On a cold and sunny afternoon in mid-November 1952, Estragon “Gogo” Belmont and Vladimir “Didi” Starek walked down a country road to meet their friend “Godot” and have not been seen since. This case report details their disappearance over 50 years ago and its aftermath. Little is known about the circumstances surrounding their departure; detectives only know that they lived in Fourcés, France with their families before vanishing. Their case is one of the most prolific in France, due to the mysterious identities of the men and of the person they were seeking, “Godot.” As family members dwindle and the men’s stories start to fade into the history books as yet another cold case, new eyewitness accounts and personal writings bring new information …show more content…
However, the two were perfect complements to each other, balancing the other’s unique tendencies when they became too extreme. The pair met in school, becoming fast friends and planning adventures together. Starek’s mother said of the two: “They completed each other’s sentences and would often end up saying the same thing at the same time. You could tell they were cut from the same cloth.” Besides his adventures with Belmont, Starek also pursued interests of his own, including philosophy. One of Starek’s cousins details, “He’d tell us all about the different interpretations and meanings of life he had read about in his books. He always wanted to take a big trip to discover the true meaning of life and what had caused it to come into being.” This search for significance in an unstimulating rural environment was often documented in his journals, where he wrote about his escapades with Estragon and the powerful revelations he hoped to find along the way. A distant cousin discovered one of Starek’s journals five years ago, shown below, that contains entries from 1952, the year Starek and Belmont vanished, until a week before their disappearance. The inscriptions fail to mention Godot but showcase the pair’s plans before they vanished, suggesting a premeditated …show more content…
In June 2005, an anonymous eyewitness sent a letter to the police explaining an overheard conversation between a blind man and his companion. Upon analysis of this letter, investigators have concluded the blind man’s to be that of Pozzo, an ill-famed aristocrat known for his unpredictability and his history of abusing those below him. In the letter, the eyewitness writes that Pozzo detailed his experience with two random men on the road a few decades ago. The aristocrat’s blindness prevented him from providing a clear location of where he met the pair, and the “Lucky” mentioned in the letter, Pozzo’s slave, died seven years ago, leaving detectives with no other method to discern the pair’s location. Given Pozzo’s history of abuse and slavery, police interviewed him to see whether he could have kidnapped Belmont and Starek for his own personal use. However, Pozzo did not provide as much useful information as the eyewitness’s letter did; he told police, “I don’t recall that ever happening. I think I would remember meeting a pair like that. Maybe it was someone who just looked like me.” While he did not provide details about the men, he did tell detectives that he remembered traveling around Gabbaret, then an underdeveloped town west of
This further proves how Walter and John Knoll are guilty of the kidnapping of Charles Jr. because, through this piece of information, we know that John Knoll, was aware of something that was going to happen in Hopewell because of his conversation with Walter and Bruno. Since both John Knoll and Walter are in close relation with Bruno- who was found to be the main suspect in the kidnapping - they are concluded to be the two accomplices of Bruno in the kidnapping of Charles Jr. on March 1, 1932. Through these pieces of evidence, it is evident how Walter and John Knoll are also involved in the
James King, a twenty-three year old man, is charged with felony murder during a store robbery. The victim, store owner, Alguinaldo Nesbitt, was supposedly shot with his own gun that was purchased and licensed by him. In King’s court case, at least one witness admitted to seeing King in the store. “Bobo” Evans states that King was the one to shoot the gun in a wrestle with Nesbitt. In addition to that, Lorelle Henry, a bystander, identifies King out of a lineup and pictures.
In the Hit and Run case, there were scene photos taken of Oropeza-Quiroz. Detective Brown printed one of these photos to provide to Hicks for possible identification of “Ricky.” We again met with Hicks in the jail and showed him the photo of Oropeza-Quiroz. Hicks immediately recognized “Ricky” in the photo and said, “That’s him.” I also explained to Hicks that we were still looking at his phone and asked if I had the consent to look at his contact list to find Ricky’s phone number.
Police linked the victims together due to Carskadden’s body intact with nine .22 caliber bullets. In that same month another man 65 year old Peter Siems left Jupiter, Florida and headed to New Jersey. On July 4th 1990 his car had been found abandoned in Orange Springs Florida where Wuornos’s palm print was found on the interior door handle. A witness had seen Wuornos and her lover Tyria Moore abandoning the vehicle. Peter Siems’s body however has never been found (The Crimes | Crime and Investigation, 2014).
Paragraph #3 In the book “In Search of Sacco and Vanzetti”, Susan Tejanda uses hundreds of sources trying to prove or disprove the innocence of both Sacco and Vanzetti in a robbery that involves murder at the Slater and Morrill shoe factory. Tejanda explains in great detail what happened in the court case involving Sacco and Vanzetti. Tejanda explains all of the evidence and stories that were used in court to pin this crime to Sacco and Vanzetti. She greatly explains both sides' arguments in the case with many different sources.
Rodney, like most of Wayne Williams’ victims, was tricked into getting into his car after school Williams tricks Rodney by saying he was an off duty cop and that “there [had] been a bank robbery” and that he needed to come with him to be safe (Jones 122). This relays the history of how the murderer lured in his victims
Barbara Deppner and her companion, the former foreman of the car-theft ring, Percy House, testified that Kuklinski had told him about both murders. However, this was all circumstantial evidence because it was just a “He said, she said”
Toronto - In 1885 at the University of Toronto, two rival stonemasons, Ivan Reznikoff and Paul Diabolos, confronted each other, which resulted in one of them, Reznikoff, being murdered. The reason for this unforeseen event was the fact that the Reznikoff’s fiance was having an affair which with Diabolos, and Reznikoff could not control himself and ended up attacking Diabolos. Reznikoff had followed his fiance when she was with Diabolos, and attacked him out of pure rage.
On the day of August 15th, 1996, the carjacking that brought Antonio’s “involvement” in the crime had taken place in a St. Louis parking lot. As stated in the article, “Antonio Beaver”, a 26-year-old white woman drove into a St. Louis parking lot to park
James King is one of two people being tried for the murder of Alguinaldo Nesbitt, as well as the robbery of his drugstore. He is guilty of felony murder, and there is much evidence to support this verdict. Bobo Evans, another perpetrator of this crime, “places Mr. King in the drugstore with him on the 22nd of December. This testimony was backed up by Lorelle Henry” (Myers 256-257). This is significant because Henry is a reliable witness, and she is an elderly, retired librarian with no criminal activity.
The three eye witnesses claimed not to know who they saw but when Sacco was taken into custody, out of nowhere the witnesses said that he was one of the two men that were involved. The murderers, who were described as two Italian men, escaped with more than $15,000. On the very same day, a deportation was also scheduled for an Italian anarchist living in Bridgewater named Feruccio Coacci. In preparation for leaving, Coacci quit his job at Slater and Morrill.(History) The similarities of these men were astonishing, not to mention all three were
George Potzgo, 7 Darlin Dr. Reading, Pa. 19609(484) 638-0861was advised of the identity of Investigator Sean P. Brennan and of the confidential nature and purpose of the interview, Potzgo, provided the following information: George Potzgo has been a constable for over 12 years. One time Potzgo explained, he couldn’t remember the date; he was standing with Judge Hadzick, Kylie Scott a security guard and her sister Ashley Scott who is also a constable outside Judge Hadzick’s courtroom. Ashley Scott showed Hadzick something on her phone. Potzgo didn’t see what it was on Ashley’s phone, but Ashley read it out loud for everyone to hear. Potzgo couldn’t remember exactly what it said but it said something about a threesome or foursome between the constables and the judge.
In Susan Glaspell's play “Trifles,” there is a difference between the men and women’s way of perceiving evidence to Mr. Wright’s murder case. The men spend most of their time searching for solid evidence upstairs where Mr. Wright's murder takes place. However, the women spend most of their time in Mrs. Wright’s kitchen. Instead of seeking tangible evidence, they inspect the condition of the items and acknowledge how they have been muddled around. Different perspectives lead to a variety of discoveries such as the women’s way of perceiving evidence.
John le Carré’s novel “The Spy Who Came in from the Cold” dives us into the life of Alec Leamas, a British spy during the Cold War era in Europe. The spy has one final mission to complete before he can finally “come in from the cold.” Leamas’ mission, given by Control, is to eliminate Hans-Dieter Mundt, the head of the Abteilung in Germany. What Leamas is not aware of is the many complications and inner battles he will run into and must overcome to reach his mission objective. Throughout the story, these complications will be seen in themes such as deception, seduction and abandonment, which are all involved in the plot and will be analyzed, as well as the recurrence of unkept promises by characters and agencies across the chapters of the book.
All characters are accused and redeemed of guilt but the murderer is still elusive. Much to the shock of the readers of detective fiction of that time, it turns out that the murderer is the Watson figure, and the narrator, the one person on whose first-person account the reader 's’ entire access to all events depends -- Dr. Sheppard. In a novel that reiterates the significance of confession to unearth the truth, Christie throws the veracity of all confessions contained therein in danger by depicting how easily the readers can be taken in by