Read No Way to Die for Free Online

my experience as a special agent in army CID said something pretty different. I’d conducted examinations of about a dozen suicides as a law enforcement officer in just under four years. In all but a couple of cases, there was
always
someone saying, “There must be some sort of mistake. He (or on a couple of occasions, she) would never take his (or her) own life.” There were
always
suspicions by the survivors. To admit that your loved one was messed up enough to take his own life seemed to most people an admission that the whole family was messed up—that they’d somehow missed, or ignored, the victim’s cry for help. Sometimes this was warranted, sometimes not. Yet it didn’t change the basic fact that, almost without fail, in every suicide case I examined where there was even a
question
as to whether it was murder or suicide, we ultimately found that the person had, in fact, killed himself.
    I think part of the problem is that people are unique. It can be really hard to reconcile conflicting sets of behavior after someone has died. Think about it. How can you tell why an irrational person did what they did? Ninety-nine percent of the time, someone who'’ll kill himself is not acting rationally. So how can a rational person look at the aftermath and try to make rational judgments?
    In addition, the textbook solutions are generally based on “averages” or “typicals.” But any individual person is neither “average” nor “typical”—like I said, they’re unique. They’re individuals and, as such, they don’t necessarily fit any profiles. Problems invariably arise when you compare a single individual’s behavior with a group profile. If the individual’s behavior doesn’t fit the “pattern” perfectly—and it seldom does—then family members who already don’t want to believe their loved one could actually kill himself become suspicious. Essentially, you have an irrational person who acted in unpredictable ways being second-guessed by people who don’t have a clue about what really happened.
    But just because they’re suspicious doesn’t mean their loved one was murdered. It does mean the wise investigator treads very carefully, though. Emotions are high and very close to the surface at times like these.
    Breakfast arrived, and we paused as the waitress served us.
    “Thank you for filling us in,” I said, after the waitress left. “Let’s continue while we eat. Did the police interview you?”
    “Yes, quite extensively.”
    “Do you remember who did the interview? We would need to talk with this person.”
    “Katherine faxed me the detective’s card,”Dad said. He opened his briefcase and handed a photocopy of the card to me—Detective Inez Johnson, Homicide. I didn’t recognize the name.
    “Thanks,” I said. “We’ll need to talk to her.” I folded the paper and put it in my pocket before turning back to Katherine. “Katherine, I apologize,” I said, “but as we proceed this morning, it’s very likely that Toni and I will be asking some of the same questions that the police asked.”
    “That’s okay,” she said. “I think the police came to the wrong conclusion. I
want
to get a second opinion. That’s why I said yes when your dad suggested I talk to you.”
    “Good,” I said. “Well, let me start by getting a little background. Tell me about Thomas.”
    Katherine nodded.
    “In a nutshell, Thomas was a brilliant mathematician,” she said. “He had a PhD from Stanford. He was nationally known for his work on cryptology algorithms. He was published, and he had a huge future. He was a mathematical child prodigy who continued to push the envelope as he grew up. At the same time, at home he was a warm, caring father to our two beautiful children. He wasn’t one of those men who spent fourteen hours a day at the office and ignored his family.” She sniffed. “He was a wonderful husband. Like I said, he was my best friend.”
    “How old was he?” Toni asked.
    “He