Tag Archives: murder

Wrist to New Years to Murder

NEVER BLACKMAIL A MURDERER!!!! HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO SA Y IT??

I guess a few more, but I don’t suppose it matters, since witnesses to murder rarely do.  Do murders ever?  I imagine some do, especially the one ones to murder that we never hear of, that is, the ones that do get away with it.  And there is the part of murderers I rarely understand: if they got away with it, you rarely hear their names.  What’s that all about?  Who wants  to do things where people don’t even know that you did it?  Or am I just an approval junky?

I guess none of this matters on New Years Day, or as some like to call it, “National Hangover Day.”  Oh, don’t go pointing the finger at me! I am quite hangover free today (about tomorrow, I make no promises).  Who wants to think about murder on New Year’s Day?  Oh well, I guess a few people must.  Policemen.  Newswriters.  The producers of Snapped.

And here we come to the second point of today:  it is Sunday.  For me, Wrist to Forehead Sunday.  I can’t think about a blog post.  All I want to do is watch Snapped.  But Happy New Years, everybody, nonetheless.  I hope you are all having a lovely holiday weekend.

 

Murder Most Different

OK, so I did not write a blog post while at work today, because I spent every break working on a murder mystery.  I LOVE writing murder mysteries!  I feel so clever when I am inventing characters, deciding on their relationships and problems.  When I realize this one wants to do dirt to that one, or the other one loves this one but yet another character knows the dirty little secret of…  you get the picture.

I actually have three mysteries to write with varying requirements for each.  Today I was working on one that is particularly intriguing, because the format is different from what I am used to.  What I usually write is dinner theatre:  the actors mingle with the audience during cocktails then have an actual, rehearsed performance in which all the clues are presented.  The murder I worked on today will be almost completely interactive, with the audience seeking clues throughout several rooms.

I will have to figure out how the murder was committed and, more importantly, how somebody might figure out who did it, how and why.  What clues will be found?  Where will they be?  How did they get there?  Where do they lead?  Can they possibly MISlead?  How about a nice, juicy red herring or two?

However, for me, everything starts with the characters.  I know who will be the victim of the first murder (I think we’ll have more than one corpse during the evening, just to keep things lively).  I started thinking of who the other characters will be.  Soon I had several people identified by roles:  the guy that runs the speakeasy (did I mention that it is a 1920s theme?), the madame of the brothel, the proprietor of a rival speakeasy…   Once I had given everybody a name, things got really fun.

Soon I will have figured out what everybody thinks of everybody else, who hates or loves whom, who did dirt to whom (I do mean “whom” don’t I?  How embarrassing that I am not sure).  I write a lot of random notes then try to organize everything.

Hmmm…  I seem to be babbling on without a whole lot of specifics.  Well, I will give more specifics on these mysteries when I know more about the where, when and how you can get tickets.  In the meantime, I hope I have intrigued my local readers and entertained those farther afield.  If so, I say good work for a Tired Tuesday.

 

Severed Heads, Murder Television and Foolish Blog Posts

Did anybody not expect a Wrist to Forehead Sunday post today?  Nonsense, of course you did.  Perhaps, like me, you were hoping for something better or at least different, but any length of acquaintance with me will show that I am continual proof of the rule: shit happens.

I am feeling marginally better from my sinus infection.  I have a new cord for my Acer and am once again typing with two hands.  Things are definitely looking up.

I’ve been researching my role for the play Roxy by watching television.  That is, I’ve been using that as an excuse.  Last night we saw Hush… Hush, Sweet Charlotte, which involves a guy getting his head chopped off.  OK, that really has very little to do with the play.  For one reason, the movie is a mystery while in the play it is quite well known whodunit (me).  Still, Bette Davis.  I couldn’t help myself.

Today, as I usually do on Sundays, I am watching Snapped on digital cable.  Some of those are about  wives who kill abusive husbands.  I caught the tail end of one where she killed him with an axe, then tried to hide the body and pretend it never happened.  The parallels were striking!  If only I had seen the entire episode.  Oh, OK, it was a re-run, and I’ve seen it at least a couple of times before.  I may even have seen another true crime show about the case.  I watch a lot of murder television.

Earlier this weekend I stopped by Ilion Wine and Spirits to purchase a bottle of wine.  One of the owners greeted me and asked how the blog was going.  I was forced to confess that I have twice tried to write a post about a wine tasting they recently hosted.  I must, I positively must finish that post and get it published.

As I begin my week, I hope once again to write good blog posts, not foolish ones.  But we’ll see what happens.  I think some people are entertained by my foolishness.  Sometimes I even entertain myself.  I hope you’re all having an enjoyable Sunday.

 

It’s A Crime

I did not write a blog post while at work today. I spent my time before my shift and on each break reading a true crime book by Ann Rule. She is the BEST! I love true crime. I guess the best I can do for this week’s Middle-aged Musings Monday is a couple of paragraphs about my crime obsession.

It seems to me that many people love murder. Murder mystery novels crowd library shelves. Many movies feature murder, mysterious or otherwise. And on television… it’s everywhere! Truth, fiction, police, amateurs, hit men and even the undead, although many would argue that they don’t count. I am not alone in my obsession.

I do enjoy a good fictional mystery, on the page or on the screen, but lately I am really addicted to the true stuff. I have written about this before, how I watch many shows of varying degrees of cheesiness. I only wish I had seen a good one lately, so I could write about that.

The novel I am having so much trouble writing (and I KNOW I have written about that here) is a murder mystery. Perhaps one of the reasons I am having so much trouble with it is that I am not spending enough thought on the actual crime. Silly me, I keep thinking about the characters. Well, I will have to work that out for myself.

Well, that is over 200 words. I am having a plethora of not very good posts lately and for that I apologize. Tomorrow I plan to go running early in the morning. I hope and trust that will offer enough interest for a decent Running Commentary. If not, I believe there is a library book sale I can attend. Ooh, maybe I’ll find another Ann Rule book.

I Liked Philo’s Dog

This week I offer Mystery Movie Monday. I would prefer Monster Movie Monday, but I didn’t have a monster movie to hand. Instead, I asked Steven to make a selection from his DVD set of 50 Mystery Classics. He chose The Kennel Murders (1933), a Philo Vance mystery.

Spoiler Alert! I probably won’t give away the solution, because I didn’t properly understand it, but I will certainly give away some major plot points.

I was a little concerned to see the word “kennel” in the title, knowing Hollywood’s history of NOT being kind to animals (perhaps you read my blog post about it). I did not want to watch a movie where dogs die.

Sure enough, a dog gets murdered. Philo does not seem too exercised about that murder, although the dog’s owner threatens to kill whoever did it. I was not clear on who did do it, and I couldn’t figure out how it fit in with the rest of the plot. Then again, as regular readers know, I don’t always pay a whole lot of attention to these things. Another dog gets hit on the head with a poker, which does figure in, but I’m getting ahead of myself.

The movie opens on a dog show. There is Philo Vance with an extremely cute Scotty dog. His dog does not win, but Philo loves him. So there’s one reason to like Philo Vance, at any rate.

Next we meet a beautiful heiress (is there another kind?) who can’t seem to get any of her own money from her unpleasant trustee or guardian or whatever he is to her besides unpleasant. It’s pretty clear who the victim is going to be and there will be no shortage of suspects.

It is a bit of a surprise later on when one of the suspects who was starting to look really good (as a suspect, I mean) ends up dead. I guess I should have seen that coming. After all, it’s “murders” plural in the tile, and I’m pretty sure they didn’t count the dog.

The dog that gets hit on the head seems to make a full recovery and I guess helps solve the mystery. Or helps Philo prove he has correctly solved the mystery. Like I said, the solution kind of mystified me. As is often the case, the “proof” would never hold up in a court of law. For that matter, the medical evidence was pretty spurious, too. But these are mere quibbles. One must take movie mysteries at their own estimation or not at all.

Philo’s dog has a pretty good scene where he shows Philo something important. I just love a cute little dog.

In retrospect, I’m thinking it might have been a good idea if I had paid more attention to the movie, maybe made a few notes, before I tried to write about it. Then again, it’s Monday.

Cheesy TV

Here is a new feature I recently came up with: Cheesy TV. Regular readers know how I love to write about cheesy movies. Well, they are not always easy to come by. However, I am discovering a whole world of cheese on cable television.

I have a long-standing addiction to true crime shows. I prefer a real documentary where they cover the facts of the case. I despise re-enactments. I find they are always cheesy and usually unnecessary. However, as re-enactment fests take over my true crime channels, I occasionally tune in to one. And I find they sometimes have a charm all their own. The dialogue in the re-enactments, which is often supposed to play like they’re being overheard, is laughable. The acting is of the scenery chewing variety. And when they show a photo of the actual people, you see the casting director had a very flattering idea of their attractiveness.

I almost feel I should include a spoiler alert, because this episode did not turn out as I expected. However, I also feel I can treat a true crime show, however cheesy, differently from now I treat a cheesy movie. I will also point out that I was paying my usual desultory attention to this one. They may actually have said who was going to end up dead and I missed it.

I will preface this essay by saying: Nobody deserves to be murdered. I suppose there are those who will dispute that statement, but I am not going there today. I would like to talk about a murder victim who, I feel, could have avoided the situation in which the murder took place. I intend to comment on this, and on the cheesy nature of the program which presented the case. I fear sounding insensitive, since an actual person did, in fact, die. Sorry about that.

OK, on with the write-up. Steven and I watched one of the cheesier crime shows on Investigation Discovery: Deadly Affairs. This one is narrated by the divine Susan Lucci, which I feel make it a cut above the rest.

Lucci presents to us a guy who has a girlfriend who is really a guy. They are off again/on again, because the guy is a serial cheater. Then they go on again and move to this cowboy town where the guy insists his lover live as a man and they keep their love affair a secret.

Soon the Guy is having an affair with a hot single mother. At first she doesn’t mind that he has a boyfriend, then she does, so he sends the boyfriend packing.

As soon as the Girl moves in, she discovers the Guy is a control freak. After many public screaming matches (all we see is a fairly hilarious fight about him telling her what order to hang her clothes in), they break up. The Guy can’t stand being alone, so he gets the Boyfriend back by telling him he can live as a woman and they can get married.

However, the Girl did not think they were permanently broken up, and she is not happy with this development. She follows them around, announcing in a loud voice that the fiance is really a man. She even has the nerve to crash their wedding. Naturally the Guy starts having sex with her again. Any slimy hound dog serial cheater would. But he makes no move to get rid of his new wife. Tensions escalate.

Of course I’ve been thinking all this time that Boyfriend/Wife is going to get it, probably from the Girl, because the narration keeps talking about jealousy. Imagine my surprise.

The Girl is out drinking one night and gets all maudlin talking about how she wants to “make amends.” Those are the exact words, used several times. If only she can see the Guy without his Boyfriend/Wife, she can “make amends.” So she goes over to their house at two in the morning.

Hello! Who goes over to somebody’s house at two in the morning and expects the wife NOT to be there? And if you really want to “make amends,” it is a better plan to wait till a decent hour of broad daylight and, for example, SEND FLOWERS! Maybe write a nice note. A conciliatory phone call.

The story is that the Boyfriend/Wife beats the poor Girl to death while the husband is sound asleep upstairs. Did you buy that? I didn’t. I don’t know what went down, and I don’t think the producers of this show did, either. I think they picked the version they liked best, and I’m kind of glad they did, because it certainly gave me something to write about.

I can believe the Girl SAID she wanted to make amends, but I don’t believe that is really what she had in mind. And I sure as hell don’t believe that the horn dog that started it all slept through a beat-down of that magnitude.

Really, when I think about it, it is a very sad story. That Girl did not deserve to be murdered and buried in the desert (oh yeah, I left that part out) (the post is getting a little long). I think what she needed to do to begin with was to find a classier guy to set her sights on. Same goes for the Boyfriend/Wife, although I lost a whole lot of sympathy for him when I found out he was a murderer.

But it is a fun show to watch. Susan Lucci pops up a couple of times looking delicious in an evening gown, about to go out on the town with a hottie who, presumably, does not plan to murder her. Lacking cheesy movies and sometimes time to watch a whole movie, I will continue to embrace cheesy television.

Murder on the Blog Post

Is anybody keeping score as to how many posts I write about Why I Can’t Write a Post? I hope not. In fact, why should I flatter myself that people are paying that much attention to me in the first place? At least I was working on something different this time. I was trying to kill someone.

I just said that to be dramatic. I was writing a murder mystery. You see, a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away… oh wait, that’s something else. It was in the North Country, as that area of northern New York State likes to call itself. And it was the 1990s, so, you know, not yesterday. My husband and I and some friends used to have a company called Murder For Hire. We put on interactive murder mystery dinner theatre.

I used to write most of them, and I like to think I was pretty good at it. We never made a lot of money, but we had a lot of fun. I really miss doing them. When I get a real intense bout of writer’s blank, sometimes I start one, just to get my creative juices flowing.

Regular readers may recall my saying that my novel is at a standstill. I keep thinking about it while at work (a good time for working out plot points), but nothing much is coming. So I started to think about something else. I thought about a possible venue for a murder mystery. I thought of an organization that might like to do one as a fundraiser. Then I thought about what kind of murder mystery they would like. Then next thing I knew, I was making notes.

I started that yesterday after I had written the day’s post, so I’ve been at it for two days now. I am enjoying it quite a bit. Will I feel confident enough to actually approach the organization I thought might like it? We shall see. And probably write a blog post about it.

That Damn Book

This is going to be another Tired Tuesday post, because I fulfill both criteria. I feared that would be the case, since my husband Steven and I planned on doing laundry after I got off work. Therefore, I went to work determined to write something while at work. Something not too long.

I guess no words at all is not too long.

Well, let me explain how the fates conspired against me. You may say I did myself in by succumbing to my own addiction. Potato, po-tah-to. A friend at work had told me about a book she had read that she thought I might like. It is a novel based on a local murder case which happened many years ago.

“Oh, I’d love to borrow it,” I told her.

Who knew she would be so prompt? The book was by my work station when I got to work this morning. How very kind of her. I would begin reading it at the first opportunity. First I had a blog post to write. I did, in fact, look at the blank page with a pen in my hand for, oh, a good three or four minutes before I thought I could read just a little bit…

I get to work a half hour to forty minutes early so that I have time to write and sometimes socialize a little. I did neither this morning. Oh dear. Well, there was still the nine o’clock break. And lunch. And the 2 p.m. break. And sometimes two or three minutes at the end of the day while I’m waiting to punch out.

I don’t really need to tell you I read during all of those, do I? Determined to make up for my profligacy, I left the book in the SUV at the laundromat and brought my notebook in with me.

And wrote one paragraph, which I immediately despised.

“It’s no use,” I told Steven. “I’m going to read that book and just write something off the cuff when we get home.”

And, I’m afraid this is it. On the brighter side, the book is about a murder that took place in the Mohawk Valley. Perhaps when I finish it I could write a book report for that day’s blog post.

Musings on Murderers

Hmmm… Kind of a gruesome headline. My Wrist to Forehead mood continues.

It’s not that I’m too lazy to write a blog post; I wrote quite a bit of one at work today. But it’s not ready yet, and I can’t possibly finish it now. I worked on my novel too, but I’d just like to mention that it is not going very well right now. That could be one reason why my wrist is on my forehead, but we’re not being analytical here.

Then again, why not be analytical on Middle-aged Musings Monday?

I did have one musing. It came to me while I worked. I was thinking about my novel and some of the true crime documentary-style shows we like to watch and a book I’ve been re-reading about Writing Mysteries: A Handbook by the Mystery Writers of America (Writer’s Digest Books, 1992). And it occurred to me: murderers do not have a great deal of imagination. If they had more imagination, they could think of better ways to solve their problems than by murdering somebody.

I feel sure I am right about this.

I believe most murderers believe they have a great imagination. Many of them think they are as clever as an analogy by that guy on Lizard Lick Towing (I never watch that show, but on the ads for it this redneck guy is full of “he’s as something as a something-something,” very down-home and distinctive. I wish I could think of things like that). In books murderers are pretty clever. In movies they are usually clever and lucky. So naturally, some of the real-life kind feel they must be the same.

Or does it happen the other way around? Because these people think they are so clever and imaginative (but are not), they think they can get away with murder (which they would not have to commit if they really were so clever and imaginative). I like that.

And that’s over 300 words. Happy Monday, everybody.

I’ll Say the Lights Went Out

I have always been cursed with the habit of listening to the lyrics of popular songs, at least when you can understand them. I think I’m going to instate a new feature where I talk about some of the more egregious ones. I will begin with the granddaddy of all stupid lyrics, “The Night the Lights Went Out in Georgia.”

I will begin with the premise that the reader knows the lyrics. After all, this was one of the great hairbrush songs of the ’70s (you know, where you used a hairbrush as a microphone and sang along with the 45?). So if you don’t know the song, you might like to go listen to it, then read the rest of this.

From beginning to end, the song is ridiculous. First stanza, the guy’s been gone for two weeks and stops for a drink before going home to his wife. What kind of a marriage is that? His wife shouldn’t have cheated on him; she should have dumped his sorry ass!

His friend Andy, for reasons best known to himself, tells him his wife isn’t at home and has been seeing “that Amos boy, Sid.” Then when the guy sees red, Andy confesses he’s been with the wife himself. Excuse me, what? Why would you tell this to a man that is already seeing red? What kind of a death wish does this Andy have, anyways? Nobody is really surprised when, a few lines later, we learn that Andy doesn’t have many friends.

One thing I was never clear on: Was the wife seeing both Andy and Sid Amos or was Andy throwing an innocent man into the line of fire? If they would have made a movie of this this song (I’m a little surprised they didn’t), Sid would have had a pathetically small part.

With only a passing thought to his missing wife (“must’ve left town”), the brother goes off with murder on his mind. I believe this is the first time the singer mentions that it’s her brother. And in the first indication of how dysfunctional the family is, we learn that the only thing his father left him was a gun. Well, maybe Papa was poor. I guess he’s dead and we needn’t concern ourselves with him, but I must say he certainly didn’t raise his kids right.

Off through the woods to kill Andy, Brother sees somebody else’s tracks (only now do I wonder how he could see them in the woods with the lights out) (really, this song is the gift that keeps on giving).

Where to begin with the next event? He’s going to kill Andy, finds out Andy is already dead. Instead of saying, “Saves me the trouble” and quietly going home and getting on match.com, he calls the police. And not by picking up a phone and dialing 911 or even saying, “Operator, get me the police!” (it was the ’70s, after all) (yeah, that match.com line was an anachronism): he fires his gun. The mind boggles. How did he even find his way home from Candletown when he clearly does not have the brains he was born with.

My sisters and I speculated that the judge was riding around in the car with the sheriff, because the “make-believe trial” happened so fast. I imagine the lack of ballistics report and investigation of clues such as the small footprints saved a lot of time.

They must have strung him up pretty fast, though, to not give his little sister time to pipe up and say she done it. Kind of a disingenuous argument after all: “I didn’t have TIME to save my brother and get hung myself!” Fast as she was about shooting everybody else, I find that a little hard to believe.

Another big question I have is: how come she hid the wife’s body were it’ll “never be found” but left Andy lying “in a puddle of blood” for all to see? And come to think about it, who shoots somebody for cheating on their brother? Did I mention dysfunctional family earlier? I guess so!

And can I just say, getting cheated on is grounds for DIVORCE! And when your best friend is sleeping with your wife you FIND A NEW BEST FRIEND! And when your brother faces these problems, what a little sister should offer is a shoulder to cry on and the name of a good divorce lawyer.

I’m sure there are many good songs about cheating wives and bad friends that do not involve murder. They probably won’t make such fun blog posts, though.