Plot hole: When Columbo tries to explain the position of the cars and the angle of the shot, he gets to the version when they come to the conclusion that if the car behind the other car park one way than the first car wouldn't block the light, so the shooter could see the victim. Colombo says it is possible, but in that case it wouldn't explain the angle of the shot. However there could have been 2 shooters which would instantly answers the question, and Columbo wouldn't come to the conclusion that it was a mistaken identity case. (00:43:00)
Factual error: In common with many other episodes, Columbo and all the other police officers at the crime scene hopelessly contaminate it - none of them wear gloves or protective clothing. Not one artifact recovered from the scene would be usable as evidence.
Trivia: A clever, subtle hint as to Mason's guilt - Columbo arrives at the animal pound just in time to stop him feeding Laurel and Hardy (the dogs he trained to kill on command) a large amount of chocolate treats. He has planned this murder meticulously, and he would be aware that chocolate is extremely toxic to dogs. The amount he is planning to feed them from the bulging bag of large chocolate balls he is holding would kill both dogs within hours if ingested.
Question: The examiner says he can't tell which blow hit the victim first. Columbo says he's lying on his back and says the blow to the forehead was first. Why did he think that? If the first blow hit him on the forehead and he fell on his back, how did he get the second blow on the back of his head while he was lying that way?
Answer: Columbo deduces that the first blow must have been to the front of the head, the force causing the victim to fall backwards and hit the back of his head hard on the ground.
raywest ★