On a closed train, a murder happened. After investigation, you as a detective suddenly found out that all 12 passengers on the train were involved in the murder. They believed that the victim had done harm to his relatives and friends. In revenge, he was lynched. These people are closely related, so they are either rich or expensive. They are united, and you are alone, the manager of the train company and the doctor who gets on the train are likely to want to stay out of the way and remain neutral. The key point is that at this time you can neither confirm whether the victim is the mastermind behind the vote tearing case, nor do you have any evidence that 12 people committed murder. In such a situation, you only have one hypothesis and theory, what will you do next?
Maybe you will pretend to be stupid first, and don't have to reveal that you have insight into the truth too early, so that you can protect yourself first, since they can kill one person, they can also kill the second one, and then continue to create the illusion that the foreign murderer has absconded. But if you pretend to be deceived by them and you discredit yourself as a detective, these criminals will think you are nothing more than that. So you have to debunk their tricks, but at the same time keep them from jumping over the wall, so you call it a complex reasoning and pretend to agree with the rationality of their behavior.
But you also know that what they have done is contrary to the case-handling regulations and judicial procedures. Obviously, it is impossible for you to conclude just from a note with the name of the little girl in the tear-off case that the victim was the mastermind. Implement the principle of avoiding relatives and friends, rather than imposing blood revenge as it is now. So the correct way is to stabilize them first, and then tell the police about their inferences after stopping at the station, and let them be responsible for subsequent investigations. It is not up to you to decide whether they can complete the task. But at the very least, you should exercise your responsibilities through your own judgment.
Perhaps, even if the Yugoslav police were able to find evidence of their crimes, they would still be unable to do anything about them. First of all, this is a dispute between foreign powers. As the driver said, it is an act of revenge between "mafia". According to this logic, it is not subject to the jurisdiction of a third party, and the third party is likely to be unwilling to participate in it. , which is why they chose to do it in Yugoslavia. Second, their status as the old and new nobles can still play a certain role of shelter, and political immunity and diplomatic immunity will come in handy. In ancient times, some people in power could execute others without legal proceedings, and 12 people just repeated this act. Of course, the law is not perfect, otherwise, the mastermind of the ticket tearing case would not have gone unpunished. The old and new rich either still indulge in the old days of not following the legal process, or distrust the era of the rule of law, and finally complete this crime, they once again become the judge of the end of the day for others, and enjoy the revenge. Come bloody pleasure.
And when you face this group of people and the bloody case alone, you will feel horrified, not only because of their power, but also because of your minority status, under their strong sense of revenge, you will find that everything is in vain Talking and doing anything is useless. You can expose those pediatric criminal tricks in front of them, but Lin Lin has to express this meaning in a tactful way: "Kill well! It really deserves it!"
View more about Murder on the Orient Express reviews
