eworm wrote:
I always welcome a logical argument.
following clues: Footprints under the window, MUD ON SHOES, Gun powder on their clothes and may on their gloves or hands.
The culprit could have used a handkerchief or something like that. And after the crime they could dispose of it in many ways. Nobody would be able to tell who it belonged to.
While someone might Had not hear 'purf' that the gun silenced, they should have heard the gun landing in the room.
The sounds of things falling on the floor isn't something unexpected when cleaning and searching a room for a things from ages ago. Why would anybody have made a notice of it? Especially if they were either busy or talking with Keiko.
The culprit would not have had time to do much. As they were leaving the scene another was heading to meet them. And they would have been pretty clear guilty when they found the victim to that person.
They knew Keiko well. They knew that after leaving Akito in embarrassment Keiko wouldn't run straight to them to get scolded for that. Especially after the words of encouragement. It was predictable that she would stop in other room/rooms and talk with others.
their should also be mud on the floor as well.
Isn't it normal to use a doormat before entering a house? Even more so if it's someone else's. The mud left on the shoes wasn't enough to leave traces on the floor.
Anything else?
How much time did all this take: "
Finally she whispered "Good luck" to Keiko and left the room saying she had left something in her car.
The two were left alone. Akito was already opening his mouth when Keiko made an excuse too and left. She checked on everybody and exchanged a few words with each of Akito's friends before going outside. "
She could have left just a minute or less after her friend. How long did the two (Victim and Friend) look at each other? The killer had only that amount time to commit the crime. How far to the window and back?
Also why even try to frame the other. On a normal case, the last one to see the victim becomes the prime suspect. It would have been far easier to just let the normal procedure make her friend prime suspect. Why throw the gun away? Keeping it would makes it harder to solve the case, and gives her more time to 'clean up'. It almost seems like she was caught because she rushed. Also if her friend had seen her wiping off the mud from her shoes, where would she have said it came from if asked. Would it have made that much difference if she shot at him from a unmuddy spot? Why did she wait until after the rain? Doing it during the the rain, would possibly remove her footprints, and maybe even give her a reason for having mud on her shoes.
You suggest this crime was well planned out. But I see all kind of examples of if being more of a decision of the moment type crime with all kinds of 'dumb' mistakes that happened. Did she only plan on silencing the Gun, and made no plan after that?