Chapter 29 Final Analysis on Chromatography

"Eventually," says Ellery Quinn, "the secondary colors all disappear from our imaginary color wheel, and what's left? A uniform halo of color that neatly sums up the whole case. " "Your metaphor is too far-fetched," I said angrily, "making people more and more confused. I admit that this is indeed a bit unfathomable to my mediocre understanding. Now that I understand those facts, But I just don’t know why.” Ellery smiled.It was several weeks since the Horne case had been closed; the sensation had already worn off in a world of crime.The incomprehensibility and bizarreness of the incident itself is only somewhat of interest to professionals in the police field.

For some reason, I couldn't explore why those news media who specialize in inquiring after the case became clear were so reluctant to speak like gold—a few words, passed in passing, and never played out.Buck Horn's ingenious calculations and skillful tactics wounded two lives in a row. The reason for this is unknown, and many questions cannot be explored.Moreover, the detection process involved has not been disclosed.In short, the newspapers and magazines seem to pay no attention at all.And with my own head, I can't find the answer at all. "What is it that bothers you so much?" Ellery asked in a low voice.

"The whole thing! What I especially don't understand is how you figured out this riddle. And," I said with a bit of malice, "even if you got two answers right, it's a hoodwink. For example Tell me, how did the pistol used in those two murders get away with it?" Ellery let out a puff of smoke with a chuckle: "Oh, here we go again, JJ. You know me so well, but you still have doubts about my professional skills to such an extent. Of course, I know the core answer - the exchange of characters — I figured it out a few hours after the first corpse appeared..."

"what!" "Oh, yes. It was indeed the result of a chain of reasoning, and I am astonished at the dullness and blindness of my colleagues." He sighed: "Poor dad! He is a good old detective, but this time he has neither insight nor imagination. This case especially needs imagination." He shrugged his shoulders , let yourself lean back comfortably on the sofa.Tijuna came in with a pitcher of coffee and some delicious morsels on a tray. "I think then..." Ellery said, "start at the beginning, you see, regardless of the fact that there are thousands of people in the scene—even if everyone could be a murderer; regardless of the crime itself. Simple or complex in form; I will now confine myself to the murder of 'Horn' - in which there are six salient facts...”

"Six?" I said. "Seems like too much, Ellery." "Yes, the case is a bit of a jumble of clues. Like I said, those six facts jumped out during the first night of the investigation. Two of them—one was tangible and the other was Psychological—together, I realized the clues alone in the corresponding investigation. According to the order of my reasoning, I piled up the referenced facts like bricks, and I could see the only possible train of thought that I reasoned out.” He stared at the fire, with a mysterious smile on his lips: "First, the belt on the trousers of the deceased. Interestingly, it turned out to be the answer to the mystery! There are five buttonholes on the belt, the second one is the same as the The edge of the third buttonhole was visibly worn and deeply strangled from constant use. And Kit Horn—poor girl!—had told me at the time that Buck had been in poor health of late, and in fact had lost weight. Dropped in. Note heal this!

"The weight loss - the buttonholes in the belt. It's interesting to see those two things put together, isn't it? That immediately caught my attention. What on earth does Horn's weight loss have to do with those two buttonholes? Quite Naturally: Horn usually uses the second buttonhole obviously, as can be seen from the deepest strangulation around the edge of the buttonhole; he has recently lost weight, so he puts the belt on the third buttonhole-thus shrinking the belt But what did we see on the night of the murder? The belt was loosely fitted around the waist of the deceased, and the belt was hooked through the first buttonhole!"

He paused to relight a cigarette; and I myself, as always, secretly admired his extraordinary keenness of observation.What a tiny detail!I'm sure that time I must have raved about it. "Hmph," he said, frowning slightly, "there is no doubt that the belt hole thing is trivial, and not only does it seem insignificant, but it is not of great significance. It can only be used as a hint, not to prove anything. But it leads to a train of thought. "As I said just now, Horne used only the second buttonhole for his belt, and when he lost weight, he used the third buttonhole; but we found that the deceased had buckled his belt on the first buttonhole. Why did the deceased step over the second and third buttonholes at once, and fasten the belt on the first buttonhole that has never been used? Besides, in this way, the belt does not hang on the waist of the deceased. It doesn't look loose. There is a problem here, how to explain Horn's abnormal behavior? Why is it necessary to loosen the belt by two full sizes at once? Think about it, when does a person loosen the belt? You Maybe say: Overeating, huh?"

"That's exactly what I was thinking," I admitted, "though I can't imagine anyone eating that much before an action-packed show; and even if they eat a lot, they don't loose two buttonholes all at once." "I agree. But logically this possibility still exists. So I still took the logical line of thought. I asked the coroner, Dr. Boddy, to pay attention to the remains of the deceased's stomach. And he pointed out in the autopsy report that the deceased's The stomach was empty; apparently, he said, the deceased had not eaten for at least six hours before he was killed. Therefore, the doubt that the belt was loose by two yards cannot be explained in this light.

"Is there any other possibility, then? Just one; you can deny it all you want: at first I forced myself to assume that the belt the dead man wore that night was not his own. Ah, but it was Buck Horn's belt; that It was indelibly engraved with his initials, and Grant--his closest old friend--was attested to be his. Yet look where this conclusion leads us! Suppose, Buck If Horne's belt is worn by someone who does not own it, then the person wearing that belt is not Buck Horn. And if the person wearing that belt is dead, then the dead person is not Buck Horne! Is there anything simpler than this, JJ?

"That's how you know the whole case?" I muttered. "That sounds far-fetched and unconvincing." "Far-fetched, no," Ellery smiled, "unconvincing is true. Because the human mind is not used to leading to huge conclusions from small things. But isn't the major scientific progress so far Didn't it all come from careful observation of insignificant things, by means of a similar process of induction? I must admit that I was not immune to the cowardly conformism of the mind at the time. Because the conclusion seemed so inconceivable. So I avoided judgment. role. I dare not confirm that possibility, it has gone beyond the level of common sense. However, are there other possibilities?"

Ellery stared thoughtfully at the fire: "And there were other factors that made me more suspicious. Someone had met Horn the night of the accident—even if it was just a passing glance, as the cowboys confessed." and, since the rider thought to be Horne was killed, Kit, Horne's adopted daughter, must have seen his face as he lifted the blanket from the dead man; As for Grant, an old friend of Horn's half life should also be able to recognize it clearly. Besides, the face was not damaged much, JJ—only the skull and limbs were seriously damaged. These facts make me conclude that the deceased was not Horn. Eun's own idea seemed flimsy. But I did not give up on it, as perhaps others would have done in the same situation. Instead, I said to myself: 'Plausible or not, the point is this: Assume that the deceased was not Huo Well, like my first hypothesis, then the deceased must be someone who closely resembles Horne in appearance and build.' This is an inevitable inference, JJ, if you accept my first hypothesis. Anyway Said, I was not satisfied with this judgment, because it always felt unreliable. I looked around for evidence to support this hypothesis. I found the evidence I needed almost immediately, and it led me to six other clues-namely The ones I just mentioned." "What on earth confirmed your hypothesis—that the deceased was not Horn?" I asked blankly, "I'm afraid I can't figure it out in my life..." "Don't bet your life, JJ," Ellery laughed, "it's unbelievably simple. The ivory insert on the butt of the gun held in the dead man's right hand—remember, the right hand—gives it away." I later found the other of the pair of revolvers in Buck's hotel room. "Now we learn that pair of guns has been with Horne for many years. Kit said they were her adoptive father's favorite weapons. Grant and Curley have also confirmed this. Once again, the attribution of physical evidence, please note that A little. The initials on the butt of the gun were instantly recognizable to Kit and Grant. So there was no doubt that the gun belonged to Horne; at least I was sure of that. "Then are there other hints? The first gun the dead man kept in his hand - the right hand - even after he fell from his horse. I myself saw the gun he drew from the right side holster , and he also held the gun in his right hand and shot at the sky when he directed the horses to gallop; the newsreel also confirmed this observation. But when I examined the revolver, I noticed a very strange phenomenon." He shook his head slightly. "Listen carefully. The butt, or handle, or whatever you call it - has ivory inserts on both sides, yellowed with age, and only the right side The small patch is different. When I hold the gun in my left hand, the whitish spot fits right between the palms of my fingers. Later that night, holding another newfound gun in my right hand, I noticed Exactly the same situation as the first gun, except that the two existed symmetrically. What does all this tell? The second gun—the one found in the hotel room—was Buck Horn's habitual right hand, This can be judged by the white mark on the left side of the handle. The other gun - the first one, which the deceased held in his right hand, was actually the one that Horne had been using in his left hand for many years." He took a deep breath: "In other words, the simplest form of narrative would be: Buck Horn was a two-gun man, always holding a gun in each hand; , the handles of the two guns would not be able to symmetrically leave white gaps from wear. Keep this in mind. "Furthermore, Horne is undoubtedly a sensitive gunslinger. Judging by the condition of the guns' wear, general appearance, and grip marks on the handles, he used both guns equally—that is, the guns in the left and right hands frequently at the same time. Also, he used one of the guns in each of his right and left hands, which was later established by a small inspection—I asked Lieutenant Knowles to weigh each gun, and found that one gun was heavier than the other. One is about two ounces lighter. Obviously each gun is specially weighted according to the strength of the owner's hand, the special feel and the habit of holding the gun. "Now, then, to return to the important question. The man killed held in his right hand the gun that Buck Horn always used with his left hand. Since Buck never mixed his left and right guns, this immediately prompted me. and……" "But," I objected, "perhaps he happened to have the wrong gun with him in his haste that night before he rushed to the playground?" "Even so, it doesn't hurt my analysis; with the sensitivity brought by habit, with the feel and weight, he can detect the gun in the left hand the moment he picks it up; he will automatically insert it into the gun. holstered his left side, and held the gun in his left hand while performing. Remember, he wasn’t required to shoot right-handed that night; he just held the reins in his left hand, or waved his hat once in a while; These simple little movements can be handled by any hand. "So! Because the deceased held Horn's left pistol in his right hand, and even put it in the right holster, whereas Horn would have held the gun in his left hand and put it in the left holster... This is strong evidence that it was not Buck Horne who was shot that night at all!" He stopped for a little coffee.This matter was so simple after he explained it! "Now," he went on steadily, "I have two connected or complementary grounds for questioning the identity of the deceased; "The two points combined formed the unshakable conclusion in my mind. The dead man was not Buck Horne. This conclusion disturbed me as much as other similar cases in the past, but I had to accept it." "Since the body that lay on the runway that night was not Buck Horn's, I asked myself: Whose body was this? Well, as I have hinted, it was evidently a body and features similar to Horn's. He must be astonishingly similar, of course, with a slightly thicker girth; he must also be able to ride and shoot like Horne, and even imitate Horne's voice; Because this fake Horn arrived at the stadium very late, he just waved to the person who greeted him; according to Grant's recollection, he hurried straight to the dressing room, and soon rode 'Ruohai' to the field; Probably didn't talk to anyone. If she did, it was just a vague fumbling." "So far," I agreed, "it's pretty clear, Ellery. But, as I said, there are some things I still don't understand. For example, I finally read in the papers that the deceased of the exact identity; but how did you find out so early in the case?" "Well," murmured Ellery, sinking into the couch, "you really got to the heart of the conspiracy. I didn't know it at the time, or I didn't know it exactly. But as the reasoning developed, Gradually it became clear to me. I go on, and you will understand." "Of course I asked myself: Who could this man—this dead man—could be so like Horn? Instinct told me it might be a twin; but Kit Horn and Grant both proved that Buck There are no living blood relatives left. So, after analyzing Horn's background, I suddenly had a guess. There is a practice that is almost as old as human history, and it is it that can make Buck Horne--pre-movie A star, connected with an unknown ordinary person. Because Buck Horne is a special actor who specializes in western films, most of the films he starred in have thrilling actions or difficult stunts in outdoor dangerous places-such as seeing western Everyone in the film has seen the scene where the characters in the play jump from the upstairs window, jump onto the saddle, or the wonderful scene of the horse leaping over the cliff; but if the production company considers that the actors cannot do those Intimidating stunts, or for the safety of actors—Western stars are worth a fortune—often employ a tried-and-true tactic—the use of stuntmen. Anyone who reads movie magazines is afraid of the concept Not unfamiliar." I tensed up, and Ellery laughed again, "Shut up, JJ, why are you looking like a fish out of water... What is it that surprises you so much? It's a logical line of thought. Actually It fits perfectly with the fact that filmmakers use doubles to perform dangerous maneuvers, and those doubles must meet two qualifications: first, they must be physically similar to the star actor they replace; second, they must be both Can do things that star actors can't, and can do things that stars can do, and maybe more. Because they must be able to embody shocking thrills. In the case of westerns, for example, stuntmen must be able to ride Good at shooting, skilled at rope skills, and even a sharpshooter. Now, in most cases, similar appearance is not an absolute condition, because the faces of the characters can be avoided by adjusting the camera angle; but there are also some films that emphasize difficult movements , and also require the face of the stand-in to be very similar to the star... Yes, the more I think about it, the more I believe that the person who was killed on the sports field is Horn's stand-in. To confirm this, I sent a special email to the confidential department in Los Angeles Telegram, ask the other party to help check whether there is such a stuntman there. A few days later I received a telegram from the other party, proving my judgment was correct. There was such a stuntman there, but since Buck three or four years ago He has not been contacted by the producers since the last feature, and has no way of knowing where to find him. The name they provided is obviously the stage name of the stand-in actor, which means nothing to me. However, even if I did not ask Hollywood inquiries, this line of thinking is not wrong - the identity of the deceased must be Buck Horn's stand-in actor." I spread my hands and made a grimace. "Should I stop?" Ellery asked. "Don't stop! I'm just in awe of the gods of reasoning. If you stop I'll knock your brains out. Go on, my God." He looked a little embarrassed: "I have to stop," he said sternly, "if you keep talking like this... Where did I go? Right! The next question is unavoidable. Why did Buck Horn invite him back again?" What about the old stuntman who replaced him in the performance of the equestrian troupe but kept it from Grant and Kit?——Grant and Kit were shocked and sad after seeing the dead body at the scene of the accident. It can be seen that the two Well, there are two possible reasons: one, Buck suddenly fell ill, or worse, he didn't want to disappoint the audience, and he was embarrassed to tell his daughter Kit, good friend Grant, and enthusiastic patron Mars, etc. People admit that he is not as good as before; or the second possibility, his performance will have a lot of too intense and thrilling content for him to be competent. However, Buck did not suddenly fall ill; He is in good health; that has been stated by Kit and the doctor. So is it possible that he suddenly fell ill in the period between the check-up and the start of the show? That would mean that he had to be Find a substitute for yourself. "However, various facts show that the stand-in was not recruited on the day of the performance, but the day before. Fact one, a mysterious person visited him at the hotel the night before; Most of the savings. So it seems pretty clear that he called in his erstwhile stand-in the night before the show, handed him one of his two guns and advanced him for the performance—that is, Horn All or part of the three thousand dollars in cash that was taken that day. And the costumes, which were also given to him. This is entirely possible-remember Grant said that the last rehearsal before the opening ceremony was fully armed, and Buck was the only one who did not wear it The costume... in fact, everything was arranged before the medical examination of him by the accompanying doctor - at least a day before. This overturns the assumption that the body is not healthy and a substitute is hired temporarily." "Sounds reasonable," I mumbled. "It's justified at all. Now to the second possibility, that Buck's performance was too difficult to handle - which is also untenable. The last rehearsal on the afternoon of the performance was attended by Horn himself. Yeah. So why do I assume it was him and not a stand-in who was in the rehearsal? Well, Horn actually spoke to a lot of people before and after that afternoon's rehearsal, including Woody, Grant, Git, et cetera—no matter vocally Relatives or friends who are familiar with him will recognize how well others imitate. In addition, just after the rehearsal, Grant gave him some cash, and he wrote Grant a check, which was signed in front of him The investigation confirmed that the check had been transferred to the bank. In other words, the signature on the check was in Barker's own handwriting, and there was no mistake. All of this can prove that it was Barker himself who attended the rehearsal. The content of the rehearsal is exactly the same as that of the real performance , and Horn went through all the cutscenes without any mistakes—Grant and Curley have both confirmed this point, so obviously there is no item in the performance that Horn is not competent for. "At this point, if Buck has neither a sudden illness nor an acting project that he is incapable of or daunting, why would he spend a lot of money to hire a past stand-in to perform for him? After the shooting, Horn did not come out and explain everything. How about explaining clearly to the police? If he is innocent in this murder case, he should realize that he has an obligation to stand up. "Then, Horn didn't step forward to prove his innocence. I think there may be two explanations. First, he may have realized that there was an enemy demanding his life, so he hired a double to be his scapegoat; in that case, murder After the incident, he would be afraid that he would reveal to the other party that he was still alive by showing his face, which would lead to further pursuit and killing. As long as the other party thinks that Horn is dead, then he is safe. But in this case, why should he have to say goodbye to his daughter and Friend concealment? It is this point that reminded me to emphasize the all-round and all-weather monitoring of Grant and Kit in the subsequent investigations—tracking of actions, wiretapping of phone calls, dismantling of communications...but nothing was found—no information from Huo No information about Horn, at least to the best of my forensic capabilities. This result led me to abandon the assumption that Horn was unable to communicate with his daughter and friends because he had managed to evade for fear of being hunted down. "It also hints at another possibility - that Horn was kidnapped on the night of the opening scene, and his role was impersonated by a pre-infiltrated figure with ulterior motives; Detect and kill. But the theory is too far-fetched to justify itself; one small thing can make it self-defeating: no statement from the kidnapper - such as a motive for the kidnapping (if it was to extort money from his daughter or friends , it should be pointed out that the amount is)—thus, although I have doubts about abandoning this hypothesis, I have to turn my attention to the more likely doubt. knowing everything about the dead man; there are obviously many disadvantages in revealing this secret before the time is ripe and when other facts are inconclusive. For I realize that if my speculation is wrong, it may lead to Horne Killed. Woody's death was something I didn't see coming; certainly, I couldn't have seen it." He was silent for a long time, and from his furrowed brow, I could see that Woody's murder made him full of emotions.I know he has always hated the way certain detective novelists describe their characters as heartless, detached, and light-hearted in the face of other people's disasters. He sighed: "Under this situation, I thought of a related question: Since Horn's disappearance cannot be explained, and the person who killed his double has disappeared, is it possible that Horn himself is the murderer? At this time I began to think about the other four clues, that is, the suspicious points discovered during the investigation on the night of the crime. They not only narrowed down the scope of various possibilities, but also limited the specific conditions of the murderer. If Horn is the murderer, he must meet the two conditions. condition is possible. "The first two clues relate to the characteristics of the venue within the stadium and the characteristics of the deceased's gunshot wound. The arena is naturally the lowest in the bowl-shaped stadium. Even the first row of spectator seats and boxes are ten feet above the level of the venue. Above. In the two murder cases, according to the autopsy report of Dr. Boddy, the bullets penetrated the victim's chest from top to bottom; That is to say, the shot was fired from the audience stand. When everyone accepts this report as a real situation, I think there is a problem that must be clarified before we assert that the killer shot from a height. That is: What was the exact position of the victim's body when the bullet flew towards him? If that is the ultimate conclusion - that the bullet was fired from a height, then the victim's body position must be completely perpendicular to the ground; that is Say, the rider sits upright at right angles to the ground and not leaning the other way." I frowned: "Wait a minute, I can't keep up." "Look here, and I'll draw a picture to explain it. Dijuna, please, bring me some paper and pencil." Di Juna, who had been sitting by the side and stared at the sound fascinatedly, jumped up and hurriedly fetched the paper and pen.Ellery sketched quickly on the paper for a moment, then looked up: "Look, like I said, if we don't know exactly where the bullet hit the body, the angle of the shot can't be determined at all. The enlarged photographs show that the bodies of the two victims were all tilted to the right at an angle of 30 degrees to the vertical when they were hit by bullets (from the point of view of the victims rather than the observer or the camera lens) Look, it's leaning to the left. To avoid confusion, I'll just go ahead and say they're 'leaning to the right' from the observer's point of view). Now look at the diagrams." I stood up and moved over to him, who had already drawn four small figures that looked roughly like the following imitation: "The first picture," he explained, "shows that the victim's body is in the Normal upright state, which is the basis for Dr. Boddy’s judgment. The small arrow above the character’s heart represents the path of the bullet penetrating the body. Dr. Boddy said it is a top-down path at a thirty-degree angle to the ground Line. The second diagram, showing the human body is still upright, that is, his torso is exactly at right angles to the horse's back; the dotted line extending from the arrow clearly shows the angle of shooting. This line is indeed from above And the following, as you can see, and it seems to support the claim that the bullet was fired from a height. Yes, if the victim is indeed in the position shown - sitting vertically on horseback, then this inference is Correct. However, the victim was not sitting vertically on the saddle; according to the enlarged photo taken from the documentary film, the victim's body was leaning to the right at a thirty-degree angle to the vertical! "On the third image, we deflected the character to the right, as it actually happened, and kept the direction of the bullet's trajectory through the chest; because the path of the bullet through his chest does not change, regardless Which direction we look at will not affect the relationship between the ballistic and the chest. If the torso rotates at a certain angle, then the relatively fixed ballistic should also rotate at the same angle... So, we are in the fourth schematic diagram Above, when the rider's torso is deflected 30 degrees to the right, extend the line indicated by the arrow—that is, the line where the bullet flies—what did we find? That line is actually parallel to the ground! In other words In other words, when the stand-in's torso and Woody's torso (which are very similar) are deflected at a thirty-degree angle to the right, the bullets that hit them fly in the horizontal direction, not from the top It was shot from below! This shows that the murderer did not shoot from a height, but from the same height as the victim!" I nodded and said, "And, of course, Dr. Boddy assumed that the rider was sitting upright in the saddle and concluded that the bullet came from above and below at a height of thirty degrees from the ground. He This is believed to be the cause of the ballistic angle of thirty degrees in the deceased's chest." "It's a bit complicated to explain," laughed Ellery, "but it's absolutely correct. So far, when I've figured it out, I've ruled out doubts about both parties—that's a sweeping and massive exclusion." The first part is all the people in the auditorium, even including the people in the first row of seats and the people in each box; because the bottom of the box is more than ten feet away from the performance venue, besides counting the people sitting inside Human height, even if you shoot here, the height of the gun is more than thirteen feet above the ground. If a bullet fired from this height hits a body that is already deflected at an angle of thirty degrees, it will only end up in the chest cavity. A larger ballistic angle is likely to form a top-down, sixty-degree angle to the ground (according to the logic of Dr. Bodi's thinking) penetrating ballistic. If you are good at mathematics, it is not difficult to deduce this; Then, according to the corresponding shooting height at a sixty-degree angle, the murderer must climb to the roof to shoot! The second group of people who can be excluded is the photographers and staff on the platform, because the platform is also ten feet away from the surface of the site. feet; and from this point of view, the bullets would only go head-on, hitting the rider's front rather than the side. This is clearly confirmed by the footage taken by the camera, and , the bullets fired thereby will also cause a trajectory greater than thirty degrees. "However, the bullet flies along a path parallel to the ground, just like the one I drew on the picture. Then, if the murderer wants to shoot the target person in the heart while the bullet flies parallel to the ground, he himself must be A man on horseback will do! Can you keep up?" "Am I an idiot?" I protested. He grinned: "Don't be so sensitive. I'm not sure if this explanation can be understood immediately. However, this is indeed a coherent inference. If the murderer was standing alone on the performance field, then he shot The bullet will cause a slightly upward sloping trajectory. If the murderer is shooting from the audience, it will obviously cause a downward penetration trajectory at a large angle. Therefore, the murderer can only shoot at the same height as the shooting target That would cause the ballistic angle we are told. But the victim was a man on a horse, so the murderer must have been on a horse too, firing at the same height as his own chest. "It was then immediately clear to me that the only logical suspect must be a member of the field cowboy team, as was the case in both cases. There was only one man on the horse who was not in the team: Crazy Bill Grant. But it was impossible for Grant to shoot and kill—because he was standing in the middle of the field when the two murders happened. The camera shot the victim head-on when he was shot, which shows that the murderer must be in the direction of the victim at that time. to the right of the gun, that is, from the direction of Mass's box. The path of the bullet was almost perpendicular to the direction in which the victim was advancing. But Grant appeared to be roughly facing the victim at the time, at a relative angle to that of the victim. The camera is similar. So it can't be that he fired the shot. However, at the moment of the murder, the entire horse team happened to be marching under the horse box. This further confirms my assumption-the murderer is a member of the horse team .From the position to the angle, that kind of inference can be established." "I get that," I said, "but what I don't understand is: Why, then, do you acquiesce in a search of 20,000 innocent people? It's embarrassing and irritating for everyone all night." Waiting for a body search one by one, and you clearly know that the murderer is not among them!" Ellery stared dreamily at the fire and said, "Here we go again, JJ, jumping into the cliché again. It's not uncommon for the man with the weapon to be the murderer himself, you know? It may have been relatively easy: In the aftermath of the murder, the killer tossed the gun to an accomplice in the audience—who could have been just over the railing not far from him. And, finding the murder weapon is a long way from our It is imperative in the process of solving the case. Therefore, the massive investigation by all members cannot be avoided. "However, if the murderer is one of the cowboys on the field, then Horn - assuming he is the murderer - must appear in line as a cowboy! How does he handle it? Simple. I asked Self: Now that he’s not Horn, who would he be? He can make up and be unrecognizable. It’s not difficult for him who has been an actor for many years. So what is Horn like? According to me It is known that he has silver-white hair. Then obviously, if he wants to be unrecognizable, he must dye his hair. Then, by means of changes in clothing, gestures, movements, small changes in voice, he will easily fool his opponent.他不很熟悉的一、只有大概印象的人们。然而他竟然还贴上了可怕的伤疤，足见此人的精明诡濡。那覆盖半个脸的丑陋疤痕既能迅速捕捉起注视他的视线，从而使人忽略对他其他相貌特征的注意。而且还有一点，依我的观点，人们都有一种潜在的意识，即，对相貌丑陋或可怕的人不予久视，以免引起对方的羞惭或不快。我真得为霍恩的精明鼓掌了。” “等一下，”我叫道，“我想我能指出你的一个重大失误了；我希望你不至于否认自己故意为之。既然你如此肯定霍恩就在牛仔群中，你为什么不把他揪出来，却给了他再次作案的机会，嗯？” “问得相当有道理，”埃勒里赞同道，“但是答案也很有道理。我没有揭露他的身份是因为显然霍恩在实施某种计划。像他这样杀了人还留在原地晃荡的情况并不多见。那他为什么这么干？如果他只是想谋杀什么人，何必选择这种复杂的环境和奇特的手段？在一条晦暗、隐蔽的巷子里一枪就能解决问题——用寻常的手段除掉目标，对他来说那是容易得多的做法。但是他选择了如此艰难的途径，为什么？我很有兴趣寻求答案。我想给他足够的空间去展开行动。实际上，他还必须等待。他还有不得不做的事情——干掉伍迪。我很快就会对你解释的。” “另外，”埃勒里皱起了眉头继续讲述，“有几件事的确对我的好奇心和我自以为拥有的智慧形成挑战。除了作案动机——对我仍然是个谜——以外，那把见鬼的自动手枪到底跑到哪儿去了？这道题着实费解。况且在那时候，整个案情都很模糊——如果我揭落了霍恩而他大缄其口——我们也未必能圆满对他的指控。” “所以我迟迟没有披露霍恩的真相，但我怎么也没想到——也没有道理会预见到——另一起谋杀案的相继发生。”他叹了口气，“那件事一直让我耿耿于怀。同时，我竭力装出惘然无知的样子开始在牛仔们的周边活动——试图在不会引起怀疑的情况下监视霍恩。可是我没有成功。他们是一个排外、戒备、敏感的群落，我从中得不到任何信息。霍恩消隐在他们之中了。于是我开始在社交圈与吉特频繁接触，以期探出霍恩前来与她联系。 “但是就在伍迪被杀之后——紧接其后的第二天——有一个牛仔失踪了。那是个自称为本杰明·米勒的人。他不仅在演出开幕前一天受到雇用——那是距今一个多月前霍恩本人书面推荐的！而且那个人，至少从表面上看，如果忽略其头发的颜色和脸上的疤痕，与巴克·霍恩极其相似。那个人——后来证明这是个关键——竟得到霍恩的'特许'乘骑那匹'英琼'；居然不忌惮会有违常理，因为'霍恩'没有道理在隆重的开幕式上不骑自己心爱的马。从这些事实我可以肯定：那个失踪了的米勒就是巴克·霍恩本人。从而这个巴克·霍恩也能满足我对凶手加以判定的第一个条件：两起命案中，他都骑着马出现在表演场上。” 我长出了一口气。 “第二个作案条件是从我对关键的几条线索中的第五和第六条进行推导而得出的。第五条线索是我凭侦探的直觉得到的，而且也被科比少校新闻摄制部拍下的影片以及诺尔斯中尉的弹道报告所证实。在案发当晚，当格兰特发令马队狂奔的时候，我记得整个马队跟着'霍恩'众枪齐射。 “那之后几秒钟内被害者就坠落在跑道上了——这段时间如此之短，不可能有人来得及在所有枪一同射击之后又单独开枪杀人，何况随即马队就开始狂奔。全体牛仔表演中只有一次同时对天鸣枪，这个事实是无可争辩的：为印证这点我们查验了所有上场牛仔的枪支，它们无一例外地只发射过一颗子弹。 “第六个，也是最后一件事实是这样的：所有的枪支，包括'霍恩'尸体手里的、格兰特的以及小疯子泰迪·莱恩斯身上的枪都不可能射出过那颗夺命的子弹；诺尔斯中尉曾不容置疑地说唯独点二五口径的自动式手枪能发射出那种子弹。但是从场上人群中搜查出的枪支统统是点三八以上口径的。弹道实验室的检测结果显示：莱恩斯的那把点二五口径自动式手枪也不是杀了人的凶器。 “这两个事实并列在一起，说明什么？你看，它足以说明：如果凶手就是场上的牛仔之一，而所有牛仔的枪又都没射出过杀人的子弹，那么凶手用的就是另外一支我们尚未找到的手枪。但这怎么可能呢？你会问。你还会说，'所有人都被彻底搜了身，也没找到武器呀。'我的回答则是：凶手把作案凶器另处藏匿了。我花点功夫分析了一下：关键点是——凶器是一把点二五的手枪，而且场上只出现过一次乱枪齐射的机会；所以他肯定是利用这个机会，即当所有牛仔朝天鸣枪的时候使用那把枪射出了置人死地的子弹。换句话说，凶手身上另外带着一把枪，装的是实弹，并且在与其他人一道用左轮枪对天鸣放空枪的同时用第二把枪杀了人。也就是说，他的两只手同时持枪射击。那么，我问自己，这种情形暗示着什么？——凶手须是个双枪客吧？” “我看未必，”我反对道，“你凭什么如此肯定他一定是同时放了两枪呢？牛仔们乱枪齐射，肯定不会那么同步地只发出一个声响，你不是也这么说吗？” “是的。但是请记住，牛仔们是举起手臂朝天放的枪。我想，凶手为避免引起怀疑，肯定也会随之举起一只手臂朝天放空枪，正如我们所有人都看见的那样。而且，这一阵乱枪响过之后再没有其他枪声出现过，由此我推断出他在对天射击的同时用另外一支手枪朝目标人物射出了致命的子弹。 “现在回到关于双枪客这个奇特的小问题上去。这可能吗？当然可能，尽管不是必要条件。而正是由于这种可能性，那么线索再一次被导向了巴克·霍恩。众所周知，他多年来一直佩带并使用两把枪，而同时使用两把枪的人，在西部被称为双枪客。巴克不仅在逻辑上符合其他作案条件，而且还满足了作为此案凶手的两个新的特别条件：他是双枪客，同时他还是神枪手——这点有供词为证。凶手是个神枪手——这就无须朝目标多次射击以求夺命；而在众人乱枪齐射的共鸣消失之前射出弹舱里所有的子弹，对他来说也不困难。可能性与事实再次吻合。 “但是，他是如何巧妙地处理第二件武器，从而避过了所有的清查呢？凶器的缺失是两案侦破中最令人苦恼的难题。”他停顿了一下，接着说道，“我也是在独臂伍迪遇害之后才洞察了这个秘密。” “这也是我迷惑不解的一点，”我急切地说，“据我所知，媒体方面对此只字未提。他到底是怎么干的？难道你不是到了最后才弄明白的？” “我在伍迪被杀当天才解开这个谜。”他阴郁地回答，“我们不妨回到当时的情境中去。已经明朗化的是，两件凶案是一人所为：两案具有共同特点，尤其是在凶器的缺失上——任凭搜查何等严密和彻底，就是不见踪影。这说明凶手藏匿凶器用的是同一种手法。伍迪命案中武器的缺失合理地印证了我们所面对的是同一个凶手。 “那么，霍恩为什么要在逃跑前杀掉伍迪？只用他们职业上的争夺很难解释这一点。单从这个角度出发，那么伍迪倒是更有理由杀掉霍恩，因为是后者占据了他的位置。不，只有一种可能的解释，在假设霍恩犯下第一桩凶杀罪的基础上可以推论，伍迪认出了所请的米勒，就是真正的霍思，因而霍恩只得杀人灭口。” “从理论上看可能性是很大，”我机灵地说，“但是我想，你一向是以事实为根据做出判断的，” “我是那么做的，”埃勒里说，“而且我相信我的解释足以令你这刁滑的家伙信服。证据是什么？就是曾经从柯利的存钱匣子里不翼而飞、又在伍迪的抽屉里出现的一万美金。” “那跟凶杀有什么关系？”我不解地问。 “是这样。对被撬的铁匣所做的观察明确了一点：钱并不是伍迪偷的。啊，我听见你嘀咕了——结论下得太轻率了吧？不，一点不轻率。铁匣子两面的锁环被同时扯断，而且是朝同一个方向——匣子的后方——扭开的。现在你明白了？” “不明白。”我老实地承认。 “这很好解释，”埃勒里略带沮丧地说，“若是一般人所为，通常的习惯是用一只手(得力的手)逐一扭开每个锁环，而且是朝着同一个方向用力，从铁匣子的角度来看，两个锁环被扭动的方向应该是一前一后；以上说的是正常人。而伍迪，总共只有一只手，假若他想打开铁匣，无疑只能先扭开一个锁环，转过来再扭开另一个；所以锁环被扭弯的方向也应该是一前一后。然而我们在现场看到的情形是：两个锁环被扭弯的方向都是向后的。这说明它是被某人用两只手同时向后用力扭断的。所以这不是伍迪干的，进而可知钱不是伍迪偷的。 “假设伍迪是偷了钱，难道他会把那捆钱币随便朝抽屉里一丢，连锁都獭得锁，以致最不经意的巡视都能发现？这只能解释为：假如钱是伍迪放在抽屉里的，那么他绝不知道那是偷来的钱；假如钱不是他本人放在那儿的，那就说明有人栽赃于他。” “再回到被撬的铁匣。那上面的锁鼻(锁环)是被朝同一个方向扭断的，这说明有人同时用两只手扭开了它。啊，我们看看得到了什么提示？两只同样有力的手！钱匣是铁的，尽管很薄，也总归是金属打造的；即便是常人，用得力的右手(或左手)扭开它也需几分力气；然而这个小偷居然用两只手同时扭开了它。这说明什么？当然，那个小偷是个左右手同样灵活有力的人！是的，是的！我知道，”他瞥了一眼我的嘴唇，似乎想看看有什么反应，接着飞快地继续说下去，“我知道你又要说了——这个结论并不是无懈可击的。也许是这样。所以我称它为'提示'，这么说，你总不会有意见了吧？如果那个贼是个双手同样灵活的人，而谋杀案的凶手——巴克·霍恩也是个双枪客……显然是个惊人的巧合，嗯？我完全有理由推断：正是霍恩偷了柯利·格兰特的钱。 “但是霍恩——或说是米勒或随便你管他叫什么——干什么要这么做——偷他好朋友的儿子的钱？是迫不得已吗？有急需吗？贪婪占了友情的上风？但是看看，如果是霍恩偷了钱，怎么会当天又从伍迪的抽屉里冒出来了呢？所以无论怎么解释，霍恩偷钱不是出于贪婪；我想，当时的情形可以很简单地构想出来：伍迪察觉出米勒其实就是霍恩——也许还揭穿了他的伪装——并以此相要挟。像伍迪那样一个人在这种情况下还会怎样？” “当然是敲诈勒索——借以捞上一笔钱。”我说。 “没错。所以霍恩必须先稳住伍迪然后再设法让他永远闭嘴。他抓住了柯利·格兰特生日庆典上获得遗产的机会，偷了柯利的钱并把它给了伍迪。后者根本没有来得及考虑钱会是从柯利那儿偷来的，所以没理由藏起它来，就随随便便放在化妆台的抽屉里了。霍恩知道，等到钱财失窃被发现的时候伍迪已经没命了，而那笔钱无疑会被找回去还给柯利。这样做，除了伍迪，谁也不会受到伤害。霍恩多精明！假如他用自己的钱去堵伍迪的嘴，那么即便那笔钱同样被发现于伍迪的抽屉之中，他本人也无法再收回去，因为身为'米勒'，那笔钱与他必定无关。可是，暂时利用柯利的钱，他本人无须承担任何风险，柯利也不会真的蒙受损失……一切佐证统统指向一个结论——霍恩是惟一的嫌犯。逻辑上他天衣无缝地满足了所有涉案条件。” “尽管如此，他冒的风险也大得可怕，不是吗？”我说着，打了个冷战，“万一他被人识破身份，那该怎么办？” “很难说。”埃勒里思索着说，“但是风险并不像你想象的那么大得可怕。除了伍迪，其实只有两个人有可能认出他来——吉特和格兰特——因为他们对他太熟悉了。然而就是吉特——她很久不在养父身边且常年难得一见，这是她亲口对我说的——也未必认得出；况且即便被她识破，霍恩对女儿的忠诚也完全不必担心。同样，他也可以信赖老友格兰特出于半生的友情也会守口如瓶。事实上我怀疑格兰特在第一桩谋杀发生后不久就对此有所察觉，他也是个诡得成精的人物呢。伍迪被杀那天的下午，他就似乎因为看见了什么人而变颜变色的，活像撞了鬼。我坚信他是看见了米勒的脸，从而意识到米勒就是巴克·霍恩。” 埃勒里重新点燃一支香烟，缓缓地吞云吐雾：“正是两人之间这种深厚而牢固的友情提供给我们一个机会——让已经逃脱在外的米勒，也就是巴克·霍恩，自动现身。我知道惟有一件事能把他拉回来：他的好友格兰特或女儿吉特因他的罪行而遭遇危机。”他停了一下，接着说，“我知道这是个邪恶的招数，可是我别无良策。我选择了格兰特，理由是不言而喻的：霍恩他们那一代人把忠诚和友情视为最基本的美德，他不会容许自己坐视无辜的老友成为他的替罪羊。那么，制造什么样的圈套才显得有理由把格兰特作为两案的嫌犯公然捕起呢？惟一能促成对他迅速逮捕的因素就是'有确凿的证据'，而最有力的证据莫过于在他的私人处所搜出凶器。虽然事实上他根本不可能是凶手——起码案发时他正站在不符合射击角度的场地中央；但这并不会影响对他的栽赃，因为显然没有任何人正确分析出射击的方向和角度。我想，一旦抓起格兰特，局面会飞速改变。 “无论如何我必须找到那把枪。而我真的找到了——你会说，那是运气使然。其实也并不全仗运气。可以告诉你我的思路。米勒为什么会突然潜逃？当然，他的谋杀计划完成了，必须撤出去寻找未来的出路了。可是米勒并非米勒，而是巴克·霍恩。米勒只是一个虚拟的姓名，代表着一个为特殊目的制造的临时身份。我可怜的老爸还一直为查不出米勒的身世背景而百思不得其解！殊不知根本就不存在什么背景。我从霍恩的角度设想过：如果米勒失踪了，警方会通缉谁呢？显然是米勒。所以他接下去要做的是：让米勒永远消失——也就是从此不用这个姓名、埋葬这一身份。而警方则永远要寻找这个永远找不到的人。但是如果再加上一点创意——让警方认为米勒就是枪杀了霍恩和伍迪的凶手，从而致力于永远徒劳无益的搜寻，这样做不仅无害于什么人，对自己也非常有利。米勒的消失再伴之以凶器的出现，就足够令警方信服。所以，我估计到米勒，或说是霍恩，一定会把那把枪放在警方发现米勒失踪后必定最先搜查的地方。哪儿？两个地方——他旅馆里的房间或者体育馆内的化妆室。我先搜查了化妆室，不出所料，枪果然在那儿。 “找到枪之后，就在当天晚上，我亲自——别用那种眼光盯着我！其实我也不自在——我亲自把那支枪悄悄放在格兰特的房间里去了，当然是确知他不在的时候。剩下的事情你都知道了。我把警长领了去，结果发现了凶器，结果格兰特被捕，结果媒体就开始大肆宣张这一消息，结果——霍恩就现身了，和我估计的一样，只为了不让朋友蒙冤替罪。他重现在我们面前的时候特意还原成米勒的装扮，为的是让我们领悟他曾经就是米勒。到此结案。”说到这里，埃勒里苦笑了一下，“一个绝美的结局，不是吗？”，迪居那给杯子斟满咖啡，我们默默吸饮着，许久无言。 “是很美，”后来我说，“的确惊世骇俗。可是不够完整。你还没有破解开霍恩绝妙的藏枪之谜。” 埃勒里像是被猝然惊醒似的看着我说，“哦，那个呀！”他做了个致歉的手势，“原想放到最后再解释，结果忘了说了。当然，这是个很有意思的情节。但终归只是幼稚的把戏。” 我不满地哼了一声。 “哦，真的，JJ，说出来你就明白了，那真的很简单。最简单的谜往往最难破解。我们的老朋友切斯特顿对此所做的心理分析可谓精辟之至！而布朗神父竟然不能在座——真是遗憾……”他笑得前仰后合，“好啦，问题是什么呢？那支涉及两桩命案的手枪一直藏在哪儿？米勒，或者说霍恩，究竟是怎么办到这一点的——警方穷其全力两次大规模清查都不能找出那玩意儿？ “伍迪的案子即出，我第二次拜访了科比少校的放映间，发现了一个重要的枝节：我第一次看到的那卷关于霍恩出事当晚现场录制的新闻片原来并不是全部的纪录，而只是按固定规格剪接后的成品片，是供剧院放映的'艺术品'。 “当科比少校把剪裁掉的纪录片申接起来放给我看的时候，我才得知原来还有许多细节是我们没有看到过的。 当然以我们有限的精力和能力也不可能毫无遗漏地捕捉到所有细节。但我还是看到了一个蹊跷的场面：案发后现场各处纷乱的场景中有一组镜头拍下了醉醺醺的小个子牛仔布恩把那些跑得大汗淋漓的马匹牵到场地一角的水槽边饮水。但有一匹马特别倔，死活不肯喝水。布恩可能因为酒醉致混，采用了通常忌讳的手段——拼命鞭打那匹马进而强迫它去喝水；这时，突然从牛仔群中跑出一个牛仔，径直闯入了镜头画面，从布恩手里抢过了皮鞭，接着毫不费力地把那匹马抚顺下来。我从布恩口里探出，那个气势汹汹夺走他鞭子又轻而易举安抚了那匹马的牛仔不是别人，正是我们那位朋友——米勒。而那匹马，正是那匹阅历不凡、价值连城、大名鼎鼎的'英琼'。谁又是'英琼'？巴克·霍恩的爱马！你意识到其中的涵义了吗？你看，其一，米勒独有其能地迅速使那匹躁动不安的马平静下来，而那匹马又是霍恩的，这就印证了米勒即霍恩的设想；另外，是那匹马与众不同的反应——当所有的马都因剧烈奔跑而饥渴得大喝其水的时候，它却拒绝喝水，这也使我觉得反常。那么，那个牛仔'米勒'从场子上直冲过来，究竟想阻止布恩做什么？ JJ？ " “不让他再打那匹马。”我说。 “不对。是想阻止他强迫那匹马喝水。”埃勒里看着我不解的神情笑了，“那把手枪，记得吗，还没有找到。整个体育馆从房顶到地下每一寸都搜遍了，所有场内的人从演员到观众都被搜身搞得几乎要呕吐。就连马身上的套具也全都检查过了，还是一无所获。这不是很奇怪吗？假如说还有什么地方没搜到，那就是那些马本身了。”他停了下来。 我的脑筋受不了了：“我恐怕，”我终于承认，“真的跟不上你的思路了。” 他轻松地摆了摆手：“太不可思议了，嗯？我们来看看这点。那把自动手枪到底会藏在哪儿，有可能不在马的身上，而会在马的体内吗？” 我完全愣住了，朝他大睁着两眼。 “是的，”他咧开嘴笑着说，“其实你已经猜到了。我记得，'英琼'不是匹寻常的马。哦，绝对不是。布恩，还有吉特，都曾提到过，英琼是巴克活跃在银幕上的时代就伴着他的坐骑。现在，正是这匹'英琼'拒绝喝水。这顿时让我想起——那只无影无踪的凶器，那支极为小巧、仅有四英寸长的手枪，有可能就含在它的嘴里。” “哦，我可想不出这个。”我惊呼道。 “你会明白的，”埃勒里咕哝着说，“从这一结论构想真实的情况其实非常简单。霍恩在杀了他的替身之后，只需稍微欠身，就可以把枪塞到英琼的嘴里。哦，英琼无疑知道是谁正骑在它的背上！——那人脸上涂的些许化妆色、染过的头发、变换了的服饰，统统瞒不过感官敏锐得惊人的老马。霍恩要做的，只不过是等待大搜查的结束。因为他确信，英琼会一直含着那支枪，绝不会张嘴。等大队人马回到位于第十大道的马场，他就能从英琼的嘴里取出他的枪。这一招果然奏效，所以在第二次杀人之前他毫不犹豫地再次采用了这一手段——还用那支枪、还用同样的藏枪方法。” “可是，如果英琼含枪过久，累得再也叼不住它，又会如何？”我问道，“想想看，如果它在众目睽睽之下把枪吐出来，那是多么可怕的情境！” “我估计不会。如果霍恩已经决定这种藏枪的办法，他肯定有把握英琼不会让枪掉出来。这个结论还来自另一个自然而然的联想——英琼是霍恩一手调教出来的，肯定接受过许多特殊的训练，包括含住东西绝不松口的本事。不管霍恩把什么东西放在他的嘴里，没有霍恩本人的命令它是不会张开嘴的。这也使我恍然大悟——为什么霍恩有违于多年的习惯，选择了那么一把点二五口径的小枪作为杀人武器：他需要一件体积最小、重量最轻、又最有杀伤力的手枪。它必须小到可以放进马的口腔。” 埃勒里站起来伸展了一下四肢，打了个呵欠。我仍然疑云缭绕地坐在壁炉前，他低下头来笑嘻嘻地看着我：“又怎么了，愁眉苦脸的？”他问道，“还有事儿让你这么想不通？” “太多啦。每件事儿都玄而又玄，虚无飘渺似的。”我抱怨道，“我是说——报纸上的报道只是空洞的经过叙述，对细节缘由似乎无人知晓。我记得几个星期之前才传出了一点消息，那是在——霍恩自杀之后……” “就在这间屋子里，”埃勒里眼神伤感地轻声说道，“好家伙，真是可怕的时刻！我们可怜的迪居那听到消息昏过去了！迪居那，往后还愿不愿意拼命追赶血腥暴力的时髦啦，孩子？” 迪居那的脸有点发白了，他害羞地一笑，走出了房间。 “我想说的是，”我继续亢奋地缠着他，“我到处搜罗消息，可是找不到关于凶杀动机的说辞。” “啊，动机呀。”埃勒里若有所思地应了一声。接着他快步走到书桌前停住，皱着眉低头望着桌面。 “是啊，动机，”我固执地重复说，“这一切都是为了什么？为什么霍恩非得杀掉那个与他合作多年的可怜的替身演员？总得有个理由吧？一个人不会因为觉着好玩儿就费那么大劲谋划一个那么复杂的杀人计划，而且又冒着险实施那个计划吧？何况据我所知，霍恩也不是疯子。” “疯子？哦，不，他不疯。”埃勒里突然显得有点难于表达自己的想法了，“啊——你看，既然他非得杀什么人不可，那么就会有方法和途径的问题。难道他会公然杀掉替身，接着就坐等自己被捉拿归案、接受审讯以至服刑偿命吗？自卫的本能和避免女儿蒙受羞辱的意识使他必然选择相反的做法。他应该杀掉替身后就自杀吗？不会，理由同上。所以他也不能做此打算，最终绞尽脑汁设计了一条曲折的途径。你可能会说……” “我是要说。”我狠狠地打断他。 “你要说——他这个计划最终会使他失去作为霍恩的真实身份，这不是很傻吗？但实际上这是否真的很傻？他会损失掉什么——他的钱？他早就把钱从银行里取出来带在身边了；他的事业功名？啊，但那已经是昨日黄花，无疑，他对此也看透、服输了；一个多年来执拗地不肯向岁月低头、拒绝臣服于衰老的必然命运的老人，现在终于看到了自身的尽头和希望的灭绝，承认自己已经是棵没用的朽木了。格兰特不惜重金协助他东山再起，也只能是一种友好的姿态，于事无补。这里我必须重复一下：他作为巴克·霍恩在公众眼前最后一次出现，然后一闪就干脆地消失——这在他有什么损失呢？” “就算没什么损失，可有什么好处呢？”我露骨地问。 “好处多了，从他的立场来看是这样。他会得到平和的心境；会享受他不可能再失去的顶峰荣誉；会因他的消失给吉特带来丰厚的收益。吉特曾对奎因警官和我说过——霍恩投了十万美元的人寿保险，而吉特是惟一的受益者。现在再看这个事实：他曾经在亨特的赌场受到诱惑，因小试牛刀而债台高筑——欠下四万两千块钱！他如何偿还得起？可是他又必须偿还。他也是个有头有脸的明星嘛。然而事业上财源已尽，手头积蓄又杯水车薪，惟一的可能是卖掉牧场了。但是我估计他舍不得，那牧场他要留给吉特。总而言之，他无法脱离这个困境。到了这一步，对他来说真可谓'生不如死'了——死了比活着值钱得多！所以他让霍恩的面目消失掉，他那十万美元的人寿保险就生效了，既够还清赌债(他深信吉特的为人必会使她为他还债)，余下的，他知道，还能让吉特得到一个小有保障的明天。如果你相信他面前摆着如许的难题和意愿他还会苟活世上那就错了。霍恩就是霍恩，他必须死掉——而借助他的替身实现自己的死亡；的确有的是难题要做。” “是的，是的，”我不耐烦地说，“那些都会是真的，但是你绕开了一个最重要的问题，把话题兜出这么老远，你这家伙！你先前说过，'既然他非得杀什么人不可……'这我可不能苟同！他为什么非得杀什么人？尤其是，为什么非得杀掉他的替身？” “哦，我想这一定是有原因的。”埃勒里头也没回地说道。 “你想？”我叫道，“你到底知不知道？” 埃勒里转过脸来，我看到他那双眼睛里有种伤感而冷硬的神情：“是的，我知道。但在霍恩亲口告诉我和奎因警官之前，我也一直猜不透……” “可是那天傍晚，霍恩小姐和柯利也在呀。”我说。 “霍恩让他们回避了，”他又停了下来，“他是在朝自己开枪之前说出来的。” “格兰特知道吗？”我困惑地问，“老格兰特？” 他把烟卷在手指上弹了弹：“格兰特知道。” 我嘀咕着说：“他让女儿避开……哼，我想，她对他来说意味着一切，而他会不惜一切代价保护她——他的养女——她的安全，她的名誉……如果说，关于她的生世存在着什么蹊跷，而恰巧那些替身演员知道了，并且威胁着要告诉吉特……她不是孤儿吗，是你说的吧？” 埃勒里默不作声。过了很久，我才意识到他可能根本没有听到我的话。可是他突然厉声说道：“你对新颁布的诺贝尔奖有什么见解，JJ？依我看……” 但对我那一长串梦呓