Mrs. Van Bliven Case Study

Mrs. Van Bliven claims that her $25,000 necklace was taken, but image and text evidence suggest otherwise. For this reason, Mrs. Van Bliven should be arrested and the necklace is in her room. Mrs. Van Bliven had a motive to stage the heist in pursuance to gain insurance money from the “crime”. First, if someone were to break glass to get into a room, the fragments would normally end up inside the room, as the person is impacting the windowpane from the outside to gain access. In this case, the image shows that the remainder of the window had ended up on the balcony, outside the room and the text attached to the scene states that “[Mrs. Van Bliven] locked her door...” before the crime took place. There would not be a reason for the suspect to damage the glass from the inside to leave the room, rather they could simply open the door. Since the glass ended up being on the balcony, readers develop the idea that the person punched through the window from an inside position. If someone …show more content…
Van Bliven did and if a phone wire was cut after the time of seven fifty-five, the person on the receiving end would have gotten a call at seven o’clock. The text states that Mrs. Van Bliven “locked her door...at seven o’clock, and she denied that the phone had rung, although the operator stated that it had.” The image that had been taken before the crime shows a time of seven fifty-five and the phone line was intact, so the phone would have been able to ring at the time of seven o’clock. For this reason, Mrs. Van Bliven would have received the call, but denied that she had gotten the call, so she cut the phone line to make it look like she couldn’t have received it, but it was too far after the operator claimed the call had occurred. This supports the idea that Mrs. Van Bliven had lied about not getting a phone call, rather she did not acknowledge the call, and she executed the scene