Everything about this episode fits in well the the series generally. It is very well produced and acted, and generally enjoyable to watch.
The problem with the episode lies in the fact that the culprit decides to leave the most inculpatory pieces of evidence at the scene of the crime. The culprit broke into a locked room where the victim had died to retrieve a letter that proves his guilt. When he hears Poirot and some others coming to the room he decides to tear up the letter in 3- strips, crush them lengthwise and leave them with some other pieces of crushed paper in a vase on the mantelpiece. He then escapes through a second door before Poirot et al. arrive.
Why the hell didn't he just take the letter? What he should have done is so obvious that it spoils the episode. Fortunately this information is only revealed to the audience at the end of the show, so one gets to enjoy most of the episode before the incredible action of the perpetrator is revealed.
The problem with the episode lies in the fact that the culprit decides to leave the most inculpatory pieces of evidence at the scene of the crime. The culprit broke into a locked room where the victim had died to retrieve a letter that proves his guilt. When he hears Poirot and some others coming to the room he decides to tear up the letter in 3- strips, crush them lengthwise and leave them with some other pieces of crushed paper in a vase on the mantelpiece. He then escapes through a second door before Poirot et al. arrive.
Why the hell didn't he just take the letter? What he should have done is so obvious that it spoils the episode. Fortunately this information is only revealed to the audience at the end of the show, so one gets to enjoy most of the episode before the incredible action of the perpetrator is revealed.
