The million dollar Bond robbery

"A young lady wants to see you, M. Poirot. Here's her card," said the landlady.

Poirot read: "Miss Elaine Smith" and nodded to the landlady to admit her. In another minute a very charming girl was shown in. She (должно быть) have been about five-and-twenty. Poirot politely offered her a seat and introduced Captain Hastings to her as his assistant in his little problems.

"I am afraid it is a big problem I have brought you today. Monsieur Poirot," said the girl. "You (возможно) have read about it in the papers, the robbery of Liberty Bonds[3] on board the Olympia." Great surprise (должно быть) have shown itself on Poirot's face, for she continued quickly. "You see, I am engaged to Mr Philip Ridgeway, who was in charge of the bonds when they were stolen. He (не может) be guilty but his uncle, I know, insists that he (вероятно) carelessly have men­tioned having them in his suitcase. It's a terrible set-back in his career. People (по всей вероятности) be suspecting that he stole them himself."

Miss Elaine also told them that the Olympia sailed from Liverpool on the 23rd and the bonds were handed over to Philip on the morning of that day by Mr Harper, Philip's uncle, and Mr Shaw, the two joint general managers of the Bank. Philip locked the bonds in his suitcase with a special lock fitted to it by Hubbs's[4] at Mr Shaw's request. The package (по всей видимости) have been stolen just a few hours before reaching New York.

The next thing was for Poirot to see Mr Ridgeway. The girl arranged the meeting at the Cheshire Cheese.

Mr Ridgeway was there before them. He was a nice-looking young man with a touch of greying hair at the temples, though he (не могло) have been much over thirty.

"You (должен) forgive my acting without consulting you, Philip," she said. "Let me introduce you to Mr Poirot, of whom you (вероятно) often have heard and his friend Captain Hastings." Philip looked very impressed.

"I hope Monsieur Poirot (сможет) to throw some light on this ex­traordinary puzzle, for I (должен) admit that I am nearly out of my mind with anxiety about it," Philip said.

"Well, well," said Poirot, "we'll see what (можно) be done."

Philip's story agreed with that of Miss Smith in every particular. The only addition was how he discovered his suitcase all cut about where they tried to force the lock but (не смогли) and in the end, they (должно быть) have got it unlocked somehow or other. The most puzzling fact was however they (не могли) have had the key. The key never left Mr Ridgeway day or night.

The bonds, which were a big package, (не могли) hardly have been hidden on board, and they weren't for they were offered for sale within half an hour of the Olympia's arrival.

Poirot's next step was to make a few inquiries at the London and Scotish Bank. On their arrival at the Bank Poirot and Captain Hastings were immediately received by Mr Harper and Mr Shaw, two respectable gentlemen. Poirot enquired for some details; the interview was short. At the end of it Poirot was decidedly disappointed. The case was perfect­ly clear, he even found it childishly simple. He knew who stole the bonds

but he wouldn't say a word to Hastings so far. He wanted further con­firmation to his theory.

After the interview Poirot and Hastings set out for Liverpool where the Olympia was due to arrive. There Poirot interviewed four stewards and enquired after the passanger, one Mr Ventnor, who had occupied the cabin next to Philip's.

On the train speeding back towards London, Poirot reviewed the case. "The package of bonds was removed from the suitcase and thrown overboard." "But if the bonds were thrown overboard they (не могли) have been sold in New York," Hastings remarked. However the fact remained that the bonds were sold in New York which meant if the pack­age was thrown overboard it (не мог) have contained the bonds. The bonds reappeared in New-York half an hour after the Olympia got in. The package was a dummy[5] and the moment of its substitution[6] (no всей вероятности) have been in the office in the Bank. The bonds were mailed to New York by the Gigantic which left Southampton on the same day as the Olympia, and was due in New-York the day before the Olympia arrived. The bonds were mailed to a confederate[7] in New-York, with instructions to sell as soon as the Olympia was in. Someone (должен был) to travel on the Olympia to stage the supposed moment of the robbery, to distract the attention from the London and Scotish Bank. This was nobody else but Mr Ventnor. He threw the package over­board and waited until the last to leave the boat. He didn't want to run the risk of meeting Ridgeway.

The reader (вероятно) have guessed by now that Mr Ventnor and Mr Shaw were the same person.

"There are criminals in high places sometimes, my friend," finished Poirot.

(after Agatha Christie)

 

Ex. 27. Test translation.

1. Во время Великой Отечественной войны весь Советский народ встал на защиту своей родины. 2. Суд над военными преступниками проходил в Нюренберге в 1946—47 гг. 3. Народы Африки активно борятся за свою независимость. 4. Он был строго наказан за наруше­ние правил уличного движения. 5. Правила вождения автомобиля должны строго соблюдаться. 6. На суде ему нечего было сказать в свое оправдание. Показания свидетелей были достаточно убедитель­ны и полностью доказывали его виновность. 7. Возможно вы и правы, но мне трудно судить, не зная обстоятельств дела. 8. Его арестовали по обвинению в убийстве, но дело было прекращено за недостатком улик. 9. Я еще не знаю, смогу ли принять участие в конференции. Это будет зависеть от ряда обстоятельств. 10. Вполне вероятно, что она пришла к тем же выводам независимо от нас. 11. Что, по вашему мнению, является самой замечательной чертой характера человека? 12. Он человек независимых взглядов и убеждений. 13. Мать была обеспокоена его здоровьем, но не показывала вида. 14. Подсудимый полностью отверг предъявленные ему обвинения. 15. Если вы думаете ехать на юг поездом, вам бы лучше заказать билеты заранее. 16. Дела у фирмы шли успешно. Недостатка в спросе на их товары не было. 17. Ваш друг не понимает шуток. Вероятно, у него нет чувства юмора. 18. Костюм оказался немного узким в плечах. Жаль, что я не примерил его в магазине. 19. Мы не сразу поняли, к чему он клонит.

 

PRECIS WRITING

Ex. 28. a) Read the passage, b) Write 3-5 questions covering the basic points of the passage, c) Give a title to the passage and write a precis.

The abolition of capital punishment in England in November 1965 was welcomed by most people with progressive ideas. Still the problem remains — the problem of how to prevent murders. The important thing in the prevention of murder is to eliminate as far as possible the weap­ons and instruments, the guns and knives, with which these crimes are committed and to stop the dangerous influence of violence in books, films and television.

We have plenty of examples from real life, in every country, to prove that few criminals are born: they are made by our standards of so-called entertainment; Cowboys and Indians, Wild West films which are only exciting when guns are shooting and bad men are being killed, spy sto­ries of the James Bond type with death in every form, bank robberies and "perfect murder" stories with killings on every few pages or in every few minutes of film. Anybody who wants to commit a murder has no difficulty in buying a knife, a gun, or some "interesting" poison. Life is cheap in fiction; no matter how many people are killed — the more the merrier — the main thing is that the hero and the heroine remain alive to enjoy the happy end.

So the practical way of reducing the number of capital crimes is to close the gunshops and to make it a criminal offence for the man in the street to possess a lethal weapon.

 

SPEECH EXERCISES

Ex. 29. Retell in narrative form.

"We want evidence," the Chief Constable was saying. "Have you got evidence, M. Poirot?"

"You want evidence... definite evidence... such as Lady Stubbs' pearls?"

Now it was the Chief Constable who stared.

"You have found Lady Stubbs' pearls?"

"Not actually found them... but I know where they are hidden. You shall go to the spot, and when you have found them, then... then you

will have evidence... All the evidence you need! For only one person could have hidden them there."

"And who's that?"

"The person it so often is," Poirot said softly, "the husband Sir George Stubbs stole the pearls."

"But he can't have done that, M. Poirot! We know it's impossible."

"Oh, no," said Poirot, "it is not impossible at all! Listen and I will tell you."

(after "Dead Man's Folly", by A. Christie)

 

Ex. 30. Answer the following questions using the vocabulary of the text. Sum up your answers.

In the Witness Box

1. What is a witness? 2. What part does a witness play at a trial? 3. What is a witness for the defence? for the prosecution? 4. How is a witness sworn in? 5. Who examines (cross-examines) a witness for the defence? for the prosecution? 6. What happens if a witness is partial or lies when giving an account of the events? 7. In what case will a witness be reminded that the life of the accused depends on his evidence?

 

A Detective Story

1. What are the most famous detective-story writers? 2. Who is usu­ally the main character in a detective story? Give the names of some detectives in fiction. 3. Why must a detective be observant, intelli­gent? What makes a good detective? 4. How does the author make things difficult for the detective? 5. What makes a detective story thrilling to read?

 

Ex. 31. Read the passage, answer the questions, using the vocabulary of the lesson and retell it.

It was very hot in the small court-room and everybody was feeling sleepy. After a tiring morning, the clerks were anxious to get off to lunch and even the judge must have felt happy when the last case came up before the court. A short, middle-aged man with grey hair and small blue eyes was now standing before him. The man had a dazed expression on his face and he kept looking around as if he was trying hard to make out what was going on.

The man was charged with breaking into a house and stealing a cheap watch. The witness who was called did not give a very clear account of what had happened. He insisted on having seen a man outside the house one night, but on being questioned further, he admitted that he was not sure whether this was the man. The judge thought over the matter for a short time and then he said that as there was no real proof, the man could not be found guilty of any crime. He said that the case was dismissed for lack of evidence and then rose to go. The prisoner looked very puzzled. It was clear that he had not understood a thing. Noticing this, the judge paused for a moment and then the man said suddenly, 'Excuse me, sir, but do I have to give the watch back or not?'

Questions

1. What was the last case brought before the court that morning? 2. What was the prisoner like? 3. What were the charges against him? 4. What was the evidence of the witness? 5. Why was it impossible to prove the prisoner's guilt beyond any reasonable doubt? 6. What was the decision of the judge? 7. How did the man give himself away? 8. What do you think happened further?

 

Ex. 32. Read the following, answer the questions, and retell the passage in English.

 

ИСТОРИЯ ОДНОЙ ПОЧТОВОЙ МАРКИ

В Париже в июне 1892 года был найден убитым в своей квартире некий Гастон Леру. Так как деньги остались в целости, убийство с целью грабежа исключалось. Не могло быть речи и о самоубийстве.

Полиция оказалась не в состоянии решить эту таинственную за­дачу. Тогда к расследованию были привлечены лучшие кримина­листы. Один из них еще раз основательно обыскал квартиру уби­того и, наконец, нашел в тайнике альбом с марками. Кроме того, он обнаружил список всей коллекции. В этом списке была поимено­вана двухцентовая гавайская марка, выпущенная в 1851 году для Сандвичевых островов в Тихом океане. Но как раз эта марка и от­сутствовала в коллекции. В то время она оценивалась в 10 000 зо­лотых франков.

Полицейский чиновник опросил всех парижских торговцев мар­ками, но они заявили, что такой марки у них в продаже нет. Кроме того, он спросил их, не знают ли они какого-нибудь парижского кол­лекционера, который бы захотел приобрести такую марку. Все еди­нодушно назвали некоего Гектора Жиру.

Полицейский решил познакомиться с Жиру и представиться ему в качестве заядлого филателиста. Однажды вечером криминалист завел разговор о первых гавайских марках. Он также упомянул и о двухцентовой гавайской марке и высказал мнение, что такой вообще не существовало. Тогда Жиру взял свой альбом и, торжествуя, пока­зал эту марку.

После долгого запирательства Жиру признался в убийстве и рас­сказал, что Леру упорно отказывался уступить ему эту марку, хотя ему предлагалась за нее любая цена.

Злополучная марка перебывала с годами у многих владельцев. Но ни разу не была показана ни на одной международной филате­листической выставке. В конце 1963 года марка был продана аукционной фирмой в Нью-Йорке за 4 100 долларов. Ее приобрел аме­риканский торговец, который, наверняка, продаст ее за еще более вы­сокую цену, и она окончательно исчезнет в какой-нибудь частной коллекции.

Questions

1. When did the incident described in the article occur? 2. Why did the police believe that Gaston Lerout couldn't have possibly been mur­dered with the aim of robbery? 3. Why could not it have been a case of suicide either? 4. Why were several leading criminologists invited to take part in the inquiry? 5. What sort of hiding place did one of them discover during a repeated search of the flat? 6. What did the hiding-place contain? 7. Why did the entry in the list describing a 2 cent Ha­waii stamp put out specially for the Sandwich Islands draw his atten­tion? 8. What did he find out in comparing the list with the actual collection? 9. How much was the missing stamp worth? 10. What was there so remarkable about the stamp? 11. What inquiries did the police offic­er make among the Paris stamp dealers? 12. Why did the police officer conclude that there must be some connection between the murder and a certain Hector Girout? 13. Why was Hector Girout among the first to be suspected of having committed the crime? 14. Why did the police officer believe that the best way of getting to know Hector Girout was by introducing himself as an ardent stamp-collector? 15. How did it happen that Hector Girout failed to guess the police officer's intentions? 16. How did the police offficer succeed in establishing the identity of the murderer? 17. Why weren't Girout's repeated denials of guilt taken into account by the police? 18. What evidence did the police have against him? 19. Was it direct or circumstantial evidence? 20. What charge was brought against Girout at the trial? 21. How did he account for the murder? 22. What happened to the ill-fated stamp? 23. When was it seen last? 24. What price did it fetch at the auction held in 1963?

 

Ex. 33. Retell the following in English.