preview

Murder Of A Murderer: Murder On The Orient Express By Agatha Christie

Good Essays

Murder of a Murderer: Murder on the Orient Express by Agatha Christie While murder is widely considered to be the most abhorrent and atrocious act one can commit, Murder on the Orient Express by Agatha Christie takes the dark and tainted act, and raises the question of its’ moral implications. The murder victim in the novel, Mr. Ratchet, has a previous alias, Mr Casetti. He is responsible for the kidnapping and murder of a young girl, Daisy Armstrong. He pretends she is alive, and extorts money from her family for her “safe return”. He blackmails the authorities: allowing him to escape from the deserved punishment. Daisy’s family decides to take matters into their own hands, and seek vengeance for the young girl. The question of whether murder …show more content…

The novel is set at the time of prohibition, however, that does not affect the characters. One of the passengers, Mr Hardman has a suitcase full of alcohol. “The contents of Mr. Hardman's grips were soon examined. They contained perhaps an undue amount of spirituous liquor . Mr Hardman winked. ‘It's not often that they search your grips at the frontiers - not if you fix the conductor. I handed out a wad of Turkish notes right away, and there's been no trouble so far.’” (177). Here is can be seen, that law enforcement officers are flexible in what they do or do not see. Mr Hardman easily skirts around the law, and bypasses all forms of ramifications for his misdeeds. Furthermore, back in America, where prohibition is strictly regulated, Mr. Hardman also evades the law again: “You are not a believer in Prohibition, Monsieur Hardman, said M. Bouc with a smile. Well, said Hardman, I can't say Prohibition has ever worried me any. Ah said M. Bouc ‘The speakeasy.” (177). Hardman finds way to get around the law, simply to fulfill his alcoholic tendencies. The authorities in America are insufficient in catching the owners, as well as the customers, of the illegal speakeasies. This is not the only time when law enforcement is incompetent. Casetti, is not held accountable for the horrendous kidnapping and murder: “Now I will make clear to you this, my friends. Casetti was the man! But by means of the enormous wealth he …show more content…

I’m rejoiced at his end. Such a man wasn’t fit to live” (84). To the passengers, he is as an abominable, cruel and disgusting individual, undeserving of life. His appalling actions outweigh one of the most basic human rights: the right to live. Furthermore Casetti escapes all forms of consequence for his deplorable crimes: “But by means of the enormous wealth he had piled up and by the secret hold he had over various persons, he was acquitted on some technical inaccuracy . . . . He changed his name and left America. Since then he has been a gentleman of leisure, travelling abroad and living on his rentes” (71). Due to him not being held accountable by the law, the Armstrongs and their friends take matters into their own hands. If such a wretched and despicable man could get away with murder, thenthe family have no other option, to punish him for the death of Daisy. Despite having no previous connections to the young girl, Poirot, Dr Constantine, and the director of the Orient Express,Monsieur Bouc, decide to let them go: Poirot looked at his friend. ‘You are the director of the company M. Bouc’ he said, ‘What do you say?’. M. Bouc cleared his throat. In my opinion, M. Poirot’ he said ‘the first theory you put forward was the correct one - decidedly so. I suggest that that is the solution we offer

Get Access