Paris

Paris matters to the novel as both a real destination and a point in a disputed timetable. Raimundo García del Olmo’s father, already in his eighties, was found dead by his son when he returned from a Paris trip for a congress in his specialty. The journey placed Raimundo away from home at a moment investigators examined closely, turning the city into a hinge between professional travel and suspicion of murder.

The Congress Trip and the Murder

Raimundo spent five days in Paris attending the congress. The inquiry into his father’s death scrutinized the trip in detail: investigators wanted to know whom he had met, which sessions he attended or missed, when he arrived late, and what motions he presented or deliberations he joined. The questions tested whether his professional itinerary could conceal an opportunity to travel to Madrid, commit the murder, and return to Paris before his next public appearance.

The timetable narrowed to the night after a congress opera performance to which the delegates had been invited. Raimundo said he chaired the first session the following morning and arrived punctually. He was able to establish that there was no direct Paris–Madrid air connection and return within that interval. That evidence addressed a specific version of the accusation: it did not, by itself, settle every conceivable route between the two cities.

Paris as an Alibi Under Examination

In conversation with Alice Gould, Raimundo emphasized the limits of what the absence of a direct flight could prove. He asked how he could know that no indirect combination of journeys might have made the trip possible in one night, naming routes through Copenhagen and Rome and possibilities involving Turkey or Cairo. His point did not establish that such a journey had occurred; it kept open a logistical uncertainty even after the direct route had been ruled out.

Paris therefore functions less as a scene of action than as a testable location in the murder investigation. The congress provides a public schedule against which Raimundo’s movements can be checked, while the proposed overnight journey makes distance and travel time part of the case. His punctual appearance at the morning session supports his account, yet Alice’s exchange with him preserves the distinction between disproving one route and proving that no route was possible.

Role in Alice Gould’s Investigation

The Paris itinerary gives Alice a concrete way to examine the suspicion surrounding Raimundo without treating his professional standing as proof either of guilt or innocence. The investigators’ questions about sessions, meetings, and timing make his conduct during the five days relevant evidence; the lack of a direct flight offers a specific constraint, while the hypothetical detours expose what remains unverified. Paris’s significance lies in that tension: it anchors an alibi in dates and public obligations, but does not erase the uncertainty that prompted the inquiry.