Post by queensgirl on May 6, 2006 14:33:07 GMT -5
Those sound like easy enough questions, if you've seen the episodes involving the Johnson/McLafferty case and are familiar with the plot details. But I've been thinking about these lately, and some facets of the story keep bothering me.
1) Why did Elaine bother going to the detectives at all? I know what she said, that she wanted to find out whether Alan had really started to care about his wife again, but I’m asking in more of a philosophical sense rather than the technical one. Not only did she invite two other people (the detectives) into her personal world, which led to them being around to notice her role in a criminal conspiracy. Had she kept her mouth shut or perhaps gone directly to Alan to talk about her misgivings, it seems likely she could have either continued to see him, or done the murder in secret and gotten away with it. (Door number three—she and Alan just hopping a plane to Mexico or something—was apparently not thought of, or at least isn’t mentioned.)
2) Since Alan wound up helping Elaine in the crime, or in any event accepted the results, why did Elaine feel such doubt that she needed to go seek somebody else’s opinion back at the beginning of the case? Yes, she said she thought Alan wanted to go back to Rita, but didn’t Elaine know Alan far better than the detectives ever would, and wasn’t it easier for Johnson herself to get closer to him? If Alan did what he did, it looks like he wanted to be with Elaine after all.
3) Which one did the actual shooting of poor Rita? Would she have been killed before the infamous look-in-the-window scene, in which case that would have only entailed firing a gun to make it sound real and then placing the body where it was found? Or was Mrs. McLafferty held hostage in another room and then killed after Elaine did her whole fake costume act? I’m sorry, that is gruesome, but it just seemed to me a very complicated scene to arrange when you actually think about the planning that had to go into it. It would also take up a lot of time, most people having little experience in killing somebody and shlepping the corpse around, thus leading to ever more opportunities to get caught. Somebody once said words to the effect, “The so-called ‘genius’ of the criminal mind does not exist." No kidding.
4) Following from that—when did Elaine and/or Alan have time to switch the body? We know the real Rita wound up dead somehow, because we see her in the chair, when the police are going over the crime scene. We also know the detectives saw part of the staged scenario (that’s when they’re running up to the house, but they don’t get there in time). After the shooting, the next major scene is the cops poring over the area. So what exactly were the time circumstances of the visual flummery needed for the conspirator(s) to make the set-up look just right? I realize it takes a little while for the police to reach the house, but I think the p.i.'s were there right away to explain what they saw, so when did anybody have the leeway to go set up the murder scene just prior? Didn’t they ever count on somebody looking at them, peeking in the window, during this process? There are so many opportunities for this to go wrong; it’s a wonder they didn’t think of this before.
5) Was Alan there at all during the killing, or did he leave the deed up to Elaine? Obviously he’s there by the time the detectives talk to him, but was he in another room in the house or maybe crouched by the garbage pails while he waited to hear that Elaine had done her job?
6) Did they even plan it together, or did one think it up and do it and then offer the outcome to the other as a solution to their inability to be together?
Because of what Maddie says a bit later, that the whole thing happened “in order to save yourself a messy, not to mention expensive, divorce,” I have to think there was fairly direct collusion between Alan and Elaine. That again leads us back to the issue of why either of the crooks was dumb enough to invite prying eyes into the matter. Most people who want to off somebody don’t stand around saying, “Hey, look at me! Look at me!”
Not that I'm trying to help anybody figure out how to do this better.
1) Why did Elaine bother going to the detectives at all? I know what she said, that she wanted to find out whether Alan had really started to care about his wife again, but I’m asking in more of a philosophical sense rather than the technical one. Not only did she invite two other people (the detectives) into her personal world, which led to them being around to notice her role in a criminal conspiracy. Had she kept her mouth shut or perhaps gone directly to Alan to talk about her misgivings, it seems likely she could have either continued to see him, or done the murder in secret and gotten away with it. (Door number three—she and Alan just hopping a plane to Mexico or something—was apparently not thought of, or at least isn’t mentioned.)
2) Since Alan wound up helping Elaine in the crime, or in any event accepted the results, why did Elaine feel such doubt that she needed to go seek somebody else’s opinion back at the beginning of the case? Yes, she said she thought Alan wanted to go back to Rita, but didn’t Elaine know Alan far better than the detectives ever would, and wasn’t it easier for Johnson herself to get closer to him? If Alan did what he did, it looks like he wanted to be with Elaine after all.
3) Which one did the actual shooting of poor Rita? Would she have been killed before the infamous look-in-the-window scene, in which case that would have only entailed firing a gun to make it sound real and then placing the body where it was found? Or was Mrs. McLafferty held hostage in another room and then killed after Elaine did her whole fake costume act? I’m sorry, that is gruesome, but it just seemed to me a very complicated scene to arrange when you actually think about the planning that had to go into it. It would also take up a lot of time, most people having little experience in killing somebody and shlepping the corpse around, thus leading to ever more opportunities to get caught. Somebody once said words to the effect, “The so-called ‘genius’ of the criminal mind does not exist." No kidding.
4) Following from that—when did Elaine and/or Alan have time to switch the body? We know the real Rita wound up dead somehow, because we see her in the chair, when the police are going over the crime scene. We also know the detectives saw part of the staged scenario (that’s when they’re running up to the house, but they don’t get there in time). After the shooting, the next major scene is the cops poring over the area. So what exactly were the time circumstances of the visual flummery needed for the conspirator(s) to make the set-up look just right? I realize it takes a little while for the police to reach the house, but I think the p.i.'s were there right away to explain what they saw, so when did anybody have the leeway to go set up the murder scene just prior? Didn’t they ever count on somebody looking at them, peeking in the window, during this process? There are so many opportunities for this to go wrong; it’s a wonder they didn’t think of this before.
5) Was Alan there at all during the killing, or did he leave the deed up to Elaine? Obviously he’s there by the time the detectives talk to him, but was he in another room in the house or maybe crouched by the garbage pails while he waited to hear that Elaine had done her job?
6) Did they even plan it together, or did one think it up and do it and then offer the outcome to the other as a solution to their inability to be together?
Because of what Maddie says a bit later, that the whole thing happened “in order to save yourself a messy, not to mention expensive, divorce,” I have to think there was fairly direct collusion between Alan and Elaine. That again leads us back to the issue of why either of the crooks was dumb enough to invite prying eyes into the matter. Most people who want to off somebody don’t stand around saying, “Hey, look at me! Look at me!”
Not that I'm trying to help anybody figure out how to do this better.