Question

When Stephens comes back to the cell he jumps to a conclusion and the whole machinery blindly goes by his assumption without even checking the identity of the injured ‘McLeery’. Does this show how hasty conjectures can prevent one from seeing the obvious? How is the criminal able to predict such negligence?

Answer 1

On his return, Stephens saw McLerry bleeding profusely in the cell. Presuming the man he had escorted to the gate to be Evans and not McLeery, he raised an alarm. None of the official staff tried to verify whether this McLeery was the real one. As the bleeding McLeery offered to help the police to track Evans, nobody questioned how he knew the plan. Later, when the Governor nabbed Evans and sent him back to jail with the prison officers, he did not notice that this officer was unknown to him. It was soon unearthed that the officers were Evan’s own men who helped him escape again. Thus, it is definite that the gullible officials made speculations in a jiffy which amounted to their subsequent negligence.

On the contrary, a plotting criminal makes a foolproof plan taking care of the intricacies and does not make hasty assumptions. He has back-up plans ready. Also, a criminal's mind is observant enough to predict any possible negligence on the part of the officials. Evans too must have easily observed these during his stay in the prison, and planned accordingly.