|
Zola posted:Well, pick out the next two mysteries so Guy A. Person and I can get ready to host. It doesn't bother me to have two books going at the same time. If it's up to me, then I'll go out on a limb and nominate... The Body on the Beach, by Simon Brett The Ponson Case, by Freeman Willis Crofts As a disclaimer I haven't read either of these, so the possibility exists that they're no good, but the word on the internet seems positive.
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 00:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 09:17 |
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:If it's up to me, then I'll go out on a limb and nominate... I know nothing about mysteries, so those are fine by me. What about our other thread participants?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 00:37
|
|
|
Sure.  (I also know nothing) The Ponson Case is the cheaper one, though, if it comes down to that. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 01:23
|
|
|
Autumncomet posted:Sure. Well, it seemed to take about a month to go through the last novel, I don't know if the holidays hindered or helped. One book a month isn't too bad, I don't think, and if we get an advance list going, there's always Paperback Swap
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 01:38
|
|
|
Zola posted:I know nothing about mysteries, so those are fine by me. What about our other thread participants? Yeah, if you want to start one of those by all means. I definitely want to hear from the people who wanted to participate but had read these two books. Once they weigh in I will choose one, either from the Prof's list or otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 03:05
|
|
|
Just got my hands on Murder Is Easy. I'll have the first three chapters finished before bed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 03:35
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:If it's up to me, then I'll go out on a limb and nominate... I haven't read either, but 'The Ponson Case' isn't available for my e-reader, so I vote 'The Body on the Beach'. Going to get started on 'Murder is Easy' tonight.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 04:05
|
|
|
I've just read the first three chapters, don't have much to speculate on yet. This is completely random, but could the limited number of men in the town somehow have something to do with it? I'm not sure what, exactly... Also, I suspect accusations of witchcraft will come up at some point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 08:02
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:So I was going back because I remembered there had been suggestions of other books. Maud Moonshine, are there any books from either of these two writers that you have already read? I want to make sure we can get a book everyone can participate in, since it seems like you and Carbon Thief have both read a lot of Christie. I haven't read anything by Rex Stout, Ngio Marsh, Simon Brett or Freeman Willis Crofts - so that covers everything that's been mentioned, I think. There's also loads of other mystery writers I haven't read / haven't read many of (Ian Rankin, P D James etc). Glad everyone's enjoying the book so far 
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 10:22
|
|
|
The Duke of Avon posted:I've just read the first three chapters, don't have much to speculate on yet. This is completely random, but could the limited number of men in the town somehow have something to do with it? I'm not sure what, exactly... Also, I suspect accusations of witchcraft will come up at some point. That sort've makes sense, and we have also had 3 of the 4 victims as men. Do you have any preference for which you want to read Zola? I am finishing up a few books and should be done probably by the end of next week with those, so at that point I'll probably pick and read through one of these for either the next book or after you. Guy A. Person fucked around with this message at 21:12 on Jan 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 16:32
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:That sort've makes sense, and we have also had 3 of the 4 victims as men. No, either is fine. We might consider switching from The Ponson Case to The Pit Prop Syndicate since Pit Prop Syndicate is on Project Gutenberg and is free, but I'm fine with whatever you choose--if you can't choose, just flip a coin and I'll take the other. Zola fucked around with this message at 16:56 on Jan 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 19:17
|
|
|
Haha, well okay. I am still going to wait until I finish these books I am reading, and in the meantime I will look into those 3 to see which one I want to read. I'll let you know in the next few days.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 19:31
|
|
|
As conversation seems to have died down, I suggest continuing! End of chapter seven seems a likely stopping point. Feel free to go back and remove spoilers for anything from chapters 1 - 3.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 15:43
|
|
|
I want to say that Christie is setting up a contrast between real life mysteries and book mysteries. Whether she plans to use this to subvert expectations or not is unclear. I also don't trust our new 'assistant'. 
Mecca-Benghazi fucked around with this message at 23:24 on Feb 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 23:37
|
|
|
Okay, wait a minute. When the hell did it become a foregone conclusion that the murderer was a man? I mean, I kind of got that impression too, but I don't think Miss Pinkerton ever said so and therefore I am calling it right now: the murderer is a woman. The hat paint would be either a red herring or an attempt to frame someone. Right now my main suspect is Miss Waynflete; she seems competent enough for a confusing whodunit murder plot. Bridget being set up as a love interest seems too obvious so I am also suspicious of her.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 03:31
|
|
|
The Duke of Avon posted:Okay, wait a minute. When the hell did it become a foregone conclusion that the murderer was a man? I mean, I kind of got that impression too, but I don't think Miss Pinkerton ever said so and therefore I am calling it right now: the murderer is a woman. I was going to say this too. That one passage where Luke just repeatedly said man like "the murderer is a man who did manly things to kill these people and we must stop this man" stood out for me. I am sure it would have just been passed right over in Christie's day, but here it stuck out like a sore thumb and seemed like it is setting up for a reversal of expectations. I also gotta say I liked the handy reference in Chapter 7. I was just thinking that I hoped someone posted a clue list because I started lose track of all the characters and details and then Chapter 7 provided a handy list. Still don't have any solid theories beyond agreeing with The Duke just yet. Guy A. Person fucked around with this message at 18:39 on Feb 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 04:43
|
|
|
Zola posted:No, either is fine. We might consider switching from The Ponson Case to The Pit Prop Syndicate since Pit Prop Syndicate is on Project Gutenberg and is free, but I'm fine with whatever you choose--if you can't choose, just flip a coin and I'll take the other. So I was mulling this over this morning and I will go ahead and get the Body on the Beach. My brother gave me a $100 Amazon gift card for Christmas and somehow I managed to not spend it all the next day so the extra cost doesn't bother me, and I am leaning toward reading something more modern anyway. Of course the other people in the thread will need to buy it, but if everyone needs time to find and procure a cheap copy I figure we can always do Pit Prop Syndicate next.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 16:42
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:So I was mulling this over this morning and I will go ahead and get the Body on the Beach. My brother gave me a $100 Amazon gift card for Christmas and somehow I managed to not spend it all the next day so the extra cost doesn't bother me, and I am leaning toward reading something more modern anyway. I think there's plenty of time this way, so I'll do the Ponson Case--that gives everyone probably two months to find a copy of the book. ProfessorProf, if you would be so kind to update the OP so that everyone knows what books will be next, that would be great. On to the current section. I agree that the killer could be a woman, I went back to chapter one and Miss Pinkerton said "the look on a person's face" -- the only time she referenced "him" was when she was speaking of the Abercrombie case and how somebody had said there was a special look he gave his victims. Hopefully there will be some more information in subsequent chapters on people who own cars--if Miss Pinkerton's was murdered, then likely it was someone from the village. I am hoping for more information about Jim Harvey, Amy's boyfriend, because he's a mechanic so conceivably has the know-how to cover up the fact that a car has hit a pedestrian. Being a mechanic, he also has access to cars, meaning he could use someone else's car to divert suspicion--he might even have copies of keys. Zola fucked around with this message at 00:33 on Feb 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 19:30
|
|
|
I know I'm late on this, but as someone who'd read A Murder is Announced, I really enjoyed seeing people gradually circling in on the solution. I've not read this one before, and I've finally caught up. I gathered from Chapter 6 that Luke thinks the murderer is male because Mrs Pinkerton "spoke of the look in his eyes when he was measuring up his next victim." I agree with Zola that this probably stems from when Pinkerton compares "the look on [the murderer's] face" to what was said about Abercrombie the poisoner. So the killer definitely isn't necessarily male. But it seems Pinkerton knew whoever she thought was the killer fairly well. I'm currently entertaining the idea of the killer being Lord Whitfield, though this solution feels a bit too obvious. Two of the supposed victims (Amy Gibbs, Tommy Pierce) worked for Whitfield at some point, so they could know something that Whitfield didn't want getting out, since he cares a lot about reputation and power. (Tommy was pushed from the window of the house which Whitfield converted into a library, if I remember rightly - he could have known the layout of the building well enough to make a beeline for the right window, shove Tommy and escape without anyone knowing he was even there.) Also, it's been strongly suggested that Dr Humbleby could have been killed for opposing a water scheme which Whitfield supported. Given the variety of methods employed, the different levels of subtlety involved, all the different locations that need to be broken into, etc., I'm also inclined to think that there's more than one murderer, or that there's one murderer with an accomplice or two.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 00:05
|
|
|
Zola posted:ProfessorProf, if you would be so kind to update the OP so that everyone knows what books will be next, that would be great. Done. Also, finished chapter 7. On the subject of the hat paint, I see four possibilities: The murderer got the color wrong because he's a man, the murderer got the color wrong to make it seem like it was a man, Bridget is lying, Bridget is mistaken. Bridget is lying: I can't see why she would pull this. The color of the hat paint ought to be easy to confirm, and if she was lying about it, her lie would be called into question, and it would just make her look more suspicious. Ruling it out. Bridget is mistaken: I can't see why this would be the case. Ruling it out. The murderer is a man: Luke came to the conclusion, so that's a point against it, but not ruling it out. The murderer wants people to think it's a man: Almost seems too convoluted for a Christie scheme - simplify, simplify. What would this case look like? The murderer sneaks into Amy's bedroom and replaces her cough linctus with hat paint, but specifically chooses a tacky color on the off chance that somebody picks up on it and concludes that only a man would have that little fashion sense? It's too contrived for me. I'm going to sit on the other side of the fence for now: Either there's some crucial detail we don't know about that crime scene yet, or the killer is a man. Quinn2win fucked around with this message at 00:11 on Feb 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 22:53
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:
Who might have hat paint in the first place? If it were a crime of opportunity, such as the boyfriend, he might have just grabbed it from somewhere and thought nothing of it, just that it was convenient. The paint might even belong to Miss Waynflete but of course she didn't want to say anything for fear of being accused. It might even have belonged to the late Miss Pinkerton. Also, has anyone noticed that the fact that the cat has sore ears has been mentioned twice? I'm sure there's some significance to his sore ears. Edit: Wait! I have discovered a Clue. The hat paint apparently had oxalic acid in it, they said Miss Gibbs died of oxalic acid poisoning. I did a search on oxalic acid and it's why you only use the stalks of rhubarb for pie and not the leaves, and I also saw that beekeepers have been using it for varroa mite control. Given that this book came out in 1939, I think that it's not outside of the range of possibility that it was also used for treating ear mites, likely the animal's ears were painted with a solution of oxalic acid such as with hat paint. So I predict a scene with Wonky Pooh where someone notices the insides of his ears are stained red. Again, the hat paint might legitimately have belonged to Miss Wayneflete and she was afraid to speak up, but that means it could well have belonged to Miss Pinkerton, as she had observed that Wonky Pooh's ears were very sore. Zola fucked around with this message at 00:33 on Feb 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 02:06
|
|
|
Excellent catch! I know we have been told about Winky Pooh's ears multiple times at this point so it certainly is a clue. Is everyone ready to move on? Guy A. Person fucked around with this message at 18:38 on Feb 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 21:23
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:Excellent catch! I know we have been told about Winky Pooh's ears multiple times at this point so it certainly is a clue. I am--I want to get more information about the characters. I'm wondering if it might turn out Amy Gibbs' poisoning truly was accidental--if she'd been helping Miss Waynflete medicate Wonky Pooh, she might have had the bottle of hat paint in her room. I'm going to keep my eye on Miss Waynflete as well Zola fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Feb 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2013 00:11
|
|
|
It would make some bit of sense - right now 3 of the 4 victims are men with bad reputations, and Amy has always seemed a little out of place. Now that I think of her murder being an accident, I am wondering whether the title "Murder is Easy" is in reference to the fact that the first murder was accidental and the rest followed because the murderer realized just how easy it was to get rid of people they didn't like. Now I am sort've suspecting Mrs. Pinkerton did it and that she might have just up and got hit by a car on accident on the way to turn herself in. Also FYI going to start on The Body on the Beach tonight! Guy A. Person fucked around with this message at 18:38 on Feb 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2013 23:02
|
|
|
Are we going to do The Ponson Case/The Body on the Beach at the same time as Murder is Easy or are you two just reading it to lead us through the discussion ahead of time?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2013 23:06
|
|
|
This book seems almost designed to be read in three chapter chunks, so I say we go on to the end of chapter ten.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2013 23:18
|
|
|
Yeah I am just reading it ahead of time. I don't think we've worked out exactly which one is next just yet; probably depends on our schedules, when this book ends, which of us finishes our prep books, etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2013 23:20
|
|
|
Autumncomet posted:Are we going to do The Ponson Case/The Body on the Beach at the same time as Murder is Easy or are you two just reading it to lead us through the discussion ahead of time? Reading it ahead so we can lead people through it. It's the weekend, so I'm sure I'll get it read.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2013 01:08
|
|
|
So we finally get into the witchcraft subplot! Not entirely sure how it ties into everything since it was just introduced, though. Also interesting that it's mostly men we've heard about, I wonder if once again that ties into the imbalance of men and women somehow. SO, other clues: Dr. Thomas seemed to get very irritated at the mention that he might have come across someone he believed to be a murderer, then went into detail about his theories on murderers. Unfortunately, the book he lends to Luke appears to be entirely fictional so no help there. The Anna Helm excerpt he talks about is interesting - "genuinely heartbroken at each death". Some good info on Abbot and other local gossip from Mrs. Pierce but I am not sure what to make of it just yet. Guy A. Person fucked around with this message at 16:12 on Feb 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2013 18:37
|
|
|
At this point it's obvious that Ellsworthy is playing a big part in the story, either as some kind of enabler or a major red herring. Given the importance and constant mention of witchcraft and his rumored dabbling in black magic orgies I'd say it's the former. I can't imagine he's the murderer though, that would be too straightforward the way he's being played up this early in the book. Again, with how often witchcraft is brought up and Bridget's funny state at Witches' Meadow I feel like she's got something to do with this as well. Maybe she's in cahoots with other women in the village (looking at you, Waynflete)? Hell, maybe there's a secret society war going on between an established witches' coven and an uprising satanist cult. Okay, that may be getting a little crazy. But I definitely think multiple people have committed murder and there may be some kind of conspiracy related to satanism/witchcraft. Dr. Thomas is in on it. We also learn that Tommy Pierce was involved. He is said to have been part of the orgies and posessed a red cossack. Red, as in red hat paint. Which, as we have already theorized, might have been used by Waynflete for her dog before it was repurposed to kill Amy Gibbs. Both were employed by Waynflete. Murder as an initiation rite for uprising satanists? I never read an Agatha Christie book before so I'm letting my thoughts run a little wild here. Then again, the book constantly goes through great lengths to remind us that the murderer is the one you least suspect. Locking in now: Miss Pinkerton faked her own death, she's the butcher of Wychwood-under-Ashe. Entenzahn fucked around with this message at 10:18 on Feb 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 12:10
|
|
|
I almost want to say there are multiple murderers because the only people who suspect there's one are suspicious and/or dead.
Mecca-Benghazi fucked around with this message at 05:10 on Feb 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 21:07
|
|
|
I've got to throw this out there... a couple of times it's been mentioned that Ellsworthy has a greenish tinge to his hands. Well, I did some digging, and it's most likely Raynaud's phenomenon (although we think of cyanosis as causing a blue tinge, some people get a green tinge). Raynaud's phenomenon has a great many possible causes, but one of them is mercury. This seems to bring us back to hats again. Everyone has heard of "mad as a hatter", because mercury was used in felting process. This book came out in 1939, and mercury for hat-making wasn't banned in the US until 1941. I'm not sure when it was banned in the UK, but I'd guess a similar date, so probably the effects of mercury poisoning were fairly common knowledge at that time. According to Wikipedia:[/spoiler] quote:The hatters, after being exposed to the mercury fumes, acted shy in one moment and highly irritable in the next moment Mr. Ellsworthy has been described as "a very exquisite young man" with "long black artistic hair". Could he have been working with a felt hat and gotten a light dose of mercury poisoning? Miss Waynflete had a felt hat as well. This may still be a red herring, because the anesthetic Procaine, perhaps better known by the more familiar "Novocaine" can also cause greenish-tinged hands in people who have an allergy to one of the metabolites. Furthermore, we know that Mr. Ellsworthy messes about with watercolors, so it's perfectly possible that his hands were simply stained from one of his paints--yet another thing that can cause greenish-tinged hands is exposure to copper dust, so if he was mixing his own colors, he may have used verdigris for the green. We need more info. Has anyone figured out what the "water scheme" they've mentioned repeatedly is all about? I am ready to move on if everyone else is. Zola fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Feb 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2013 04:12
|
|
|
Finished chapter 10. Reiterating that I love this dialogue writing in this book. Luke and Thomas's cheerful discussion on the pros and cons of killing anyone unfit to live was charming to read. Speculation on new info: This is just a theory, but I've been focusing on Dr. Thomas's description of the murderer mentality - specifically the bit where he says that a true homicidal maniac believes themself to be acting in self-defense. This, and the witchcraft subplot. What if it's not the murderer who's into the dark arts, but the victims? A lot fits this theory, I think. Someone's scared for the sanctity of their community and is trying to kill all the perceived satan-worshippers before they get out of control. The killer believes that she is acting in self defense for the good of the community. We know that at least one of the victims was part of Ellsworthy's little cult. Submitting theory: The murderer is Rose Humbleby, and her next target is Bridget. Quinn2win fucked around with this message at 07:24 on Feb 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2013 00:11
|
|
|
Chapter Fourteen gives us another example of Luke summing up his opinion of the case, so I suggest we read to the end of that chapter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2013 21:15
|
|
|
I swear if this book ends with Bridget and Luke ending up together.  I'm not quite sure where the witchcraft and superstition ties in exactly, but the fact that it hasn't really come up yet means it will later. And at this point, I'm convinced it wasn't a man (or if more than one, not all were men), because the story keeps harping on gender and gender roles to an almost ridiculous extent. Mecca-Benghazi fucked around with this message at 01:23 on Feb 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 07:15
|
|
|
And so Rose gets a motive on another one of the victims! There's not much else keeping the theory together, though. Quinn2win fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Feb 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 07:23
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:And so Rose gets a motive on another one of the victims! So I had this in mind when I was reading it too. My theory on Rose is that Dr. Thomas, having been forbidden to see Rose by her father, began to take interest in Amy while he was treating Mrs. Horton. So Amy killed Mrs. Horton so that Thomas wouldn't have any reason to see Amy. When he continued to, Rose killed Amy as well. And obviously she has a motive to kill her father. Not sure how the other 2 tie in, although as with Mrs. Pinkerton it could be a case of trying to shut people up at this point. Did I miss anything else with regards to Rose? My other theory is still that the title and repetition of "Murder is Easy" is itself a clue - that someone accidentally killed the first victim (or else made a half-hearted attempt at murder which easily succeeded) and when they realized how easy it was they continued to kill people just out of convenience. So they murder Carter for being a belligerent drunk, Tommy Pierce for being a little poo poo and possibly for his involvement in whatever bizarre rituals are going on, and Dr. Humbleby possibly as a way to intervene on Rose's behalf. In which case the real mystery is who committed those first few murders, after which the murderer just started doing it out of habit almost. It also sounds, from the end of Chapter 14, that we are going to get another murder soon, so I think that will give us a good deal of clues based on how it all fits together with the other murders. Guy A. Person fucked around with this message at 18:29 on Feb 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 16:27
|
|
|
Okay, wow, this is pretty hard. We keep running in circles instead of going forward, cycling through all kinds of witnesses and every new clue points at five different people and exempts two other. Honestly Luke's roundup at Chapter 14 is pretty crap too, so here's a few things he left out. The account of Humbleby's widow is very interesting as well. She speaks of a wickedness and mentions that her late husband was on the right side or something. I don't know what to make of that. One of my original theories was that there might be two factions involved in a secret war, and that would fit. But it's pretty far out there and just as with any other "multiple murderers" theory, there's one catch: Mrs Pinkerton. It's always back to her. From what we know she knew the murderer, it was one, and she was familiar with him/her. But what does that actually amount to? Maybe the person she recognized was responsible for the murders, but somebody else always did the dirty work? She was run over by a car. I'm not an expert in criminology or mechanics, but from what I know, poo poo like that leaves a mark. I doubt you could just rent a car in London, run somebody over and return it. I also doubt you could just park it in front of your house and Luke wouldn't notice the dents. So multiple murderers or no, I think anybody whose car has been seen by Luke is out of the question as Pinkerton's murderer. He went to the mechanic and they were busy with something else in the background - the murder car? So much to consider. I guess it all starts with Mrs Horton. She was the first to go, the one whose death set everything into motion. Who could have killed her? Amy didn't like her and certainly had an opportunity to get her hands on Ellsworthy's potion. Whitfield sent her peaches and other edibles, which is a fact so deliberately subtly told it shouldn't be overlooked. I also like the theory that it was accidental. Dr. Thomas isn't the only one who could have killed Humbleby. Rose is his daughter and probably knows her fair share of medical stuff. Knowing the distrustful relationship between Dr. Humbleby and Thomas, he might have gotten treated by Rose. She's also athletic and climbing the window to Amy Gibbs' room is supposedly easy. I don't know if she would really murder her own father though, or Pinkerton. She certainly had the opportunity, with her husband-to-be out of town. If she killed Amy or Horton she might have sent a letter to the lawyer, which Tommy read and blackmailed her with. But this is really just blind guesswork now. It could be anything else. I do suspect Waynflete a little. She's smart, has distinctive eyes (Pinkerton saw it in the murderer's look), knew the first murder victim very well, knew Pinkerton very well and is a very tidy person so she might have a motive to "clean up the village" (Gibbs, Pierce, Carter, Humbleby). Rose certainly has a strong case as well. Halfway through the book it's way too early to focus on anyone though. I still maintain the theory that it could be multiple culprits, maybe under one puppet master. Whitfield should be watched to that end. The book seems to want to throw another murder at us so things might be a little clearer soon. But right now I'm not willing to settle on anything. Calling it: next victim is Ellsworthy. Entenzahn fucked around with this message at 21:50 on Feb 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 20:46
|
|
|
I missed the whole thing about Tommy having a red hat. So maybe the cult or whatever it is wears red cassocks, but to mark themselves in public they wear red hats. Sort've like how groups like the Freemasons have hand shakes or whatever to be able to spot another member. In which case maybe someone is specifically eliminating people from this group.
Guy A. Person fucked around with this message at 18:29 on Feb 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 21:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 09:17 |
|
|
Pretty sure Tommy had a red cassock, which is an ankle length robe worn by clerics of the Roman Catholic church. I honestly don't know whether a robe could be died by hat pant. Hat paint has kind of died out as a thing so goodness knows. Regardless, Tommy did not have a red hat (as far as we know).
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2013 22:06
|
|