by two decades in a single moment. We all travel through time, but we do it at the rate of one day per day, and we don’t always notice the changes accumulating..

When Robinson’s story was published in a science fiction magazine some people cancelled their subscriptions, claiming it was not science fiction. I’m not sure they are right. Maybe – said the man who is complaining that it took a whole day to travel halfway around the world – science fiction is what we are living right now.

Tuesday, August 31: Mystery Masterclass

I first discovered the Thinking Machine stories of Jacques Futrelle (1875-1912), one of the victims in the sinking of the Titanic, when I was in the fourth grade. I was smitten. This story was first published in 1907.

Futrelle never says so, but I’ve always thought that the “S. F. X.” initials between the Thinking Machine’s first and last names must stand for “Saint Francis Xavier”, but I could be wrong. I can say that they definitely do not stand for “Special Effects”.

The story’s ending has always amused me—perceptive readers will realize that Dr. Ballard’s final question is stupid, since the result is the same in either case, and that Professor Van Dusen’s answer actually expresses nothing but contempt for his fellow (an emotion of which the Thinking Machine is never in short supply).

I hereby dedicate the appearance of this particular story to Leigh’s companion Valentine, for reasons which should be entirely apparent.

And last but not least, this will be the last appearance of the Surprise Witness column for a while. I have a real surprise in store for the Gentle Reader next week.

—JLW

THE PROBLEM OF THE HIDDEN MILLION

by Jacques Futrelle

     The gray hand of Death had already left its ashen mark upon the wrinkled, venomous face of the old man, who lay huddled up in bed. Save for the feverishly brilliant eyes—cunning, vindictive, hateful—there seemed to be no spark of life in the aged form. The withered lips were mute, and the thin, yellow, claw-like hands lay helplessly outstretched on the white sheets. All physical power was gone; only the brain remained doggedly alive. Two men and two women stood beside the death bed. Upon each in turn the glittering eyes rested with the merciless, unreasoning hatred of age. Crouched on the floor was a huge St. Bernard dog; and on a perch across the room was a parrot which screeched abominably.
     The gloom of the wretched little room was suddenly relieved by a ruddy sunbeam which shot athwart the bed and lighted the scene fantastically. The old man noted it, and his lips curled into a hideous smile.
     “That’s the last sun I’ll ever see,” he piped feebly. “I’m dying—dying! Do you hear? And you’re all glad of it, every one of you. Yes, you are! You are glad of it because you want my money. You came here to make me believe you were paying a last tribute of respect to your old grandfather. But that isn’t it. It’s the money you want—the money! But I’ve got a surprise for you. You’ll never get the money. It’s hidden safely—you’ll never get it. You all hate me, you have hated me for years, and after that sun dies you’ll all hate me worse. But not more than I hate you. You’ll all hate me worse then, because I’ll be gone and you’ll never know where the money is hidden. It will lie there safely where I put it, rotting and crumbling away; but you shall never warm your fingers with it! It’s hidden—hidden—hidden!”
     There was rasping in the shrunken throat, a deeply drawn breath, then the figure stiffened and a distorted soul passed out upon the Eternal Way.

     Martha held a card within the blinding light of the reflector, and Professor Augustus S. F. X. Van Dusen, with his hands immersed to the elbows in some chemical mess, squinted at it.
     “Dr. Walter Ballard,” he read. “Show him in.”
     After a moment Dr. Ballard entered. The scientist was still absorbed in his labors, but paused long enough to jerk his head toward a chair. Dr. Ballard accepted this as an invitation and sat down, staring curiously at the singular, childlike figure of this eminent man of science, at the mop of tangled, straw yellow hair, the enormous brow, and the peering blue eyes.
     “Well?” demanded the scientist abruptly.
     “I beg your pardon,” began Dr. Ballard with a little start. “Your name was mentioned to me sometime ago by a newspaper reporter, Hutchinson Hatch, whom I chanced to meet in his professional capacity. He suggested then that I come and see you, but I thought it useless. Now the affair in which we were both interested at that time seems hopelessly beyond solution, so I come to you for aid.
     “We want to find one million dollars in gold and United States bonds, which were hidden by my grandfather, John Walter Ballard, sometime before his death just a month ago. The circumstances are altogether out of the ordinary.”
     The Thinking Machine abandoned his labors, and dried his hands carefully, after which he took a seat facing Dr. Ballard. “Tell me about it,” he commanded.
     “Well,” began Dr. Ballard reminiscently, as he settled back in his chair, “the old man—my grandfather—died, as I said, a month ago. He was nearly eighty-six, and the last five or six years of his life he spent as a recluse in a little hut twenty miles from the city, a place some distance from any other house. He had a spot of ground there, half an acre or so, and lived like a pauper, despite the fact that he was worth at least a million dollars. Previous to the time he went there to live, there had been an estrangement with my family, his sole heirs. My family consists of myself, wife, son, and daughter.
     “My grandfather lived in the house with me for ten years before he went out to this hut; and why he left us then is not clear to any member of my family, unless,” and he shrugged his shoulders, “he was mentally unbalanced. Anyway, he went. He would neither come to see us, nor would he permit us to go to see him. As far as we know, he owned no real property of any sort, except this miserable little place, worth altogether—furnishing and all—not more than a thousand or twelve hundred dollars.
     “Well, about a month ago some one stopped at the hut for something and found he was ill. I was notified, and with my wife, son and daughter went to see what we could do. He took occasion on his death bed to heap vituperation upon us, and incidentally to state that something like a million dollars was left behind, but hidden.
     “For the sake of my son and daughter, I undertook to recover this money. I consulted attorneys, private detectives, and in fact exhausted every possible method. I ascertained beyond question that the money was not in a bank anywhere; and hardly think he would have left it there, because of course, if he had, even with a will disinheriting us, the law would have turned it over to us. He had no safe deposit vault as far as one month’s close search revealed, and the money was not hidden in the house or grounds. He stated on his death bed that it was in bonds and gold, and that we should never find it. He was just vindictive enough not to destroy it, but to leave it somewhere, believing we should never find it. Where did he hide it?”
     The Thinking Machine sat silent for several minutes, with his enormous yellow head tilted back, and slender fingers pressed together. “The house and grounds were searched?” he asked.
     “The house was searched from cellar to garret,” was the reply. “Workmen, under my directions, practically wrecked the building. Floors, ceilings, walls, chimney, stairs,—everything,—little cubby holes in the roof, the foundation of the chimney, the pillars, even the flag stones leading from the gate to the door,—everything was examined. The joists were sounded to see if they were solid, and a dozen of them were cut through; the posts on the veranda were cut to pieces; and every stick of furniture was dissected—mattresses, beds, chairs, tables, bureaus—all of it. Outside in the grounds the search was just as thorough. Not one square inch but what was overturned. We dug it all up to a depth of ten feet. Still nothing.”
     “Of course,” said the scientist at last, “the search of the house and grounds was useless. The old man was shrewd enough to know that they would be searched. Also it would appear that the search of banks and safety deposit vaults was equally useless. He was shrewd enough to foresee that too. We shall, for the present, assume that he did not destroy the money or give it away; so it is hidden. If the brain of man is clever enough to conceal a thing, the brain of man is clever enough to find it. It’s a little problem in subtraction, Dr. Ballard.” He was silent for a moment. “Who was your grandfather’s attending physician?”
     “I was. I was present at his death. Nothing could be done. It was merely the collapse consequent upon old age. I issued the burial certificate.”
     “Were any special directions left as to the place or manner of burial?”
     “No.”
     “Have all his papers been examined for a clue as to the possible hiding place?”
     “Everything. There were no papers to amount to anything.”
     “Have you those papers now?”
     Dr. Ballard silently produced a packet and handed it to the scientist.
     “I shall examine these at my leisure,” said The Thinking Machine. “It may be a day or so before I communicate with you.”
     Dr. Ballard went his way. For a dozen hours The Thinking Machine sat with the papers spread out before him, and the keen, squinting, blue eyes dissected them, every paragraph, every sentence, every word. At the end he arose and bundled up the papers impatiently.
     “Dear me! Dear me!” he exclaimed irritably. “There’s no cipher—that’s certain. Then what?”

     Devastating hands had wrought the wreck of the little hut where the old man died. Standing in the midst of its litter, The Thinking Machine regarded it closely and dispassionately for a long time. The work of destruction had been well done.
     “Can you suggest anything?” asked Dr. Ballard impatiently.
     “One mind may read another mind,” said The Thinking Machine, “when there is some external thing upon which there can come concentration as a unit. In other words, when we have a given number the logical brain can construct either backward or forward. There are so many thousands of ways in which your grandfather could have disposed of this money, that the task becomes tremendous in view of the fact that we have no starting point. It is a case for patience, rather than any other quality; therefore, for greater speed, we must proceed psychologically. The question then becomes, not one of where the money is hidden, but one of where that sort of man would hide it.
     “Now what sort of man was your grandfather?” the scientist continued. “He was crabbed, eccentric, and possibly not mentally sound. The cunning of a diseased brain is greater than the cunning of a normal one. He boasted to you that the money was in existence, and his last words were intended to arouse your curiosity; to hang over you all the rest of your life and torment you. You can imagine the vindictive, petty brain like that putting a thing safely beyond your reach—but just beyond it—near enough to tantalize, and yet far enough to remain undiscovered. This seems to me to be the mental attitude in this case. Your grandfather knew that you would do just what you have done here; that is, search the house and lot. He knew too that you would search banks and safety deposit vaults, and with a million at stake he knew it would be done thoroughly. Knowing this, naturally he would not put the money in any of those places.
     “Then what? He doesn’t own any other property, as far as we know, and we shall assume that he did not buy property in the name of some other person; therefore, what have we left? Obviously, if the money is still in existence, it is hidden on somebody’s else property. And the minute we say that, we have the whole wide world to search. But again, doesn’t the deviltry and maliciousness of the old man narrow that down? Wouldn’t he have liked to remember as a dying thought that the money was always just within your reach, and yet safely beyond it? Wouldn’t it have been a keener revenge to have you dig over the whole place, while the money was hidden just six feet outside in a spot where you would never dig? It might be sixty, or six hundred, or six thousand. But then we have the law of probability to narrow those limits; so—”
     Professor Van Dusen turned suddenly and strolled across the uneven ground to the property line. Walking slowly and scrutinizing the ground as he went, he circled the lot, returning to the starting point. Dr. Ballard had followed along behind him.
     “Are all your grandfather’s belongings still in the house?” asked the scientist.
     “Yes, everything just as he left it; that is, except his dog and a parrot. They are temporarily in charge of a widow down the road here.”
     The scientist looked at Dr. Ballard quickly. “What sort of dog is it?” he inquired.
     “A St. Bernard, I think,” replied Dr. Ballard wonderingly.
     “Do you happen to have a glove or something that you know your grandfather wore?”
     “I have a glove, yes.”
     From the debris which littered the floor of the house, a well worn glove was recovered.
     “Now, the dog, please,” commanded the scientist.
     A short walk along the country road brought them to a house, and here they stopped. The St. Bernard, a shaggy, handsome, boisterous old chap, with wise eyes, was led out in leash. The Thinking Machine thrust the glove forward, and the dog sniffed at it. After a moment he sank down on his haunches, and with head thrust forward and upward, whined softly. It was the call of the brute soul to its master.
     The Thinking Machine patted the heavy-coated head, and with the glove still in his hand made as if to go away. Again came the whine, but the dog sank down on the floor, with his head between his forepaws, regarding him intently. For ten minutes the scientist sought to coax the animal to follow him, but still he lay motionless.
     “I don’t mind keepin’ that dog here; but that parrot is powerful noisy,” said the woman after a moment. She had been standing by watching the scientist curiously. “There ain’t no peace in the house.”
     “Noisy—how?” asked Dr. Ballard.
     “He swears, and sings and whistles, and does ’rithmetic all day long,” the woman explained. “It nearly drives me distracted.”
     “Does arithmetic?” inquired The Thinking Machine.
     “Yes,” replied the woman, “and he swears just terrible. It’s almost like havin’ a man about the house. There he goes now.”
     From another room came a sudden, squawking burst of profanity, followed instantly by a whistle, which caused the dog on the floor to prick up his ears.
     “Does the parrot talk well?” asked the scientist.
     “Just like a human bein’,” replied the woman, “an’ just about as sensible as some I’ve seen. I don’t mind his whistling, if only he wouldn’t swear so, and do all his figgerin’ out loud.”
     For a minute or more the scientist stood staring down at the dog in deep thought. Gradually there came some subtle change in his expression. Dr. Ballard was watching him closely.
     “I think perhaps it would be a good idea for me to keep the parrot for a few days,” suggested the scientist finally. He turned to the woman. “Just what sort of arithmetic does the bird do?”
     “All kinds,” she answered promptly. “He does all the multiplication table. But he ain’t very good in subtraction.”
     “I shouldn’t be surprised,” commented The Thinking Machine. “I’ll take the bird for a few days, doctor, if you don’t mind.”

     And so it came to pass that when The Thinking Machine returned to his apartments he was accompanied by as noisy and vociferous a companion as one would care to have.
     Martha, the aged servant, viewed him with horror as he entered. “The perfessor do be gettin’ old,” she muttered. “I suppose there’ll be a cat next.”
     Two days later Dr. Ballard was called to the telephone. The Thinking Machine was at the other end of the wire.
     “Take two men whom you can trust and go down to your grandfather’s place,” instructed the scientist curtly. “Take picks, shovels, a compass, and a long tape line. Stand on the front steps facing east. To your right will be an apple tree some distance off that lot on the adjoining property. Go to that apple tree. A boulder is at its foot. Measure from the edge of that stone twenty-six feet due north by the compass, and from that point fourteen feet due west. You will find your money there. Then please have some one come and take this bird away. If you don’t, I’ll wring its neck. It’s the most blasphemous creature I ever heard. Good bye.”

     Dr. Ballard slipped the catch on the suit case and turned it upside down on the laboratory table. It was packed—literally packed—with United States bonds. The Thinking Machine fingered them idly.
     “And there is this too,” said Dr. Ballard.
     He lifted a stout sack from the floor, cut the string, and spilled out its contents beside the bonds. It was gold—thousands and thousands of dollars. Dr. Ballard was frankly excited about it; The Thinking Machine accepted it as he accepted all material things.
     “How much is there of it?” he asked quietly.
     “I don’t know,” replied Dr. Ballard.
     “And how did you find it?”
     “As you directed—twenty-six feet north from the boulder, and fourteen feet west from that point.”
     “I knew that, of course,” snapped The Thinking Machine; “but how was it hidden?”
     “It’s rather peculiar,” explained Dr. Ballard. “Fourteen feet brought the man who had measured it to the edge of an old, dried up well, twelve or fifteen feet deep. Not expecting any such thing, he tumbled into it. In his efforts to get out he stepped upon a stone which protruded from one side. That fell out, and revealed the wooden box, which contained all this.”
     “In other words,” said the scientist, “the money was hidden in such a manner that it would in time have come to be buried twelve or fifteen feet below the surface, because the well, being dry, would ultimately, of course, have been filled in.”
     Dr. Ballard had been listening only hazily. His hands had been plowing in and out of the heap of gold. The Thinking Machine regarded him with something like contempt about his thin-lipped mouth.
     “How—how did you ever do it?” asked Dr. Ballard at last.
     “I am surprised that you want to know,” remarked The Thinking Machine cuttingly. “You know how I reached the conclusion that the money was not hidden either in the house or lot. The plain logic of the thing told me that, even before the search you had made demonstrated it. You saw how logic narrowed down the search, and you saw my experiment with the dog. That was purely an experiment. I wanted to see the instinct of the animal. Would it lead him anywhere?—perhaps to the spot where the money had been hidden? It did not.
     “But the parrot? That was another matter. It just happens that once before I had an interesting experience with a bird—a cockatoo which figured in a sleep walking case—and naturally was interested in this bird. Now, what were the circumstances in this case? Here was a bird that talked exceptionally well, yet that bird had been living for five years alone with an old man. It is a fact that, no matter how well a parrot may talk, it will forget in the course of time, unless there is some one around it who talks. This old man was the only person near this bird; therefore, from the fact that the bird talks, we know that the old man talked; from the fact that the bird repeated the multiplication table, we know that the old man repeated it; from the fact that the bird whistles, we know that the old man whistled, perhaps to the dog. And in the course of five years under these circumstances, a bird would have come to that point where it would repeat only the words or sounds that the old man used.
     “All this shows too that the old man talked to himself. Most people who live alone a great deal do that. Then came a question as to whether at any time the old man had ever repeated the secret of the hiding place within the hearing of the bird—not once but many times, because it takes a parrot a long time to learn phrases. When we know the vindictiveness which lay behind the old man’s actions in hiding the money, when we know how the thing preyed on his mind, coupled with the fact that he talked to himself, and was not wholly sound mentally, we can imagine him doddering about the place alone, repeating the very thing of which he had made so great a secret. Thus, the bird learned it, but learned it disjointedly, not connectedly; so when I brought the parrot here, my idea was to know by personal observation what the bird said that didn’t connect—that is, that had no obvious meaning, I hoped to get a clue which would result, just as the clue I did get did result.
     “The bird’s trick of repeating the multiplication table means nothing except it shows the strange workings of an unbalanced mind. And yet, there is one exception to this. In a disjointed sort of way, the bird knows all the multiplication tables to ten, except one. For instance—listen!”
     The Thinking Machine crept stealthily to a door and opened it softly a few inches. From somewhere out there came the screeching of the parrot. For several minutes they listened in silence. There was a flood of profanity, a shrill whistle or two, then the squawking voice ran off into a monotone.
     “Six times one are six, six time two are twelve, six times three are eighteen, six times four are twenty-four—and add two.”
     “That’s it,” explained the scientist, as he closed the door. “ ‘Six times four are twenty-four—and add two.’ That’s the one table the bird doesn’t know. The thing is incoherent, except as applied to a peculiar method of remembering a number. That number is twenty-six. On one occasion I heard the bird repeat a dozen times, ‘Twenty-six feet to the polar star.’ That could mean nothing except the direction of the twenty-six feet—due north. One of the first things I noticed the bird saying was something about fourteen feet to the setting sun—or due west. When set down with the twenty-six, I could readily see that I had something to go on.
     “But where was the starting point? Again, logic. There was no tree or stone inside the lot, except the apple tree which your workmen cut down, and that was more than twenty-six feet from the boundary of the lot in all directions. There was one tree in the adjoining lot, an apple tree with a boulder at its foot. I knew that by observation. And there was no other tree, I knew also, within several hundred feet; therefore, that tree, or boulder rather, as a starting point—not the tree so much as the boulder, because the tree might be cut down, or would in time decay. The chances are the stone would have been allowed to remain there indefinitely. Naturally your grandfather would measure from a prominent point—the boulder. That is all. I gave you the figures. You know the rest.”
     For a minute or more, Dr. Ballard stared at him blankly. “How was it you knew,” he asked, “that the directions should have been first twenty-six feet north, then fourteen feet west, instead of first fourteen west, and then twenty-six feet north?”
     “I didn’t know,” replied The Thinking Machine. “If you had failed to find the money by those directions, I should merely have reversed the order.”
     Half an hour later Dr. Ballard went away, carrying the money and the parrot in its cage. The bird cursed The Thinking Machine roundly, as Dr. Ballard went down the steps.

Monday, August 30: The Scribbler

STRIP SEARCH

by James Lincoln Warren

In Saturday’s Los Angeles Times, there was a three inch column on page AA2 (in “LATEXTRA”, the section following the front page section which supposedly contains late-breaking news) stating that the Tribune Company, which owns the Times, the Chicago Tribune, and the Los Angeles TV station KTLA TV (which began operations in 1942 as “W6XYZ”, the first television station west of the Mississippi), after having consulted with its creditors, has delayed presenting its revised bankruptcy plan to the court. Most of you out there probably aren’t following the story, which began back in 2008, and which has recently been made more interesting by the fact that one of the proposals for saving the company involves having former Disney CEO Michael Eisner take over. Whatever happens, the Tribune saga has been held out for the last several years as evidence of the daily newspaper’s demise.

Even after having changed corporate masters and severely slashing its staff and budget over the last several years, the Times is still hæmorrhaging money. Its subscriber base, which at one time was well over a million, is now less than seven hundred thousand—and this without any serious print competition, since arch-rival Hearst’s Herald-Examiner folded (please excuse the pun) over twenty years ago.

Sigh.

I don’t know if this newspaper will survive or become yet another casualty of our post literate culture. I can tell you that although there’s still a lot worth reading in it, it certainly isn’t the excellent L.A. Times I remember from when I first moved to Los Angeles in the 1980s anymore. I’m pretty sure it will hang on a while longer, but if it goes, it’s going to take a lot of things down with it.

Like comic strips. News I can get anywhere in this digital age, but reading comics online just ain’t the same. It doesn’t smell the same, you don’t get ink on your fingers, and you can’t take in the whole collection of strips at once. You can’t fold it up your netbook and shove it in your pocket, then toss it away when you’re done.

Not that I’m all that crazy about most contemporary strips these days, but I learned to read by perusing Sunday comics pages and comic books, so they fill an important place in my heart. When I lived in Brussels during my junior high school years, one of the things I most coveted was the American comics in the International Herald-Tribune.

One of the things that has mostly disappeared from the comics pages is strips that aren’t gag oriented. About the only daily strip in the Times that still tells stories is “Rex Morgan, M.D.” — there’s also “9 Chickweed Lane”, but that’s still primarily a humor strip, although it has lately metamorphozed almost into a post modern “Gasoline Alley”.

There aren’t any detectives at all.

Remember Dick Tracy? Or Rip Kirby? How about Kerry Drake? If you are not, ahem, of a certain age, you probably won’t remember the last two at all.

And who could forget Secret Agent X-9? Well, just about everybody, I admit, although he survived from his inception in 1934 until last year. What really makes that particular comic strip noteworthy were the two guys who wrote and drew it during its first year: Dashiell Hammett and Alex Raymond, of Flash Gordon fame, who also gave us Rip Kirby, mentioned above, although when I read that excellent strip every day in the late 60s and early 70s, it was drawn by the marvelous John Prentice. (Raymond had been killed in an auto accident in 1956.)

And not just cops and private eyes. There were reporters. Yeah, OK, I hated Dale Messick’s Brenda Starr, who first appeared in 1940 and is still with us, because despite the redheaded bombshell’s occasional forays into crime, it was essentially an adventurous romance strip. But Steve Roper, on the other hand, was a true crime-fighting investigative reporter, and his buddy Mike Nomad was every inch the tough unlicensed P.I.-type epitomized by Travis McGee and Matthew Scudder — although the evolution of that particular strip is a strange tale. It started as a humorous Western.

Like so many newspapers, most of these strips are long gone, and there has been nothing to replace them. But wouldn’t it be cool if detectives came back to the comics page?

If there are any comics pages.

Sunday, August 29: The A.D.D. Detective

DEATH and DESTRUCTION

by Leigh Lundin

So much crime news flooded the network this week, I couldn’t fit in more than a taste. Some are very serious, but I’ll try to lighten the load.

Corporate Death Threats

Arizona is becoming weirder by the week, no longer a place for odd-tasting ice tea in pretty packaging. Denied a liquor permit to open a bar, one man plotted death and destruction at the 2008 SuperBowl. After buying an assault rifle and ammunition, he wrote letters to major newspapers and a couple of web sites about his plans: "I will sacrifice your children upon the altar of your excess."

Setting aside he writes better than some authors and that booze and ammo don’t make great partners, he turned himself into police a half hour before doing the deed. Score one for him.

For the threats, he received a year in lockup. However the appeals court decided a death threat against a corporation is not a crime– threats are only considered crimes if directed at specific individuals. Score two for the dude, zero for common sense.

The ruling strikes me as strange. Another Arizonian, Tim McVeigh, targeted a building rather than individuals. That toll: 168 people, 19 children, ~700 injuries.

FaceBook Hit List

FaceBook death threats are nothing new, but one burst into reality when the first three teens on a list of one hundred were gunned down two weeks ago, ages 16, 17, and 19 (or 15, 16, 17, according to other reports). Originally, an unknown party posted the list with 69 boys and a few days later added 31 teen girls.

Thus far, no one has come up with a theory that makes sense. Score zero for common sense.

Ohio News (and Mystery Clues)

Another execution is imminent in Dick Stodghill’s old stomping grounds and once again many– including local newspapers and professionals– believe the evidence indicates the man, Kevin Keith, is either innocent or unfairly tried.

After a couple of days reading evidence, I’m far from convinced of innocence, not like, say Georgia’s Troy Davis case. My meter indicates maybe 50-50, but any doubt or unfairness should give us pause when a life is at stake and it seems likely the trial was tainted.

As mentioned in comments last week, the 1996 federal AEDPA act cut off many federal judges’ remedies for unjust convictions and even proof of a demonstrably wrongful conviction of an innocent person is no basis for relief in a habeas case. As a result, the case was dumped in the lap of a clemency hearing.

Clemency boards are often accused of rubber stamping convictions. The Ohio board did little to offset that view, wrapping up their summary with the statement "we believe that considerable deference should be afforded the findings of the jury and trial…"

On the one hand, an impressive array of supporters argue misidentification, pointing to another suspect not considered by the police, Rodney Melton. Kevin Keith’s supporters assert investigative error (and perjury in one instance), prosecutorial misconduct, a non-existent witness, and unheard witnesses who place the accused elsewhere. No personal evidence and little physical evidence can be tied to Keith, which includes tire tracks that may have been misidentified. There are charges of a contaminated jury, accusations leveled about jury threats but also improper ties, such as a juror who babysat for lead detectives on the case. Finally, one of the victims doesn’t think Keith was the perpetrator.

A large body of expert testimony was considered and discounted or disregarded by the board regarding eye witnesses and that memory tends to fade with time rather than radically improve as seems to happen in so many critical cases.

On the other side, I agree some of the prosecution problems can be explained. I give the police captain accused of perjury a sizable benefit of the doubt. I don’t think he lied at all, but made a simple mistake in interpreting a nurse’s surname, the so-called non-existent witness.

While the captain shouldn’t be accused of perjury, in a death penalty case tiny details matter and an error like that shouldn’t be used against the defense.

To me, the most intriguing physical evidence was a partial license plate number embedded in a snowbank by what was believed to be the getaway car. The car left behind the numbers 043. Police discovered the grandfather of one of Keith’s girlfriends owned a car with a tag ending in 043. Prosecutors said "open and shut" and the jury agreed. Guilty.

But …

If this happened in a novel, you wouldn’t believe it, but it wasn’t enough to sway either jury or board. Remember the alternate suspect mentioned above?

His license plate also contains 043.

If you’re looking for a job…

The DEA is looking for native speakers of ebonics.

Really. I wouldn’t lie to you. They should either hire June Cleaver from Airplane or score zero for jivin’ us.

Saturday, August 28: Mississippi Mud

LESSER EVILS

by John M. Floyd

Rob Lopresti’s column about heroes and their sidekicks the other day got me thinking. It’s true that the best Kirks need good Spocks, or Hawks or Tontos or Watsons or Samwise Gamgees, as the case may be. But let’s be fair, here: the villains need interesting helpers as well.

I also began wondering what the advantage could be, to the writer and the story, of giving the villain a sidekick. I came up with several:

  • the villain can reveal, via dialogue with his Number Two, important plot facts or character traits that might otherwise be hard to disclose;
  • the more allies the villain has, the worse the odds are against the hero;
  • comparisons and conflicts between the sidekick and his boss can confirm for the reader/viewer how much more evil and threatening the head villain is;
  • a sidekick can provide skills the villain might not possess; and
  • an expendable sidekick (few of them survive until the last reel) can “test” the hero before the hero’s final confrontation with Villain #1.

Buddies for the baddies

Sometimes villains’ sidekicks (henchmen?) are even more sinister than their superiors. I thought From Russia With Love’s Rosa Klebb was more creepy than her archvillain boss, and in Tom Rob Smith’s novel Child 44 a subordinate named Visili Nikitin was one of the most evil characters I’ve ever read about. On the big screen, one who comes to mind is soulless killer Charlie Prince (Ben Foster), who in the remake of 3:10 to Yuma was far more ruthless than his gang leader Ben Wade (Russell Crowe).

At times, though not often, the “other” bad guy can actually steal the show. Hannibal Lecter wasn’t the only villain in The Silence of the Lambs; the main plot, investigation, and manhunt was focused on serial killer Jaime Gumb. But guess which one everybody remembers. Another example is the silent and loyal Oddjob, who — silly as he was — made more of a lasting impression on me than Auric Goldfinger did, in both the novel and the film. And I’d be willing to bet that more moviegoers remember squinty-eyed, hawk-nosed actor Lee Van Cleef, one of the three outlaw sidekicks in the film High Noon, than either of his two buddies or his boss Frank Miller (Ian MacDonald), even though Miller was the main villain of both the movie and its Tex Ritter theme song.

One of my favorite sidekicks was the murderous but cheerful Mexican bandit in Hombre. I can still hear him calling out, from his hiding place after being wounded, “Heeey, Hombre, you put a hole in meeee. I never had a bellyache like this since I’m a leetle boyee.” His character added a touch of humor to a deadly serious story, but in more lighthearted movies plenty of villains had comic-relief sidekicks: Otis (Ned Beatty) in Superman, Max (Peter Falk) in The Great Race, Ralph (Danny DeVito) in Romancing the Stone, etc. Playing a comedy villain’s sidekick is good duty– nothing truly bad ever happens to those guys.

The facts about malefactors

The criminals with lower billings are of course not always sidekicks; sometimes they’re killers hired by the villain (Billy Drago in The Untouchables), junior members of a team (Danny Glover in Witness, Gary Busey in Under Siege, Alexander Godunov in Die Hard), or just other evil characters unconnected to the villain (Doug Hutchison in The Green Mile).

There are plenty of variations on this subject. I can think of one novel where a villain’s sidekick (the pyromaniac “Trashcan Man” in The Stand) was the final undoing of the villain, one film where the villain’s accomplice (William Hurt in Body Heat) was also the protagonist, one where a villain’s employee (Ben Johnson in Shane) turned away from the Dark Side and helped the hero, and even one where the hero’s sidekick (Alan Hale Jr. in The Eiger Sanction) turned out to be the villain. Hey, if it works, it works.

Aiding and abetting

Who are some of your favorite bad-guy sidekicks? I particularly liked Pete Postlethwaite in The Usual Suspects, Jack Weston in both Wait Until Dark and the first Thomas Crown Affair, Daryl Hannah in both Blade Runner and Kill Bill, and Chuck Connors (actually the villain’s son rather than his sidekick) in The Big Country– but I’ll probably think of a dozen more as soon as I send this column off to press.

I should mention here that the lesser villain role has its disadvantages. Let’s face it, if you get that part, you’re admitting you’re not quite good-looking enough or sinister enough or interesting enough for the top slot. And, as I said earlier, you’ll probably die an unpleasant death before the end of the story. (Remember Jabba the Hutt? There’s not much dignity in being strangled at the end of the first scene, by the young lady the hero’s trying to rescue.)

If you like sidekicks, try out for the buddy of the good guy instead: you’ll get more respect. Unless, of course, you’re a Wookiee.

Friday, August 27: Bandersnatches

OBJECT POVERTY

by Steven Steinbock

I can’t really blame anyone for dropping the Ms of the end of whom. I may get a momentary sense of unease. But then I remind myself that there are bigger fish to fry. Besides, whom has fallen so far into disuse that when I speak a sentence that calls for it I find myself pausing to double check. Real-time oral proofreading is no way to carry a conversation.

Perfectly good patterns do sometimes fall into disuse. I think it’s a shame that the Second-Person Plural pronoun ye has disappeared from English. Ironically, it’s only in the Southern states of the US that ye can still hear a plural second-person in the form of you all or the contraction y’all. What makes it ironic is that American not living in Southern states generally look down their noses at the form, thinking it the sign of poor education, when it is, in fact, a smarter use of pronouns than what the rest of us use.

I’ve noticed an interesting pattern in which object pronouns are misused. There’s probably a name for it, and perhaps some grammarian reading this will kindly provide it. But I’m stuck just trying to describe it. Here it is: we sometimes choose pronouns based on their location in a sentence or clause rather than on its function. I’m sure I’m guilty of it.

Here’s how it works: we are so accustomed to the pattern SUBJECT VERB OBJECT (“he kissed her” “she slapped him” “we ignored them” etc.) that we mistakenly assume that any pronoun near the end of a sentence ought to take the object form.

I’m reading a light thriller written in the early 1940s, They Tell No Tales by Manning Coles. (It’s an excellent book from a wonderful series, by the way). I came across a phrase that felt awkward. But after reading it a few times, I realized that it was correct, and that I was just unaccustomed to it.

To set up the stage, the hero, Hambledon, is talking with his friend and a policeman about a man they suspect of being a spy, but who has covered his tracks so well that they can’t prove it.

“It’s a pity,” agreed Elliot, “but he gets away with it this time, if it was he.”

It was the last word in that passage that derailed me. If it was he. It would seem (to me, anyway) that the phrase would read if it was him. My guess is that most of us would, without giving it a second thought, use him rather than he. But then most of us (including me) would be wrong. The he in question is the subject of Elliot and Hambledon’s suspicion, not the object. But because the pronoun is the final word in the sentence, or perhaps because it comes at the end of an if clause, we instinctively think it should be the object.

But that brings up another question: should the verb in that passage have been was or were? I thought that in the subjunctive mood, we should always use the verb were no matter who the person is. Would “if it were he” have been more correct?

Now I’ve completely confused myself.

If any readers can enlighten me as to the history of the subjunctive were rule, or if you’d like to share any odd or awkward verbal patterns, jump right in.