The Cuckoo's Calling discussion

If you didn't read the entire book, do not continue reading this.

Why did John Bristow hire Strike if he was the murderer since the beginning? To prove to himself that he was the best at killing without a worked out plan?
I really have, need and want to know.

I feel the same. Didn't seem to make sense. I think this question is the reason I haven't read the next book.

He wanted to make sure that he got her money not the biological brother. He was trying to frame the brother so that just in case any one questioned the money going to him they would see that it couldn't go to anyone else because the only other person that it could go to was the so call murderer in the biological brother.

I hope that makes sense.

Maddie wrote: "He wanted to make sure that he got her money not the biological brother. He was trying to frame the brother so that just in case any one questioned the money going to him they would see that it co..."

I still don't get it. I mean, the police stopped working on the case and anybody was looking for information, so why? He killed for two times now and he didn't get caught. Nobody knew about her biological father but the father, and he is dead.

Thanks anyway.

Because Bristow didn't think Strike was a very good detective seeing as he had no clients etc. and he thought he could mislead and manipulate him throughout therefore framing the other brother and getting Lula's inheritance instead. If you know anything at all about amateur murderers you'll often hear of them being super cocky and returning to the scene of the crime etc. and then getting caught. I think this is like a similar situation.

Amanda wrote: "Because Bristow didn't think Strike was a very good detective seeing as he had no clients etc. and he thought he could mislead and manipulate him throughout therefore framing the other brother and ..."

Oh, now I get it, thank you so much, it makes sense. xx

Inés wrote: "Amanda wrote: "Because Bristow didn't think Strike was a very good detective seeing as he had no clients etc. and he thought he could mislead and manipulate him throughout therefore framing the oth..."

No problem :)

In the UK you cannot profit from a crime. In other words if you murder your parents for your inheritance and are convicted you don't get the money. Bristow knew that Lula had already contacted her half brother. The half knew his sister was a famous RICH super model. Suppose he came out of the woodwork and decided to contest John's right to the money? Easiest thing to do is nip it in the bud. Hire a detective to investigate the suicide. Makes him look like a loving brother. When it is found to be murdered who better to pin it on than the half brother? Bristow thinks he has an air tight alibi plus a 'trust fund' why would he kill his beloved sister? He leaves enough evidence to point to Jonah.
Jonah is convicted of the murder and therefore could not contest any money that John might get. (she didn't have a will so it would go to next of kin and government) Next on his list was Tony who knew he was a killer. Once he was eliminated ditch Alison and everything is lovely in the garden.

I am sorry but still doesn't make sense. The case is cold and Jonah is completely out of the equation. It feels like something that at least should be mentioned, especially considering that the rest of the case is explicit.

I agree, Andreu.
It didn't make sense. Another bad part of this is that I listen to old time radio shows ,and this basic set up is the start of at least a dozen thrown together storylines.

Anther thing that put me off was the detective visiting the old lady and while there searching her closet (??) and finding a safe which he could open and finding the evidence that solves the case in the safe. Why didn't the killer just destroy the paper instead of saving it.?

Joseph, the reason he couldn't open the case to see evidence was because the time was less and the caretaker was due any minute. Bristow didn't destroy the paper because he couldn't find it. Still the story has loopholes. He had seen the CCTV footage, if he saw Jonah(whom he hadn't recognized then), he would have seen himself also in the borrowed jacket. If anything, he should've attempted to bury any investigation. Also, i didn't buy Tony keeping his silence in exchange for an alibi for an affair when he had a strong dislike for his nephew since so long (for good reason) and being a smart man, could easily deduce who stood to profit from Lula's death(he was family, he knew the trust's condition).

Andreu wrote: "I am sorry but still doesn't make sense. The case is cold and Jonah is completely out of the equation. It feels like something that at least should be mentioned, especially considering that the res..."

Laura wrote: "I feel the same. Didn't seem to make sense. I think this question is the reason I haven't read the next book."

Agreed. the reason for Bristow reopening the investigation after he got away clean with the murder was not established. If he was worried about Rochelle spilling the beans, or Tony getting suspicious, why not off them both? we've already established he was a sociopathic killer. I felt this about the tv show and the book. It really spoiled things for me, because otherwise I felt this was tremendously well written. I loved the character descriptions and the world building and the interior monologues. It's a pity the story didn't hold water for me.

Kate wrote: "In the UK you cannot profit from a crime. In other words if you murder your parents for your inheritance and are convicted you don't get the money. Bristow knew that Lula had already contacted her ..."

Maybe. But none of this was established. I finished the book with no real understanding of why Bristow did such a stupid thing, just a bunch of maybes, none of which was that compelling. I will admit, thinking about it, that this was foreshadowed by Strike himself, when he says that police aren't really that interested in motive when it comes to murder, just in opportunity, but Bristow coming to Strike and asking him to investigate isn't murder.

The case is closed however,
a.) Rochelle Onifade is alive and knows that the Bristow isn't the real heir of Lula. That blue paper is still lying around evidencing this.
b.) Jonah Agyeman knows that he's the heir and John knows that he was one of the hooded guys spotted in the video

I think this makes Bristow get's an idea that by hiring a detective, he can become the sole-heir to Lula's will. I think Bristow's making a final attempt to ensure that his entitlement to the Lula's money isn't questionable in future.

I still think it's a valid question and they should have clarified it better!

I don't think that Agyeman does know he's the heir: Lula never got to tell him, after all. And why doesn't Bristow just kill Rochelle? The police wouldn't put it together (in fact they didn't put it together until Strike did it for them).
As for the will, yes, it's still out there. But did Bristow even know there was a written will? I don't think Lula actually told him that, did she?
If she did, that would be a good reason for hiring someone to find it. So that Bristow could destroy it and ensure his inheritance. But it's never established that was why Bristow hired Strike.

Some good explanations here but it doesn’t hang together

The comments seem to center around John framing the uncle and Strike being a bungled detective and easy to manipulate.

Okay, but where’s the evidence John leaves to manipulate Strike into fingering the uncle?

There is none