Appointment With Death by Agatha Christie
‘So, in this case, although you have lied to me, you have also, unwittingly, told me the truth.’
He heard a faint sigh, the scrape of a chair on the floor to his right, but he did not look round. He continued to look at the Boyntons.
‘First, I examined the possibility of Mrs Boynton having died a natural death—and I decided against it. The missing drug—the hypodermic syringe—and above all, the attitude of the dead lady’s family all convinced me that that supposition could not be entertained.
‘Not only was Mrs Boynton killed in cold blood—but every member of her family was aware of the fact! Collectively they reacted as guilty parties.
‘But there are degrees in guilt. I examined the evidence carefully with a view to ascertaining whether the murder—yes, it was murder—had been committed by the old lady’s family acting on a concerted plan.
‘There was, I may say, overwhelming motive. One and all stood to gain by her death—both in the financial sense—for they would at once attain financial independence and indeed enjoy very considerable wealth—and also in the sense of being freed from what had become an almost insupportable tyranny.
‘To continue: I decided, almost immediately, that the concerted theory would not hold water. The stories of the Boynton family did not dovetail neatly into each other, and no system of workable alibis had been arranged. The facts seemed more to suggest that one—or possibly two—members of the family had acted in collusion and that the others were accessories after the fact. I next considered which particular member or members—were indicated. Here, I may say, I was inclined to be biased by a certain piece of evidence known only to myself.’
Here Poirot recounted his experience in Jerusalem.
‘Naturally, that pointed very strongly to Mr Raymond Boynton as the prime mover in the affair. Studying the family, I came to the conclusion that the most likely recipient of his confidences that night would be his sister Carol. They strongly resembled each other in appearance and temperament, and so would have a keen bond of sympathy and they also possessed the nervous rebellious temperament necessary for the conception of such an act. That their motive was partly unselfish—to free the whole family and particularly their younger sister—only made the planning of the deed more plausible.’ Poirot paused a minute.
Raymond Boynton half opened his lips, then shut them again. His eyes looked steadily at Poirot with a kind of dumb agony in them.
‘Before I go into the case against Raymond Boynton, I would like to read to you a list of significant points which I drew up and submitted to Colonel Carbury this afternoon.
Significant points
Mrs Boynton was taking a mixture containing digitalin.
Dr Gerard missed a hypodermic syringe.
Mrs Boynton took definite pleasure in keeping her family from enjoying themselves with other people.
Mrs Boynton, on the afternoon in question, encouraged her family to go away and leave her.
Mrs Boynton is a mental sadist.
The distance from the marquee to the place where Mrs Boynton was sitting is (roughly) two hundred yards.
Mr Lennox Boynton said at first he did not know what time he returned to the camp, but later he admitted having set his mother’s wrist-watch to the right time.
Dr Gerard and Miss Genevra Boynton occupied tents next door to each other.
At half-past six, when dinner was ready, a servant was dispatched to announce the fact to Mrs Boynton.
Mrs Boynton, in Jerusalem, used these words: “I never forget. Remember that. I’ve never forgotten anything.”
‘Although I have numbered the points separately, occasionally they can be bracketed in pairs. That is the case, for instance, with the first two. Mrs Boynton taking a mixture containing digitalis. Dr Gerard had missed a hypodermic syringe. Those two points were the first thing that struck me about the case, and I may say to you that I found them most extraordinary—and quite irreconcilable. You do not see what I mean? No matter. I will return to the point presently. Let it suffice that I noticed those two points as something that had definitely got to be explained satisfactorily.
‘I will conclude now with my study of the possibility of Raymond Boynton’s guilt. The following are the facts. He had been heard to discuss the possibility of taking Mrs Boynton’s life. He was in a condition of great nervous excitement. He had—mademoiselle will forgive me’—he bowed apologetically to Sarah—‘just passed through a moment of great emotional crisis. That is, he had fallen in love. The exaltation of his feelings might lead him to act in one of several ways. He might feel mellowed and softened towards the world in general, including his stepmother—he might feel the courage at last to defy her and shake off her influence—or he might find just the additional spur to turn his crime from theory to practice. That is the psychology! Let us now examine the facts.
‘Raymond Boynton left the camp with the others about three-fifteen. Mrs Boynton was then alive and well. Before long Raymond and Sarah King had a tête-à-tête interview. Then he left her. According to him, he returned to the camp at ten minutes to six. He went up to his mother, exchanged a few words with her, then went to his tent and afterwards down to the marquee. He says that at ten minutes to six, Mrs Boynton was alive and well.
‘But we now come to a fact which directly contradicts that statement. At half-past six Mrs Boynton’s death was discovered by a servant. Miss King, who holds a medical degree, examined her body and she swears definitely that at that time, though she did not pay any special attention to the time when death had occurred, it had most certainly and decisively taken place at least an hour (and probably a good deal more) before six o’clock.
‘We have here, you see, two conflicting statements. Setting aside the possibility that Miss King may have made a mistake—’
Sarah interrupted him. ‘I don’t make mistakes. That is, if I had, I would admit to it.’
Her tone was hard and clear.
Poirot bowed to her politely.
‘Then there are only two possibilities—either Miss King or Mr Boynton is lying! Let us examine Raymond Boynton’s reasons for so doing. Let us assume that Miss King was not mistaken and not deliberately lying. What, then, was the sequence of events? Raymond Boynton returns to the camp, sees his mother sitting at the mouth of her cave, goes up to her and finds she is dead. What does he do? Does he call for help? Does he immediately inform the camp of what has happened? No, he waits a minute or two, then passes on to his tent and joins his family in the marquee and says nothing. Such conduct is exceedingly curious, is it not?’
Raymond said in a nervous, sharp voice:
‘It would be idiotic, of course. That ought to show you that my mother was alive and well as I’ve said. Miss King was flustered and upset and made a mistake.’
‘One asks oneself,’ said Poirot, calmly sweeping on, ‘whether there could possibly be a reason for such conduct? It seems, on the face of it, that Raymond Boynton cannot be guilty, since at the only time he was known to approach his stepmother that afternoon she had already been dead for some time. Now, supposing, therefore, that Raymond Boynton is innocent, can we explain his conduct?
‘And I say, that on the assumption that he is innocent, we can! For I remember that fragment of conversation I overheard. “You do see, don’t you, that she’s got to be killed?” He comes back from his walk and finds her dead and at once his guilty memory envisages a certain possibility. The plan has been carried out—not by him—but by his fellow planner. Tout simplement—he suspects that his sister, Carol Boynton, is guilty.’
‘It’s a lie,’ said Raymond in a low, trembling voice.
Poirot went on: ‘Let us now take the possibility of Carol Boynton being the murderess. What is the evidence against her? She has the same highly-strung temperament—the kind of temperament that might see such a deed coloured with heroism. It was she to whom Raymond Boynton was talking that night in Jerusalem. Carol Boynton returned to the camp at ten minues past five. According to her own story she
went up and spoke to her mother. No one saw her do so. The camp was deserted—the boys were asleep. Lady Westholme, Miss Pierce and Mr Cope were exploring caves out of sight of the camp. There was no witness of Carol Boynton’s possible action. The time would agree well enough. The case, then, against Carol Boynton is a perfectly possible one.’ He paused. Carol had raised her head. Her eyes looked steadily and sorrowfully into his.
‘There is one other point. The following morning, very early, Carol Boynton was seen to throw something into the stream. There is reason to believe that that something was a hypodermic syringe.’
‘Comment?’ Dr Gerard looked up surprised. ‘But my hypodermic was returned. Yes, yes, I have it now.’
Poirot nodded vigorously.
‘Yes, yes. This second hypodermic, it is very curious—very interesting. I have been given to understand that this hypodermic belonged to Miss King. Is that so?’
Sarah paused for a fraction of a second.
Carol spoke quickly: ‘It was not Miss King’s syringe,’ she said. ‘It was mine.’
‘Then you admit throwing it away, mademoiselle?’
She hesitated just a second.
‘Yes, of course. Why shouldn’t I?’
‘Carol!’ It was Nadine. She leaned forward, her eyes wide and distressed. ‘Carol…Oh, I don’t understand…’
Carol turned and looked at her. There was something hostile in her glance.
‘There’s nothing to understand! I threw away an old hypodermic. I never touched the—the poison.’
Sarah’s voice broke in: ‘It is quite true what Miss Pierce told you, M. Poirot. It was my syringe.’
Poirot smiled.
‘It is very confusing, this affair of the hypodermic—and yet, I think, it could be explained. Ah, well, we have now two cases made out—the case for the innocence of Raymond Boynton—the case for the guilt of his sister Carol. But me, I am scrupulously fair. I look always on both sides. Let us examine what occurred if Carol Boynton was innocent.
‘She returns to the camp, she goes up to her stepmother, and she finds her—shall we say—dead! What is the first thing she will think? She will suspect that her brother Raymond may have killed her. She does not know what to do. So she says nothing. And presently, about an hour later, Raymond Boynton returns and having presumably spoken to his mother, says nothing of anything being amiss. Do you not think that then her suspicions would become certainties? Perhaps she goes to his tent and finds there a hypodermic syringe. Then, indeed, she is sure! She takes it quickly and hides it. Early in the morning she flings it as far away as she can.
‘There is one more indication that Carol Boynton is innocent. She assures me when I question her that she and her brother never seriously intended to carry out their plan. I ask her to swear—and she swears immediately and with the utmost solemnity that she is not guilty of the crime! You see, that is the way she puts it. She does not swear that they are not guilty. She swears for herself, not her brother—and thinks that I will not pay special attention to the pronoun.
‘Eh bien, that is the case for the innocence of Carol Boynton. And now let us go back a step and consider not the innocence but the possible guilt of Raymond. Let us suppose that Carol is speaking the truth, that Mrs Boynton was alive at five-ten. Under what circumstances can Raymond be guilty? We can suppose that he killed his mother at ten minutes to six when he went up to speak to her. There were boys about the camp, true, but the light was fading. It might have been managed, but it then follows that Miss King lied. Remember, she came back to the camp only five minutes after Raymond. From the distance she would see him go up to his mother. Then, when later she is found dead, Miss King realizes that Raymond has killed her, and to save him, she lies—knowing that Dr Gerard is down with fever and cannot expose her lie!’
‘I did not lie!’ said Sarah clearly.
‘There is yet another possibility. Miss King, as I have said, reached the camp a few minutes after Raymond. If Raymond Boynton found his mother alive, it may have been Miss King who administered the fatal injection. She believed that Mrs Boynton was fundamentally evil. She may have seen herself as a just executioner. That would equally well explain her lying about the time of death.’
Sarah had grown very pale. She spoke in a low, steady voice.
‘It is true that I spoke of the expediency of one person dying to save many. It was the Place of Sacrifice that suggested the idea to me. But I can swear to you that I never harmed that disgusting old woman—nor would the idea of doing so ever have entered my head!’
‘And yet,’ said Poirot softly, ‘one of you two must be lying.’
Raymond Boynton shifted in his chair. He cried out impetuously:
‘You win, M. Poirot! I’m the liar. Mother was dead when I went up to her. It—it quite knocked me out. I’d been going, you see, to have it out with her. To tell her that from henceforth I was a free agent. I was—all set, you understand. And there she was—dead! Her hand all cold and flabby. And I thought—just what you said. I thought maybe Carol—you see, there was the mark on her wrist—’
Poirot said quickly: ‘That is the one point on which I am not completely informed. What was the method you counted on employing? You had a method—and it was connected with a hypodermic syringe. That much I know. If you want me to believe you, you must tell me the rest.’
Raymond said hurriedly: ‘It was a way I read in a book—an English detective story—you stuck an empty hypodermic syringe into someone and it did the trick. It sounded perfectly scientific. I—I thought we’d do it that way.’
‘Ah,’ said Poirot. ‘I comprehend. And you purchased a syringe?’
‘No. As a matter of fact I pinched Nadine’s.’
Poirot shot a quick look at her. ‘The syringe that is in your baggage in Jerusalem?’ he murmured.
A faint colour showed in the young woman’s face.
‘I—I wasn’t sure what had become of it,’ she murmured. Poirot murmured: ‘You are so quick-witted, madame.’
Chapter 16
There was a pause. Then clearing his throat with a slightly affected sound, Poirot went on:
‘We have now solved the mystery of what I might term the second hypodermic. That belonged to Mrs Lennox Boynton, was taken by Raymond Boynton before leaving Jerusalem, was taken from Raymond by Carol after the discovery of Mrs Boynton’s dead body, was thrown away by her, found by Miss Pierce, and claimed by Miss King as hers. I presume Miss King has it now.’
‘I have,’ said Sarah.
‘So that when you said it was yours just now, you were doing what you told us you do not do—you told a lie.’
Sarah said calmly: ‘That’s a different kind of lie. It isn’t—it isn’t a professional lie.’
Gerard nodded appreciation.
‘Yes, it is a point that. I understand you perfectly, mademoiselle.’
‘Thanks,’ said Sarah.
Again Poirot cleared his throat.
‘Let us now review our time-table. Thus:
Boyntons and Jefferson Cope leave the camp 3.5 (approx.)
Dr Gerard and Sarah King leave the camp 3.15 (approx.)
Lady Westholme and Miss Pierce leave the camp 4.15
Dr Gerard returns to camp 4.20 (approx.)
Lennox Boynton returns to camp 4.35
Nadine Boynton returns to camp and talks to Mrs Boynton 4.40
Nadine Boynton leaves her mother-in-law and goes to marquee 4.50 (approx.)
Carol Boynton returns to camp 5.10
Lady Westholme, Miss Pierce and Mr Jefferson Cope return to camp 5.40
Raymond Boynton returns to camp 5.50
Sarah King returns to camp 6.0
Body discovered 6.30
‘There is, you will notice, a gap of twenty minutes between four-fifty when Nadine Boynton left her mother-in-law and five-ten when Carol returned. Therefore, if Carol is speaking the truth, Mrs Boynton must have been killed in that twenty minutes.
‘Now who could have ki
lled her? At that time Miss King and Raymond Boynton were together. Mr Cope (not that he had any perceivable motive for killing her) has an alibi. He was with Lady Westholme and Miss Pierce. Lennox Boynton was with his wife in the marquee. Dr Gerard was groaning with fever in his tent. The camp is deserted, the boys are asleep. It is a suitable moment for a crime! Was there a person who could have committed it?’
His eyes went thoughtfully to Ginevra Boynton.
‘There was one person. Ginevra Boynton was in her tent all the afternoon. That is what we have been told—but actually there is evidence that she was not in her tent all the time. Ginevra Boynton made a very significant remark. She said that Dr Gerard spoke her name in his fever. And Dr Gerard has also told us that he dreamt in his fever of Ginevra Boynton’s face. But it was not a dream! It was actually her face he saw, standing there by his bed. He thought it an effect of fever—but it was the truth. Ginevra was in Dr Gerard’s tent. Is it not possible that she had come to put back the hypodermic syringe after using it?’
Ginevra Boynton raised her head with its crown of red-gold hair. Her wide beautiful eyes stared at Poirot. They were singularly expressionless. She looked like a vague saint.
‘Ah, ça non!’ cried Dr Gerard.
‘Is it, then, so psychologically impossible?’ inquired Poirot.
The Frenchman’s eyes dropped.
Nadine Boynton said sharply: ‘It’s quite impossible!’
Poirot’s eyes came quickly round to her.
‘Impossible, madame?’
‘Yes.’ She paused, bit her lip, then went on, ‘I will not hear of such a disgraceful accusation against my young sister-in-law. We—all of us—know it to be impossible.’
Ginevra moved a little on her chair. The lines of her mouth relaxed into a smile—the touching, innocent half-unconscious smile of a very young girl.
Nadine said again: ‘Impossible.’
Her gentle face had hardened into lines of determination. The eyes that met Poirot’s were hard and unflinching.
Poirot leaned forward in what was half a bow.
He heard a faint sigh, the scrape of a chair on the floor to his right, but he did not look round. He continued to look at the Boyntons.
‘First, I examined the possibility of Mrs Boynton having died a natural death—and I decided against it. The missing drug—the hypodermic syringe—and above all, the attitude of the dead lady’s family all convinced me that that supposition could not be entertained.
‘Not only was Mrs Boynton killed in cold blood—but every member of her family was aware of the fact! Collectively they reacted as guilty parties.
‘But there are degrees in guilt. I examined the evidence carefully with a view to ascertaining whether the murder—yes, it was murder—had been committed by the old lady’s family acting on a concerted plan.
‘There was, I may say, overwhelming motive. One and all stood to gain by her death—both in the financial sense—for they would at once attain financial independence and indeed enjoy very considerable wealth—and also in the sense of being freed from what had become an almost insupportable tyranny.
‘To continue: I decided, almost immediately, that the concerted theory would not hold water. The stories of the Boynton family did not dovetail neatly into each other, and no system of workable alibis had been arranged. The facts seemed more to suggest that one—or possibly two—members of the family had acted in collusion and that the others were accessories after the fact. I next considered which particular member or members—were indicated. Here, I may say, I was inclined to be biased by a certain piece of evidence known only to myself.’
Here Poirot recounted his experience in Jerusalem.
‘Naturally, that pointed very strongly to Mr Raymond Boynton as the prime mover in the affair. Studying the family, I came to the conclusion that the most likely recipient of his confidences that night would be his sister Carol. They strongly resembled each other in appearance and temperament, and so would have a keen bond of sympathy and they also possessed the nervous rebellious temperament necessary for the conception of such an act. That their motive was partly unselfish—to free the whole family and particularly their younger sister—only made the planning of the deed more plausible.’ Poirot paused a minute.
Raymond Boynton half opened his lips, then shut them again. His eyes looked steadily at Poirot with a kind of dumb agony in them.
‘Before I go into the case against Raymond Boynton, I would like to read to you a list of significant points which I drew up and submitted to Colonel Carbury this afternoon.
Significant points
Mrs Boynton was taking a mixture containing digitalin.
Dr Gerard missed a hypodermic syringe.
Mrs Boynton took definite pleasure in keeping her family from enjoying themselves with other people.
Mrs Boynton, on the afternoon in question, encouraged her family to go away and leave her.
Mrs Boynton is a mental sadist.
The distance from the marquee to the place where Mrs Boynton was sitting is (roughly) two hundred yards.
Mr Lennox Boynton said at first he did not know what time he returned to the camp, but later he admitted having set his mother’s wrist-watch to the right time.
Dr Gerard and Miss Genevra Boynton occupied tents next door to each other.
At half-past six, when dinner was ready, a servant was dispatched to announce the fact to Mrs Boynton.
Mrs Boynton, in Jerusalem, used these words: “I never forget. Remember that. I’ve never forgotten anything.”
‘Although I have numbered the points separately, occasionally they can be bracketed in pairs. That is the case, for instance, with the first two. Mrs Boynton taking a mixture containing digitalis. Dr Gerard had missed a hypodermic syringe. Those two points were the first thing that struck me about the case, and I may say to you that I found them most extraordinary—and quite irreconcilable. You do not see what I mean? No matter. I will return to the point presently. Let it suffice that I noticed those two points as something that had definitely got to be explained satisfactorily.
‘I will conclude now with my study of the possibility of Raymond Boynton’s guilt. The following are the facts. He had been heard to discuss the possibility of taking Mrs Boynton’s life. He was in a condition of great nervous excitement. He had—mademoiselle will forgive me’—he bowed apologetically to Sarah—‘just passed through a moment of great emotional crisis. That is, he had fallen in love. The exaltation of his feelings might lead him to act in one of several ways. He might feel mellowed and softened towards the world in general, including his stepmother—he might feel the courage at last to defy her and shake off her influence—or he might find just the additional spur to turn his crime from theory to practice. That is the psychology! Let us now examine the facts.
‘Raymond Boynton left the camp with the others about three-fifteen. Mrs Boynton was then alive and well. Before long Raymond and Sarah King had a tête-à-tête interview. Then he left her. According to him, he returned to the camp at ten minutes to six. He went up to his mother, exchanged a few words with her, then went to his tent and afterwards down to the marquee. He says that at ten minutes to six, Mrs Boynton was alive and well.
‘But we now come to a fact which directly contradicts that statement. At half-past six Mrs Boynton’s death was discovered by a servant. Miss King, who holds a medical degree, examined her body and she swears definitely that at that time, though she did not pay any special attention to the time when death had occurred, it had most certainly and decisively taken place at least an hour (and probably a good deal more) before six o’clock.
‘We have here, you see, two conflicting statements. Setting aside the possibility that Miss King may have made a mistake—’
Sarah interrupted him. ‘I don’t make mistakes. That is, if I had, I would admit to it.’
Her tone was hard and clear.
Poirot bowed to her politely.
‘Then there are only two possibilities—either Miss King or Mr Boynton is lying! Let us examine Raymond Boynton’s reasons for so doing. Let us assume that Miss King was not mistaken and not deliberately lying. What, then, was the sequence of events? Raymond Boynton returns to the camp, sees his mother sitting at the mouth of her cave, goes up to her and finds she is dead. What does he do? Does he call for help? Does he immediately inform the camp of what has happened? No, he waits a minute or two, then passes on to his tent and joins his family in the marquee and says nothing. Such conduct is exceedingly curious, is it not?’
Raymond said in a nervous, sharp voice:
‘It would be idiotic, of course. That ought to show you that my mother was alive and well as I’ve said. Miss King was flustered and upset and made a mistake.’
‘One asks oneself,’ said Poirot, calmly sweeping on, ‘whether there could possibly be a reason for such conduct? It seems, on the face of it, that Raymond Boynton cannot be guilty, since at the only time he was known to approach his stepmother that afternoon she had already been dead for some time. Now, supposing, therefore, that Raymond Boynton is innocent, can we explain his conduct?
‘And I say, that on the assumption that he is innocent, we can! For I remember that fragment of conversation I overheard. “You do see, don’t you, that she’s got to be killed?” He comes back from his walk and finds her dead and at once his guilty memory envisages a certain possibility. The plan has been carried out—not by him—but by his fellow planner. Tout simplement—he suspects that his sister, Carol Boynton, is guilty.’
‘It’s a lie,’ said Raymond in a low, trembling voice.
Poirot went on: ‘Let us now take the possibility of Carol Boynton being the murderess. What is the evidence against her? She has the same highly-strung temperament—the kind of temperament that might see such a deed coloured with heroism. It was she to whom Raymond Boynton was talking that night in Jerusalem. Carol Boynton returned to the camp at ten minues past five. According to her own story she
‘There is one other point. The following morning, very early, Carol Boynton was seen to throw something into the stream. There is reason to believe that that something was a hypodermic syringe.’
‘Comment?’ Dr Gerard looked up surprised. ‘But my hypodermic was returned. Yes, yes, I have it now.’
Poirot nodded vigorously.
‘Yes, yes. This second hypodermic, it is very curious—very interesting. I have been given to understand that this hypodermic belonged to Miss King. Is that so?’
Sarah paused for a fraction of a second.
Carol spoke quickly: ‘It was not Miss King’s syringe,’ she said. ‘It was mine.’
‘Then you admit throwing it away, mademoiselle?’
She hesitated just a second.
‘Yes, of course. Why shouldn’t I?’
‘Carol!’ It was Nadine. She leaned forward, her eyes wide and distressed. ‘Carol…Oh, I don’t understand…’
Carol turned and looked at her. There was something hostile in her glance.
‘There’s nothing to understand! I threw away an old hypodermic. I never touched the—the poison.’
Sarah’s voice broke in: ‘It is quite true what Miss Pierce told you, M. Poirot. It was my syringe.’
Poirot smiled.
‘It is very confusing, this affair of the hypodermic—and yet, I think, it could be explained. Ah, well, we have now two cases made out—the case for the innocence of Raymond Boynton—the case for the guilt of his sister Carol. But me, I am scrupulously fair. I look always on both sides. Let us examine what occurred if Carol Boynton was innocent.
‘She returns to the camp, she goes up to her stepmother, and she finds her—shall we say—dead! What is the first thing she will think? She will suspect that her brother Raymond may have killed her. She does not know what to do. So she says nothing. And presently, about an hour later, Raymond Boynton returns and having presumably spoken to his mother, says nothing of anything being amiss. Do you not think that then her suspicions would become certainties? Perhaps she goes to his tent and finds there a hypodermic syringe. Then, indeed, she is sure! She takes it quickly and hides it. Early in the morning she flings it as far away as she can.
‘There is one more indication that Carol Boynton is innocent. She assures me when I question her that she and her brother never seriously intended to carry out their plan. I ask her to swear—and she swears immediately and with the utmost solemnity that she is not guilty of the crime! You see, that is the way she puts it. She does not swear that they are not guilty. She swears for herself, not her brother—and thinks that I will not pay special attention to the pronoun.
‘Eh bien, that is the case for the innocence of Carol Boynton. And now let us go back a step and consider not the innocence but the possible guilt of Raymond. Let us suppose that Carol is speaking the truth, that Mrs Boynton was alive at five-ten. Under what circumstances can Raymond be guilty? We can suppose that he killed his mother at ten minutes to six when he went up to speak to her. There were boys about the camp, true, but the light was fading. It might have been managed, but it then follows that Miss King lied. Remember, she came back to the camp only five minutes after Raymond. From the distance she would see him go up to his mother. Then, when later she is found dead, Miss King realizes that Raymond has killed her, and to save him, she lies—knowing that Dr Gerard is down with fever and cannot expose her lie!’
‘I did not lie!’ said Sarah clearly.
‘There is yet another possibility. Miss King, as I have said, reached the camp a few minutes after Raymond. If Raymond Boynton found his mother alive, it may have been Miss King who administered the fatal injection. She believed that Mrs Boynton was fundamentally evil. She may have seen herself as a just executioner. That would equally well explain her lying about the time of death.’
Sarah had grown very pale. She spoke in a low, steady voice.
‘It is true that I spoke of the expediency of one person dying to save many. It was the Place of Sacrifice that suggested the idea to me. But I can swear to you that I never harmed that disgusting old woman—nor would the idea of doing so ever have entered my head!’
‘And yet,’ said Poirot softly, ‘one of you two must be lying.’
Raymond Boynton shifted in his chair. He cried out impetuously:
‘You win, M. Poirot! I’m the liar. Mother was dead when I went up to her. It—it quite knocked me out. I’d been going, you see, to have it out with her. To tell her that from henceforth I was a free agent. I was—all set, you understand. And there she was—dead! Her hand all cold and flabby. And I thought—just what you said. I thought maybe Carol—you see, there was the mark on her wrist—’
Poirot said quickly: ‘That is the one point on which I am not completely informed. What was the method you counted on employing? You had a method—and it was connected with a hypodermic syringe. That much I know. If you want me to believe you, you must tell me the rest.’
Raymond said hurriedly: ‘It was a way I read in a book—an English detective story—you stuck an empty hypodermic syringe into someone and it did the trick. It sounded perfectly scientific. I—I thought we’d do it that way.’
‘Ah,’ said Poirot. ‘I comprehend. And you purchased a syringe?’
‘No. As a matter of fact I pinched Nadine’s.’
Poirot shot a quick look at her. ‘The syringe that is in your baggage in Jerusalem?’ he murmured.
A faint colour showed in the young woman’s face.
‘I—I wasn’t sure what had become of it,’ she murmured. Poirot murmured: ‘You are so quick-witted, madame.’
Chapter 16
There was a pause. Then clearing his throat with a slightly affected sound, Poirot went on:
‘We have now solved the mystery of what I might term the second hypodermic. That belonged to Mrs Lennox Boynton, was taken by Raymond Boynton before leaving Jerusalem, was taken from Raymond by Carol after the discovery of Mrs Boynton’s dead body, was thrown away by her, found by Miss Pierce, and claimed by Miss King as hers. I presume Miss King has it now.’
‘I have,’ said Sarah.
‘So that when you said it was yours just now, you were doing what you told us you do not do—you told a lie.’
Sarah said calmly: ‘That’s a different kind of lie. It isn’t—it isn’t a professional lie.’
Gerard nodded appreciation.
‘Yes, it is a point that. I understand you perfectly, mademoiselle.’
‘Thanks,’ said Sarah.
Again Poirot cleared his throat.
‘Let us now review our time-table. Thus:
Boyntons and Jefferson Cope leave the camp 3.5 (approx.)
Dr Gerard and Sarah King leave the camp 3.15 (approx.)
Lady Westholme and Miss Pierce leave the camp 4.15
Dr Gerard returns to camp 4.20 (approx.)
Lennox Boynton returns to camp 4.35
Nadine Boynton returns to camp and talks to Mrs Boynton 4.40
Nadine Boynton leaves her mother-in-law and goes to marquee 4.50 (approx.)
Carol Boynton returns to camp 5.10
Lady Westholme, Miss Pierce and Mr Jefferson Cope return to camp 5.40
Raymond Boynton returns to camp 5.50
Sarah King returns to camp 6.0
Body discovered 6.30
‘There is, you will notice, a gap of twenty minutes between four-fifty when Nadine Boynton left her mother-in-law and five-ten when Carol returned. Therefore, if Carol is speaking the truth, Mrs Boynton must have been killed in that twenty minutes.
‘Now who could have ki
His eyes went thoughtfully to Ginevra Boynton.
‘There was one person. Ginevra Boynton was in her tent all the afternoon. That is what we have been told—but actually there is evidence that she was not in her tent all the time. Ginevra Boynton made a very significant remark. She said that Dr Gerard spoke her name in his fever. And Dr Gerard has also told us that he dreamt in his fever of Ginevra Boynton’s face. But it was not a dream! It was actually her face he saw, standing there by his bed. He thought it an effect of fever—but it was the truth. Ginevra was in Dr Gerard’s tent. Is it not possible that she had come to put back the hypodermic syringe after using it?’
Ginevra Boynton raised her head with its crown of red-gold hair. Her wide beautiful eyes stared at Poirot. They were singularly expressionless. She looked like a vague saint.
‘Ah, ça non!’ cried Dr Gerard.
‘Is it, then, so psychologically impossible?’ inquired Poirot.
The Frenchman’s eyes dropped.
Nadine Boynton said sharply: ‘It’s quite impossible!’
Poirot’s eyes came quickly round to her.
‘Impossible, madame?’
‘Yes.’ She paused, bit her lip, then went on, ‘I will not hear of such a disgraceful accusation against my young sister-in-law. We—all of us—know it to be impossible.’
Ginevra moved a little on her chair. The lines of her mouth relaxed into a smile—the touching, innocent half-unconscious smile of a very young girl.
Nadine said again: ‘Impossible.’
Her gentle face had hardened into lines of determination. The eyes that met Poirot’s were hard and unflinching.
Poirot leaned forward in what was half a bow.