The Rasp · Chapter
XVII: By The Owl’s Commissioner explained
Anthony Gethryn sends a detailed letter and report to Mr.
What happens
Anthony Gethryn sends a detailed letter and report to Mr. Egbert Lucas of Scotland Yard, outlining his investigation into the murder of John Hoode. He requests assistance to arrange a confession from the guilty party, whom he identifies as Sir Arthur Digby-Coates. The chapter includes Gethryn's full report, which reconstructs the crime, explains the fingerprint evidence against Deacon as a plant, and reveals the crucial testimony of Robert Belford, who saw the study empty of the murderer at a key moment, undermining the alibi.
Themes in this chapter
The Fallibility of Evidence
Anthony demonstrates how fingerprints can be planted and alibis manipulated, questioning the reliability of forensic evidence.
Secrecy and Blackmail
The murderer's cunning use of deception and hidden actions, such as the double fake of the struggle scene, underscores the theme of secrecy.
The Detective as Outsider
Anthony operates independently from official police channels, using his own methods and even acting as an 'actor' to secure a confession.
Characters to notice
- Anthony Gethryn
Writes a letter and report to Scotland Yard, detailing his conclusions and requesting help to secure a confession.
- Mr. Lucas
Receives Anthony's letter and report, reads them with interest.
- Mr. Deacon
Discussed as the scapegoat whose fingerprints were planted on the murder weapon.
- Sir Arthur Digby-Coates
Identified by Anthony as the murderer; his alibi is disproven.
- Mr. Belford
Key witness who entered the study and saw no one else present, providing crucial timing evidence.
- Old Mr. Poole
Mentioned as suffering from hay-fever, which created a window for Belford's unnoticed entry.
Key passages
“I have finished my game; the rest is up to you.”
Anthony tells Lucas that his investigation is complete and now it is up to the authorities to act.
Anthony hands over responsibility to Scotland Yard.
“I know that I am right!”
Anthony expresses absolute certainty in his conclusions about the murderer.
Anthony's confidence in his deductions.
“The fingerprints go a long way to prove (even without the rest of my evidence) that Deacon cannot be the murderer.”
Anthony argues that the very fingerprints that seem to incriminate Deacon actually prove his innocence.
Key logical reversal in the evidence.
“Instead of going to the immense trouble of making a stamp or die, why not obtain beforehand upon the desired object the actual fingerprints of the chosen scapegoat?”
Anthony reasons that the murderer simply got Deacon to touch the handle before the crime, rather than forging prints.
Explanation of how fingerprints were planted.
“The murderer, then, left the study at some time between two minutes past the hour at the earliest and ten minutes past.”
Anthony narrows the time window for when the murderer departed the study.
Critical timing for disproving the alibi.