The Guilty Behind the Drawbridge Killing

Every character in th story is a suspect. Although the case seemed simple, where the madman should be guilty of all accounts, other influencing factors should be considered. The Baron could also be guilty of her death because of how he threatened her in the beginning of the story. It could be the Baroness herself, who led her fate to the death. It could be the servants, who could have called the attention of the madman. It could be every one at the same time, conjoined in a plan to kill the Baroness.

            However, mere ideas will not help solve the matter. Careful deliberation of each probable culprit should be done. It could not have been the Lover because he does not have a motive. The Baroness comes to him in time of boredom, and no one would think that it was such an offence to punish her with death. The story did not sound as if the Lover was jealous as the Baroness continued to stay with her legal spouse. It could not have been the boatman because he was merely doing his job. Her friend could not have been the culprit either because she merely wanted the Baroness to learn a lesson.

            This paper does not believe that the Madman is the culprit behind her death. True, he might have been the one who technically slained her, but he is still a madman. He was no longer conscious of what he was doing or what consequences he might have to face. He could not be found guilty because his interests are questionable. Although he had announced that if the Baroness would cross the drawbridge, and did as he said, could he really be made guilty given his mental capacity?

            With this simple deduction, those remained are the Baron and the Baroness. The person who the Baroness regarded as a friend mentioned that if she did not meet with her lover then she would not have been in that situation in the first place. Although it made sense, that the Baroness seemed to hold all the guilt, one must not over look the reasons for her leaving. She has been threatened by the Baron, and he marriage seemed estranged. Who would not like to get away from the horror of it all?

            In this regard, this paper shall stand with the notion that it was the Baron who should be the most guilty with his wife’s death. There are reasons behind this deduced assumption. Among those involved, the Baron was the only person with the most valid motivation. There are three points that one should consider in deliberating this assumption. These are: the threat at the beginning, the implication of an estranged marriage, and the possibility that he was the one who instigated to have the madman at the gates.

            This paper believes that the Baron should be guilty because of how he threatened his wife. First of all, the story began with his threatening his wife about leaving the castle. Second, it tells a lot aout his personality and behavior with his wife. His jealousy is getting out of place. He could be capable of many unimaginable things. Third, maybe he knew about the affair of the Baroness, and it was his way of warning her. These points should show that he was guilty. He pressured his wife, pushing her away to the arms of another man.

            The Baron should also be guilty because he played a big role in the estrangement of their marriage. In a marriage, it is almost assumed that they love each other. However, given the scenario, perhaps their marriage has been arranged, and neither party are happy about it. Although it can be said that they were not happy, the least they could do sis to try to coexist without hurting the other.

So, the first proof of their estranged marriage is how he threatened her when he’d leave the household. Second, if their marriage was even satisfactory, the Baroness would not have tried to look for a lover to let time pass by. Third, if he even cared about her, even considering his jealous nature, then he should have brought her with him. But that was not the case, he left her and threatened to punish her if she so much as left the castle walls. He should be guilty for causing his wife’s distrust and disgust of him.

            Lastly, maybe he found out about her affair, and acted upon his rage and jealousy. Maybe, he was the one who called for the madman. This paper believes that the Baron had enough motivation to send the madman to their drawbridge. He was a jealous man, that much was confirmed at the beginning of the story. Second, the madman came out of no where.

If they were a noble family, guards should have been at their posts to be at their master’s need. However, their true master was the Baron. Maybe they were ordered to not save Baroness when she arrived. It would have been an order they could not refuse. Lastly, the madman specifically had a target, and that was the Baroness. If he was truly the madman he was, he would not have a target. He would do as he pleased, and kill anyone who would cross the drawbridge. Considering that the Baron instigated the order, it would make sense.

            In this case, the guilty could not be anyone else but the Baron. All these point should prove how he pushed his wife away, and punished her for disobeying him. The Baroness only did only what she did, thinking that she could still be happier. Unfortunately, the Baron had every intention and motivation, psychotically so. He should be guilty of his wife’s death. Also, this paper considers the possibility that the madman could have been the Baron himself. The role of the Baron was not given much justice to his involvment in this. But the mystery and intrigue was difficult not to notice.

            This deliberation of who should be guilty of the death of the Baroness has weaknesses and strengths. One of the strengths of this paper is that it focused on a less likely culprit. Some could have been led by what the friend of the Baroness said in the story, that the Baroness should face the consequences of her folly. The Baron in this story was only given dim light at the beginning of the story. But in any story, every detail is included in its totality. The detail would not have been included if it does not add to the twist of the story.

            A weakness of this paper is that all the assumptions are simply that, they are assumptions. There is no solid ground based on the story supplied. Although the paper tried to convince an audience that the Baron was the person behind her death, the arguments were not as strong as they should be.

            In the production of this paper, difficulties were definitely encountered. First, the story supplied was a simple overview of what happened. In any case, all events and details should be considered before proper deliberation over the matter. Second, since this paper believed in the notion that the Baron was behind her death, it was difficult to connect the dots with a character who was barely mentioned. Lastly, it was most difficult to think about the things that were not mentioned in the story. The simple implications that the characters should be guilty on many accounts cannot suffice the decision to make.