As I am unfamiliar with Norwegian society and conventions, I stayed where I was to observe, as I was uncertain whether the whole thing might have been staged in order to rob me. A few moments later, the boy on the bicycle came back. He leaned down over Fredriksen, pulled out the knife and then stood there with it in his hand. Then suddenly he hopped on his bike and pedalled off at high speed. Several other passers-by were now gathering around Fredriksen. I understood now that he really had been the victim of a crime, but that I might myself be suspected and so withdrew and went back to the embassy, rather than approaching the scene of the crime.
The woman who stabbed Fredriksen had dark hair and looked as though she could be somewhere between forty and sixty. She was bare-headed and wearing an old green winter coat. Because of the distance and the dark, I am unfortunately unable to give any more details about her features or clothes.
Dr Sergey Klinkalski, Oslo, 24 March 1972.
‘The vice-ambassador hopes that the information may be of help to your investigation into the terrible murder of Mr Fredriksen,’ the interpreter said.
I said that I hoped so too. Then I thanked the vice-ambassador for his help and cooperation. He left with me this time. We parted at the reception, with a firm and almost friendly handshake.
III
‘Exactly. Thank you. That is exactly what I was hoping for,’ Patricia said, and put the document down beside her cup of coffee.
I remarked that the document provided new information, but not about who killed Per Johan Fredriksen. I added that we might perhaps want to take what Klinkalski said with a pinch of salt, but that what he had written did fit well with what we already knew.
Patricia nodded. ‘Like a glove. All the stuff about him and his intentions is of course nonsense, but his eyewitness account is the truth, I think. There is no reason for him to lie about it. On the contrary, it is not only in his interests, but also in the embassy’s that this is cleared up. His statement does not tell us who the murderer is, but it does give important information about who it is not. Enough for me now to tell you who murdered Eva Bjølhaugen in 1932 and who killed Per Johan and Vera Fredriksen in 1972. So, we are talking about three murders and two murderers. But I warn you, evidence may be problematic, so having the murderers’ identities will not necessarily mean that the case is closed.’
I quickly agreed with her. I probably would have done that no matter what she said in the end. I felt slightly shellshocked – and intoxicated by the possibility that the case might soon be solved.
‘Per Johan Fredriksen’s death acted as a catalyst killing, to a certain extent, which dramatically escalated certain processes that triggered the deaths of three other people in only a matter of days. But the statement from Dr Death confirmed something that I have thought for some time now, in other words, that the murder of Per Johan Fredriksen had nothing to do with the deaths of his wife’s sister in 1932 and his daughter now in 1972. But shall we begin with 1932?’
I quickly said yes. The murder mystery from 1932 had a strange allure for me.
‘The death in 1932 still cannot be explained in isolation. However, there is one interesting detail that I have thought about a lot. Solveig Ramdal heard a thump in the room next door at half past seven. That was because Eva Bjølhaugen fainted as a result of an epileptic seizure. The young Solveig obviously had very good hearing and was on the alert in her room, as only she and no one else heard it. She also heard footsteps in the corridor and neighbouring room earlier. After the bang, she becomes even more attentive and practically stands with her ear to the wall. But she hears nothing – even though a person must have been walking around in the room after Eva fainted. What do you think that means?’
I had never thought about it in that way – and was not sure what to answer when suddenly confronted with it from this angle. So my answer was somewhat noncommittaclass="underline" ‘One possible explanation is that Solveig Ramdal is simply lying, as we only have her word for it.’
Patricia gave a thoughtful nod. ‘I have also considered that possibility. Solveig Ramdal had something to hide and she has lied before. She is an egotist and a cold-blooded chameleon, who would, no doubt, be capable of killing if it was in her interest. But she had no motive for the murder, unless Eva had threatened to reveal the secret of Solveig’s sexuality, but then Eva had no interest in doing that. So we can assume that Solveig is telling the truth. The key question here is which one of the others had the strongest motive, if you ignore the human considerations that most people would assume?’
‘Talking of important questions – have you worked out the significance of the key in the corridor?’
‘As far as 1932 is concerned, I have from the start worked on the theory that the key was a spontaneous attempt to point the suspicion at Eva’s boyfriend, Hauk Rebne Westgaard. And to give the impression that the position of the key was of real importance. But it was not: the murderer was let in by the victim. And forty years later, it was a premeditated attempt to give the impression that it was an enactment of the same murder. This was done by a murderer who had created a kind of alibi in doing this, who had an alibi for the death of Per Johan Fredriksen, and who at first glance was a highly unlikely candidate.’
As Patricia spoke, it suddenly dawned on me who she was referring to. At first it seemed slightly surreal, but then it seemed all the more strange to me that I had not considered this possibility before.
‘The last person that anyone remembers was there,’ I said, tentatively.
Patricia nodded.
‘The one who walks without a sound, even in shoes. So if she was walking on the carpet in the corridor in her stockinged feet, you would not hear her. She was let in by her sister. She knew about her sister’s illness, and understood immediately that she was having an epileptic fit. And she had an obvious motive: with her irritatingly beautiful and popular little sister out of the way, she would become a very attractive heir to a considerable fortune. And even more importantly, I think: she would be rid of a dangerous competitor for the affections of the man she wanted – and later got, with the help of the family fortune.’
So it was as I had thought for the past few minutes, and I still could not believe that I had not seen it until now. I was cheered to an extent when Patricia carried on.
‘To begin with, when the main focus was on Per Johan Fredriksen’s death, we almost lost sight of the grieving widow, who had an alibi. She was no doubt constantly worried that her husband would discover the truth of what happened in 1932. But he had not and nothing he said to his wife showed that he had. So she was genuinely surprised, and mourned his death. Paradoxically, it was only after the death of the daughter, who also did not suspect her mother, that I started to suspect Oda Fredriksen. In the case of Vera, it was not just that someone knew she was at the hotel, but also who she would let into the room. When Solveig Ramdal confessed to being the mystery guest in the next room, I focused more and more on the last person that Vera Fredriksen rang.’
‘But, she only made two phone calls, other than the call to me. Surely one must have been to her sister and the other to Solveig Ramdal?’ I said.
Patricia snorted. ‘Nonsense. She paid for two telephone calls earlier in the day. But she would of course not have paid for the call to her sister, as it was never answered. After she had spoken to Solveig Ramdal, the nervous Vera would undoubtedly have consulted with someone in her family before phoning you. First she rang her sister, who did not get to the phone on time. The other two possibilities were then her brother, who I knew had not killed her, and her mother. Vera Fredriksen really was a little naive, and made a fatal mistake when she trusted that her own mother was not the murderer. Solveig Ramdal arrived first, and was also prepared to kill her if her secret was about to be revealed. But she had no murder to hide and was smart enough to find out what Vera Fredriksen knew first.’