Ronald Haymes’s desertion from the army

Ronald Haymes’s desertion from the army creates a misleading connection between his wife, Phillipa Haymes, and the shooting at Little Paddocks. The investigation initially makes his disappearance seem compatible with a desperate fugitive’s involvement in a robbery, but a later identification establishes that he died before the crime. His absence has left Phillipa with reason to remain silent, while the circumstances of his death complicate the judgment attached to his desertion.

Background and First Mention

The possibility of a detective’s presence at Little Paddocks becomes a subject of conversation when Miss Hinchcliffe reports seeing a man near the henhouse. Julia identifies him as their detective, and Edmund Swettenham jokes that the detective is there to prevent someone from committing murder. The remarks do not yet identify Ronald Haymes or establish any connection to him, but they place the household under the shadow of a possible crime and make the question of who might be suspected explicit.

The subject becomes more concrete when Phillipa is questioned about her husband. Asked whether she is certain she has not seen him for years, she is challenged with the possibility that she met him roughly a fortnight earlier. The question links her to Mitzi’s emphatic account of a man she encountered in the summerhouse. The investigator proposes that the man Phillipa returned from work to meet may have been her husband, rather than Rudi Scherz. Phillipa denies seeing anyone there and insists that she does not know where her husband is.

Why Desertion Raises Suspicion

The investigation treats Ronald’s status as a deserter as a reason to consider him a possible participant in a robbery. Craddock suggests that deserters can be desperate, may become involved in hold-ups, and may possess foreign revolvers brought back from abroad. In the context of the Little Paddocks shooting, those points give the suspicion a practical shape: an absent soldier might be short of money, acquainted with his wife, and connected to a weapon or robbery.

That reasoning remains circumstantial. Phillipa rejects the proposed meeting in the summerhouse and denies knowing where Ronald is; she does not confirm that she gave him money or that he took part in any crime. Her emphatic denial nevertheless does not persuade Craddock, who tells Rydesdale that he believes she was not speaking truthfully. At this stage, her silence is open to an incriminating interpretation, while the facts about Ronald’s whereabouts remain unresolved.

Identification and the Timeline

Rydesdale resolves the most urgent uncertainty by recalling a recent road accident. A man had been taken to Milchester General after being struck by a lorry; he had rescued a child from its path and was himself run down. He carried no papers, no one came forward to identify him, and he died without regaining consciousness. He was eventually identified as Ronald Haymes, an Army deserter and former captain in the South Loamshires.

The dates exclude him from the Little Paddocks shooting. Ronald was admitted to the hospital on October 28, and the hold-up took place on October 29. Although he had an old Chipping Cleghorn bus ticket and a reasonable amount of money with him, his presence in hospital before the crime means he could not have participated in it. This discovery turns the suspected fugitive into a man whose death had already removed him from the chain of events.

Phillipa’s Silence and Ronald’s Legacy

The identification also changes the meaning of Phillipa’s refusal to discuss her husband. Rydesdale suggests that she may not have known about the accident and may have believed Ronald was involved in the hold-up. If she thought the missing man had taken part in a crime, she would naturally have been reluctant to speak about him. Her reticence therefore remains significant to the inquiry, but it need not mean that she was protecting a living accomplice or had certain knowledge of the shooting.

The police distinguish Ronald’s desertion from the act that ended his life. Craddock recognizes the rescue as gallant, and Rydesdale agrees that it was brave, adding that desertion need not have resulted from cowardice. The conclusion does not erase Ronald’s military history; it sets that history beside a final action that gives it a different moral measure. His death also changes the prospects of those left behind: Craddock says he is glad for Phillipa and their boy, and Rydesdale notes that the boy need not be ashamed of his father and that Phillipa will be able to marry again.