How Did Mrs. Van Bliven Reveale Her Own Necklace?

Mrs. Van Bliven clearly stole her own necklace because the crime scene was not legitimate and because she needed to collect the insurance money from the necklace. First of all, the French doors were securely locked before the necklace was stolen. This evidence is important to proving Mrs. Van Bliven guilty of stealing her own necklace because no one else could have gotten in and stolen the necklace if the doors were locked. In addition, if Schmidt, Mrs. Van Bliven’s neighbor at the hotel, had tried to access the hotel room by tampering with the door, there would have been physical evidence- such as a broken door knob- at the crime scene. After consulting the crime scene photographs, it was clear the only tampering with the door could have been done from the inside. In the crime scene photograph, the …show more content…
Since there is no evidence that Mrs. Van Bliven’s maid, Emmy, was in the room when the necklace was stolen, there is only one person that could have broken the glass- Mrs. Van Bliven. Finally, Mrs. Van Bliven spent lots of money on caviar, a hotel room, and bubble bath and needs to collect the insurance money. This fact is extremely important to proving Mrs. Van Bliven guilty because it would give her a motive for stealing her own necklace. One might ask- “Who would steal their own necklace?”- but it makes much more sense when considering the fact that Mrs. Van Bliven would have been spending lots of money on caviar, a hotel room, and bubble bath. By stealing her own necklace, she could easily collect insurance money and pay for the expensive goodies she bought, but still keep her necklace. Even though all of the suspects were searched for the necklace, they did not search Mrs. Van Bliven’s suitcase, and it is highly likely that her necklace is hidden inside of it. In conclusion, it is clear that Mrs. Van Bliven stole her own necklace because the crime scene is not legitimate and because she would have needed to collect the insurance money after