[Vidocq]

"A murder -- a most dramatic and remarkable murder. I know how keen you are upon these things, and I would take it as a great favour if you would step down to Appledore Towers and give us the benefit of your advice. It is no ordinary crime. We have had our eyes upon this Mr. Milverton for some time, and, between ourselves, he was a bit of a villain. He is known to have held papers which he used for blackmailing purposes. These papers have all been burned by the murderers. No article of value was taken, as it is probable that the criminals were men of good position, whose sole object was to prevent social exposure."

Criminals!" said Holmes. "Plural!"

"Yes, there were two of them. They were, as nearly as possible, captured red-handed. We have their foot-marks, we have their description; it's ten to one that we trace them. The first fellow was a bit too active, but the second was caught by the under-gardener and only got away after a struggle. He was a middle-sized, strongly-built man -- square jaw, thick neck, moustache, a mask over his eyes."

"That's rather vague," said Sherlock Holmes. "Why, it might be a description of Watson!"

"It's true," said the inspector, with much amusement. "It might be a description of Watson."

"Well, I am afraid I can't help you, Lestrade," said Holmes. "The fact is that I knew this fellow Milverton, that I considered him one of the most dangerous men in London, and that I think there are certain crimes which the law cannot touch, and which therefore, to some extent, justify private revenge. No, it's no use arguing. I have made up my mind. My sympathies are with the criminals rather than with the victim, and I will not handle this case."

I Wonder if Lestrade suspected Holmes to be the murder of Milverton after this conversation, but simply decided not to work upon it and forget about it to cover for Holmes and Watson.

I know that Lestrade never possessed the brightest of minds in the canon but being a cop for over 20 years, he must be able to recognize suspicious behaviour, specially with someone who does nothing to hide the fact that he sympathies with the murder and that believes that vigintalism is sometimes justified.

Not only that but if Lestrade had work on the suspicion that Holmes and Watson were the murders he would find out that a plumber who arrived just two weeks before the fact disappeared after being engaged with a maid that knew the mansion inside and out. Knowing full well about Holmes' mastery in diguise and his unusual methods for gathering information he would have even more reason to suspect that Holmes was the Murder.

Milverton's usual methods (blackmail) and the fact that apparently the murder burned all papers in his safe shows that the murder was most likely someone blackmailed by Milverton.
Holmes being someone that depends on his image as a righteous detective or even Watson someone with a name in the comunity as not only Sherlock Holmes' pal but also as a Doctor and a widower would have much to lose if someone like Milverton found some dirt on them.

And the forensic evidence of the footpronts, Watson matching the description of one of the perps and the maybe perjurious testimony of a certain broken hearted house maid. Well, Holmes and Watson would be REALLY Screwed.

But I think that Lestrade suspected Holmes and Watson were the murders but decided to keep it to himself. Maybe because he considered them friends or maybe he didn't want to send Scotland yard's biggest assest to prison or maybe he simply thought that it would be impossible for any of them to do something illegal and simply shruged it off (And was realy surprised one day, when he opened the Strand ).

I find it hard to believe that their wasn't even a hint of suspicion. What do you think.

[A. Polasek]

I'd never really put much thought into it, but now you mention it, I tend to agree. I have more respect for Lestrade than a lot of folks do, I think, and I give him credit for being reasonably clever. One does not get to his position without possessing some kind of intelligence, skill and instinct and all of those would have pointed him to Holmes' door. It isn't as though Lestrade came to Holmes with every murder either. The chance that he would happen to consult the detective on this one, particulary as he felt the chances of tracing the culprit were pretty good with all the evidence they had to work with, well, it almost seems as if bringing the thing to Holmes at all was a way for Lestrade to gauge Holmes' reaction and satisfy himself one way or the other. Which way he decided depends on how well you think of Lestrade. If he wasn't fooled then Holmes has not given him enough credit either for his capacity as an inspector or his sense of personal justice. I'd like to think that's the case because I like Lestrade and should like to think he would rather compound Holmes' crime (or what he thought was Holmes' crime) than trust the law over his personal morality in running he ans Watson in.

Fascinating question!

A.

[Shangas]

I don't think Lestrade really guessed it was Holmes and Watson. And if he did, I doubt he could prove it.

[Lady Halle]

Yeah, great question. I'll have to think about this one.

[MAHibbard]

Although we will never know for certain, I think that Lestrade may have at least suspected the possibility that Holmes and Watson were involved. But knowing what a low-life CAM was, and how many lives he'd ruined and the fact that legally nothing could be done to bring the man to justice, he chose to ignore any suspicions he had.

As Vidocq points out, Lestrade may not have been the brightest bulb in the pack, but that's because we're comparing him to Holmes. After 20-some years on the force, the man had to have some smarts when it came to crime solving.

[Limited-Fantasy]

It is my belief that the thought that Holmes and Watson could've been involved occurred to him, but he simply chose to ignore it. Lestrade might've had suspicions that Holmes and Watson had to do with it, but I doubt he would've pursued that line of thought (or at least believed they shot Milverton multiple times in cold blood). He knows that what those two do, even if against the law, is always for the good of the people. Although it is true that the description matched Watson, Watson was meant to look like an ordinary man, hence the vague remark.

I also don't see what Holmes said to be incriminating. He was being himself as if he never had a thing to do with it.

Also, people tend to disappear in and out of the great city. A missing plumber would only mean that that person could've been one of the murderers and had left town as soon as possible. There are too many factors in the case left unexplained and with Holmes refusing to help, Lestrade's chances of filing anything against the duo is near impossible.

But the idea that Lestrade would stick to the law so much to bring two men he respected into custody for the murder of a man that he most certainly saw as a villain (and got his just reward) would be out of character.

[221Bee]

Well said, Limited Fantasy. That about sums up my position as well. Even if Lestrade had his suspicions, he was seasoned enough to keep them to himself. As you said, I doubt he would have suspected Holmes or Watson of shooting CAM multiple times--that would surely have been out of character. MAHibbard's and A. Polasek's posts hit the important points also.

[secret_memoir]

When I first read this story, I felt Lestrade likely suspected Holmes and Watson were on a case for a client in regards to blackmailing and thought they in all likelihood knew who the murderer was. I doubt he suspected them as the murderers, although he words his description as such as a means to goad Holmes into pointing it out. Holmes's answer demonstrates to Lestrade that yes, he does, but politely declines because justice was served.

[BakerStreetBabe]

Although we will never know for certain, I think that Lestrade may have at least suspected the possibility that Holmes and Watson were involved. But knowing what a low-life CAM was, and how many lives he'd ruined and the fact that legally nothing could be done to bring the man to justice, he chose to ignore any suspicions he had.

As Vidocq points out, Lestrade may not have been the brightest bulb in the pack, but that's because we're comparing him to Holmes. After 20-some years on the force, the man had to have some smarts when it came to crime solving.

That sums up my point of view in the matter!

[John Clayton]

I Wonder if Lestrade suspected Holmes to be the murder of Milverton after this conversation, but simply decided not to work upon it and forget about it to cover for Holmes and Watson ...
...I find it hard to believe that their wasn't even a hint of suspicion. What do you think.

The ambiguity works wonderfully well on the printed page, a la THE LADY OR THE TIGER, by Frank Stockton. We may never really know precisely what ACD intended in this case. However, the real irony is that when you dramatize the story, you have to make a choice. Truthfully, it can work dramatically either way. My personal preference would be to play it as if Lestrade suspects ... EVERYONE - at this point. He has more than a vague suspicion that Holmes & Watson were involved on behalf of a client. Although it is very unlikely that Lestrade would suspect that they actually committed murder.

Given first rate actors, a subtle approach to this choice could be suspenseful and slyly amusing.

[John Clayton]

I know that Lestrade never possessed the brightest of minds in the canon but being a cop for over 20 years, he must be able to recognize suspicious behaviour, specially with someone who does nothing to hide the fact that he sympathies with the murder and that believes that vigintalism is sometimes justified.

In STUD, Holmes describes Gregson & Lestrade as the best of a bad lot. As Michael Harrison theorized, they are probably survivors of the Metropolitan Police Scandals of the late 1870's. That means that Lestrade is a pragmatist. He would be reluctant to place Scotland Yard's prize asset in the dock. We know that by the time of HOUND & THE SIX NAPOLEANS, the relationship between Lestrade and Holmes & Watson has ripened into a real friendship. As a pragmatist with a survivor mentality, Lestrade would be virtually unable to send his friends and allies to prison for the sake of a parasite like CAM.

[Captain Basil]

Lestrade would be virtually unable to send his friends and allies to prison for the sake of a parasite like CAM

Good reasoning there. I agree.

Would Lestrade really think he could get the goods on Holmes if he tried? Holmes certainly didn't think so.

[Sherlock Poirot]

Well, there are four possibilities here.

Possibility #1: Lestrade suspected nothing. He didn't even think about Holmes and Watson being the criminals.

Possibility #2: Lestrade not as much suspected, as entertained himself with the idea that Holmes and Watson were criminals.

Well, I propose that posssibility #1 is impossible. Why? Because Holmes said(as a joke) that Watson could have been the criminal.

Now, if I said that Simon Cowell was in fact an alien, wouldn't you at the very least imagine him as an alien?
You would. That is how the human brain works. After you hear something, even if mentioned as a joke, you think about it.

Therefore, we know that Lestrade not even thinking about that possibility is impossible. Therefore, to paraphrase our old friend Holmes, let's eliminate the impossible. And then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

It's now assumed as the truth that Lestrade at the very least thought about the possibility of Holmes and Watson being criminals.

After that, he either a)Considered the idea ridiculous b)Had some serious suspicion about it, but figured that even if Holmes killed him, he would never leave any evidence, and therefore chasing after Holmes was a waste of time or c)Had some serious suspicion, but decided not to chase Holmes due to respect/friendship/agreed with what he had done.

Let's analyse those possibilities.

a)Considered the idea ridiculous.
That's impossible. Holmes was an extreme man. Lestrade knew that. He knew very well of what he was capable of doing. Also, Holmes said that "justice was served" something he had rarely(if ever) said to Lestrade before. If someone jokes about their best friend possibly being a killer, and then say you feel sympathy towards the criminals instead of the victim, and that someone is known for being a person who does whatever he wants, then it would be stupid to consider that ridiculous.

Of course, Lestrade was amused by Holmes joke about Watson being the killer. But that's when he assumed that Holmes would take the case. We never get to see his reaction after Holmes refuses to solve the case.

Should we accept that a man described as the most tenacious member of the Scotland Yard would consider any lead ridiculous? Should we accept that Lestrade would think that there anything in the world Holmes was not capable of? More than that, should we accept that Lestrade finds nothing strange about Holmes telling a joke?

That's absolutely impossible. Until evidence comes to light proving that Lestrade was legally retarded at the time, him ignoring the possibility of that happening is impossible.

So, we go to b ) . He didn't chase Holmes because he knew Holmes was too smart for him.

That would have been a good theory, but Lestrade remainds friendly with Holmes in other stories. Would a policeman remaind friendly with a murderer that he wanted to arrest, but couldn't? No, he would not.

Therefore, it's impossible to assume that Lestrade ever had the mere intent of arresting Holmes, but it's impossible to assume that he never thought about Holmes being the criminal.

So what is left is c). Respect,friendship, and maybe even some understanding that the crime was justified. Given that he remained friendly with Holmes in the canon, without even a hint of awkwardness, we can assume that he did not lose any sleep over the matter. Therefore, his thoughts ranged from "maybe he did it, but if he did that's okay" to "he did it, but that's okay"

Based on their mindsets and evidence from the canon, we can eliminate the impossible, and the only theory that remains is that Lestrade thought it was possible, but ultimately didn't care whether Holmes was or not the criminal.

That's what I got trying to apply Holmes' principle to this question. Is there anything that contradicts my reasoning? If there is, please tell me so I can correct it.

[Orontes]

Surely, Holmes sounds like he doesn't give all this credit to the inspector (this time), and I always like the way he looks totally calm, almost happy. You can almost imagine the scene.
On the other side: the perfect 'silence' of Watson ( )
But, after all Holmes is not perfect...

Anyway L can think what he wants: Sherlock Holmes is sure he didn't leave traces/proofs/etc.

[Clare Hart]

Well, there are four possibilities here.

Possibility #1: Lestrade suspected nothing. He didn't even think about Holmes and Watson being the criminals.

Possibility #2: Lestrade not as much suspected, as entertained himself with the idea that Holmes and Watson were criminals.

Well, I propose that posssibility #1 is impossible. Why? Because Holmes said(as a joke) that Watson could have been the criminal.

Now, if I said that Simon Cowell was in fact an alien, wouldn't you at the very least imagine him as an alien?
You would. That is how the human brain works. After you hear something, even if mentioned as a joke, you think about it.

Therefore, we know that Lestrade not even thinking about that possibility is impossible. Therefore, to paraphrase our old friend Holmes, let's eliminate the impossible. And then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

It's now assumed as the truth that Lestrade at the very least thought about the possibility of Holmes and Watson being criminals.

After that, he either a)Considered the idea ridiculous b)Had some serious suspicion about it, but figured that even if Holmes killed him, he would never leave any evidence, and therefore chasing after Holmes was a waste of time or c)Had some serious suspicion, but decided not to chase Holmes due to respect/friendship/agreed with what he had done.

Let's analyse those possibilities.

a)Considered the idea ridiculous.
That's impossible. Holmes was an extreme man. Lestrade knew that. He knew very well of what he was capable of doing. Also, Holmes said that "justice was served" something he had rarely(if ever) said to Lestrade before. If someone jokes about their best friend possibly being a killer, and then say you feel sympathy towards the criminals instead of the victim, and that someone is known for being a person who does whatever he wants, then it would be stupid to consider that ridiculous.

Of course, Lestrade was amused by Holmes joke about Watson being the killer. But that's when he assumed that Holmes would take the case. We never get to see his reaction after Holmes refuses to solve the case.

Should we accept that a man described as the most tenacious member of the Scotland Yard would consider any lead ridiculous? Should we accept that Lestrade would think that there anything in the world Holmes was not capable of? More than that, should we accept that Lestrade finds nothing strange about Holmes telling a joke?

That's absolutely impossible. Until evidence comes to light proving that Lestrade was legally retarded at the time, him ignoring the possibility of that happening is impossible.

So, we go to . He didn't chase Holmes because he knew Holmes was too smart for him.

That would have been a good theory, but Lestrade remainds friendly with Holmes in other stories. Would a policeman remaind friendly with a murderer that he wanted to arrest, but couldn't? No, he would not.

Therefore, it's impossible to assume that Lestrade ever had the mere intent of arresting Holmes, but it's impossible to assume that he never thought about Holmes being the criminal.

So what is left is c). Respect,friendship, and maybe even some understanding that the crime was justified. Given that he remained friendly with Holmes in the canon, without even a hint of awkwardness, we can assume that he did not lose any sleep over the matter. Therefore, his thoughts ranged from "maybe he did it, but if he did that's okay" to "he did it, but that's okay"

Based on their mindsets and evidence from the canon, we can eliminate the impossible, and the only theory that remains is that Lestrade thought it was possible, but ultimately didn't care whether Holmes was or not the criminal.

That's what I got trying to apply Holmes' principle to this question. Is there anything that contradicts my reasoning? If there is, please tell me so I can correct it.

Beautifully reasoned.

It has occured to me that Holmes must have been granted immunity from prosecution by a grateful government at some point in his career. People weren't really slower on the uptake then than they are now and someone, if not an enemy then someone like "old Frankland, the crank" from Hound of the Baskervilles, would have made a stink about him getting away with so much.

[MAHibbard]

Now, if I said that Simon Cowell was in fact an alien, wouldn't you at the very least imagine him as an alien?

What? You mean Simon Cowell is NOT an alien?

Sorry about that bit of silliness slipping out, because I love the way you reasoned everything out, Sherlock Poirot. The Master would be proud of you!

[Sherlock Poirot]

Beautifully reasoned.

It has occured to me that Holmes must have been granted immunity from prosecution by a grateful government at some point in his career. People weren't really slower on the uptake then than they are now and someone, if not an enemy then someone like "old Frankland, the crank" from Hound of the Baskervilles, would have made a stink about him getting away with so much.

Thank you, and I think you are right. Many people owed Holmes their lives, and his brother was the British government.
Also, didn't he mention that he helped the king of Scandinavia with something in the NB story? Prosecuting someone that is friends with a king is hardly the smartest thing to do. Best case scenario, you get a big arrest, but an entire country starts to hate you. Worst case scenario, you become a public joke and more than one country hates you.

With all the people Holmes knew, he should have been pretty much untouchable, legally. What would he become if he tried to use those protections for evil? Well, Moriarty. But that's getting offtopic.

What? You mean Simon Cowell is NOT an alien?

Sorry about that bit of silliness slipping out, because I love the way you reasoned everything out, Sherlock Poirot. The Master would be proud of you!

Thanks, and don't worry. I am a high school student, I enjoy siliness. And you raise a good point, Simon Cowell could be an alien. That would explain a lot of things. In fact, it might be the only alternative left, if we eliminate the impossible(that a human can be born that evil)!

[BakerStreetBabe]

And you raise a good point, Simon Cowell could be an alien. That would explain a lot of things. In fact, it might be the only alternative left, if we eliminate the impossible(that a human can be born that evil)!

It should be investigated...

[BaskerVilleHall]

From the first time I read the story, I'd always had the impression that Lestrade knew much more than he was letting on - the description of the burgulars was just too, well, descriptive I thought it sort of humorous that Lestrade was conceding that it might be a description of Watson.

And on that note, Holmes had to know that the inspector knew, lol.