Three Little Pigs vs. The Wolf

I really need to record this one...

It is a simple case, but I am not going to miss a single detail before I appear in court. There are stacks of files and documents, and I have represented Goose, Grimm and Associates for too long to make any errors. Two of the legal assistants, Geppetto and Van Winkle, were sent home for the day – they would be back for Monday’s first session – but I am not done yet. There was no demand to settle things out of court. That was not a surprise with such a gruesome case involving murder and property damage. There seemed to be a real vendetta here, something that just could not be settled between them.

Here are the facts:

Three little pigs – names withheld from all documents pertaining to the case for some reason – purchased separate properties in the town of Aesop and were attacked by The Wolf. There was absolutely no relationship between the assailant and the victims; there was no reason for the three homeowners to fear for their lives.

I was fortunate enough to have some recorded material taken from separate cameras and other devices in order to form some sort of narrative in my mind.

The first home was made of straw – perhaps some sort of zoning violation ignored there – and the assailant approached in the middle of an afternoon, right after the rush hour (no explanation why), demanding entrance into the home. I looked over the dialogue overheard by a neighbour:

“Little pig, little pig, let me in!”

Response of the victim:

“Not by the hairs on my chinny-chin chin!”

No word as to whether or not the victim spoke English as a second language; no information as to how The Wolf knew the size of the victim.

Still not sure how The Wolf was able to find a wind machine to knock down the home (no receipts or papers to show a bill of sale; perhaps it was homemade). All that is available is the fact of the destruction of the home by the assailant and the consumption of the “little pig”. That detail was left out of the news – some still think the pigs got away – but I could see the photos taken by the coroner (Ms. Longstocking has a job that I would not trade all the golden goose eggs in the world for); there were no other items damaged besides the home (nice bungalow from the photo).

The second home was stick-based (cedar and pine – clearly, this was a zoning violation and fire hazard waiting to happen). By all accounts, the home was solid – at least in comparison to the straw home – and was in good condition when The Wolf paid a visit. What I do not understand is why the dialogue used by the assailant is exactly the same for both victims.

“Little pig, little pig, let me…!” Et cetera. Et cetera.

It is clear that the pigs did know each other (familial relationships are not a key issue in this case…but I want to know). They seemed determined to have homes of their own and not have to deal with the problems associated with living outside of the district (I imagine that they must have ties with the Boarville district; again, not relevant to the case). The photos associated with the case are just as gruesome…and confusing. The house did have a recording device, and it was clear that The Wolf did not take a break between both acts of destruction. Why did no one report this as it happened? I will be grilling Chief Mad Hatter about this one…

Anyway, there were the photos and that weird record of what The Wolf actually said to the victim. Only a fragment was saved and transcribed, but it sticks in the mind:

“Then, I’ll…puff…your house in.”

I try not to dig too deeply into the mind of murderers. I really don’t care that much about their motivations or their choice of words. But this might be something worth bringing up in court. What was in his mind as he took out another pig? And how did he raze an entire home, this one a two-story place that was a much better build than the earlier one? Maybe there was a vendetta there…

It’s better to focus on the final victim.

Victim? Well, that might be tricky.

The third pig… Well, this is the real wrench in the works. His home was the best one of the three. At least he had the common sense to build a home out of a standard brick and mortar design that would blend in with the district. And from what I can see here, it was probably the biggest home on the street (again, someone has to tell me more about why the zoning regulations were ignored for these three). The Wolf did not attack on the same day. There was a gap of twenty-four hours between attacks (a grim thought: he must have been full enough to ignore the last pig until he was ready to eat again). And he used the exact same MO when he appeared at that new home.

“Little pig, little pig…”

It is unsure whether or not the pig was aware of the previous attacks, but he did have a good security system that worked better than anything seen on the block. And his response was the same.

“Not by the hair on my…” Well, that is all clear (strange way of responding to an intruder).

Here is where the problem lies.

The pig did not record the rest of The Wolf’s taunt. I will have to make the assumption that the words were exactly the same and he, once again, attempted to raze the home with whatever wind device was available to him (again, not a single piece of evidence supports my theory, but the assailant had no weapons or devices of any kind by the time he was caught).

The pig must have been aware of how secure he was. There is evidence that the siege of his home took place over more than a week. There is also more evidence that the two of them were in verbal communication with each other over that same period of time. There is the testimony of Old Mother Hubbard and that old lady living in a shoe with all those kids (too young to be reliable witnesses, perhaps). Apparently, the pig and The Wolf (why do I keep writing him with capital letters?) wanted to arrange a schedule for the assault, and the former tricked the latter into being out of town when he needed to continue with his professorship and staff meetings (at least he had steady work compared to the other pigs). This can all be raised in court as mitigating circumstances and a good explanation as to why the pig did what he did.

Those photographs…

Again, I do not like to dive too deeply into the minds of criminals. I also tell myself not to go too far into the thoughts of defendants. Everyone has their reasons, even if their reasons seem insane to a sober and clearheaded representative of the law (does such a thing really exist?)

Here is the wrench: The Wolf was alive when the police broke in and found him in the fireplace. Why did the pig bother to stay in the house just to let the police run over the place like that? I do not know. He was sitting at his table, marking papers, sorting through his courses, drinking a glass of very expensive red wine (pairs well with revenge, I guess), and ignoring the cries of the assailant.

Yeah, assailant…

Not looking forward to this case.

But if I can prove that mental distress and the loss of his loved ones provide enough of a reason to torture someone who ended up in their home, then I could make partner. This is what I need to prove myself in their eyes. Goose and Grimm, you have your man.

Maybe I need a good night’s sleep…

Wife is probably worried about me, too. Should call her about dinner.

Jack Sprat, out.

*

Thank you for reading!

If you liked this, you can add your Insights, Comment, leave a Heart, Tip, Pledge, or Subscribe. I will appreciate any support you have shown for my work.

You can find more poems, stories, and articles by Kendall Defoe on my Vocal profile. I complain, argue, provoke and create...just like everybody else.

Give it a look...