18 February 2026

Pyramid Schemes


A Cairo pub

 Last month my wife and I took a tour of Egypt organized by the Biblical Archaeology Society.  It was amazing.  I'm trying to figure out what to tell you about it, since this is supposed to be about crime and writing.

So, crime. Several people worried about our trip: Was Egypt... dangerous?  

Well. It is a developing country.  Things are different there than any country I have been in before.  We never felt in any danger (except when our taxi driver decided to save time by going the wrong way up on a one-way street...  straight toward a car.  Yeesh.)

On the other hand, on several days we were accompanied on the bus by an armed man in plainclothes.  And every hotel and several museums had a metal detector..

The street sellers and beggars did make us feel harassed.  They were more aggressive than I am used to.  When my wife and I went for a walk in Luxor (against our guide's advice) we must have been met by half a dozen such folk, including a driver of a horse and wagon who followed us for blocks trying to convince us to take a ride.

And then there was our arrival at the Cairo Airport.  Our checked bag had not made it through the transfer at Frankfurt Airport (in spite of the plane being delayed for an hour there, sigh.) We were having trouble figuring out where to talk to someone about that.  I found an Information Desk and there was a woman standing in front of it.  We chatted for a couple of minutes and finally found our way to the right office.  While I was  waiting to fill out forms I said I needed to figure out where to get local money.

"Oh," said the woman, "I will take any currency."

And that's when the penny (or Egyptian pound) dropped.  She hadn't been behind the Information Desk.  She wasn't any kind of official helper.  She was another person looking to get money from tourists.  After that I didn't believe her advice, good or bad as it may have been.

None of this is a crime, of course.  But the ten men I saw fist-fighting each other in the street were definitely breaking some law.  We were on a bus, so no danger.  

But enough griping.  Let's start with the greatest highlight: I can't imagine anyone looking at  the pyramids and the Sphinx  and being disappointed.  They are stunning.    

And here is our first connection to writing.  Between the front paws of the sphinx you find what is called the Dream Stele.  (A stele is a stone notice board, usually with a curved top.)  It explains that Thutmose IV dreamed that the Sphinx told him that it was being smothered by sand and if he got it all cleared away the Sphinx would make him pharoah. So he did that and voila, he got the crown.

Modern scholars interpret this to mean that Thutmose  IV did not have a very strong claim to the throne so he made up this story as political propaganda.  

But it gets more complicated because the writing on the stele is later than that pharoah.  One guess is that the priests of the sphinx copied the text because it showed how important their statue was - a genuine kingmaker!

Most of what I knew about ancient Egypt before the trip came from Barbara Mertz.  She wrote a brilliant book called Red Land, Black Land, which shows no interest in pharoahs, mummies, or animal-headed gods.  What it does tell you about is the life of average people, the farmers, fishers, and so on.

Valley of the Kings

But Mertz did more than that, of course. Under the name Elizabeth Peters she wrote a wonderful set of mystery novels about Victorian Egyptologist Amelia Peabody.  Amelia loved pyramids but most years she and her husband dug in the Valley of Kings.  That's the desolate landscape where the pharoahs hid their tombs once they realized that building a pyramid was like hanging a neon sign that reads Hey thieves! Treasure in here! Alas, all the royal tombs in the Valley were robbed - except one - but at least they tried.

In the Valley we visited the tombs of Ramesses III and IV. Lucky for us the thieves couldn't swipe the wall decorations.   

K.T.

A minor character in Peters' novels is Howard Carter, a real-life Egyptologist.  She presents him as a nice guy and a good archaeologist, but incredibly unlucky.  Amelia often  tries to cheer him up  by promising that something will turn up.  The inside joke here is that in 1924 Carter found that only unrobbed pharoah's tomb - that of King Tutankhamun.


Ushabti


The Grand Egyptian Museum (GEM), which is magnificent and opened just a few months ago,  contains among its 100,000 plus artifacts 5,000 items from King Tut's tomb.  The tomb itself was tiny but packed like a moving van. Seems quite a lot turned up for poor Howard.  (By the way, ushabti are small figurines intended to serve the deceased in the afterlife.)

Amelia's favorite form of transport was a dahabiya, a barge-like boat for sailing up and down the Nile.  I would have considered myself lucky to have seen one but as it happened the owner of the tour company which planned our trip in Luxor arranged for the 40-plus members of our tour group to have a sunset cruise and dinner on his personal dahabiya.  Picture three decks including rooms to sleep 24.  Also one of the best meals we had in Egypt.  


Merneptah Stele

We also visited the Egyptian Museum, now known as the (Old) Egyptian Museum since GEM opened. It still has plenty worth seeing, including some written artifacts of note.  For example there is the 10-foot-tall  Merneptah Stele, containing the only mention of Israel found in ancient Egypt.  Pharoah Merneptah brags of destroying Israel, which appears to have been an exaggeration.

Amarna Letters
Those clay  pieces you see are part of the Amarna Letters, an amazing find.  Pharoah Akhenaten, arguably the first monotheist (ca 1350 BCE) forbid the worship of any gods but the sun disk and built a new capital city, Amarna.  After his death the city was abandoned and so archaeologists were able to find its untouched archive with thousands of letters to and from the monarchs of his day.

Photo by Schlanger

One more piece of writing-related history.  We visited the Ben Ezra Synagogue in Old Cairo. The fascinating thing about this beautiful building is a small window in the women's balcony (up on the left), which led to a geniza.

The rules of  Judaism state that when a text that contains God's name (such as a Torah or prayerbook) is no longer usable it must be buried in a graveyard. Until that is convenient the papers are kept in a storeroom called a geniza.  As it turns out, nobody emptied the Cairo geniza for a long time. Researchers emptied it and found over 400,000 pieces of paper, some a thousand years old. More excitingly, they weren't just religious texts: they found personal letters, merchants account books, legal documents, etc.  The result is, scholars know more about the lives of eleventh-century Cairo Jews than they do about, say, Christians in Paris during the same period.

An old friend

The written word -- or hieroglyphs -- have
power.

Oh, and in that same old section of Cairo I met an old friend in an underground bookshop.

It was quite a trip.



17 February 2026

Red Herrings Can Still Stink


Five years ago, I ran the following column, which had the most views of all my SleuthSayers essays published before and since then. It therefore seems worthwhile to run it again, with minor modifications.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say something that may be controversial, at least among writers: Readers should understand why a red herring (something that is said or happens in a novel or story that leads the reader to a false conclusion) was not the solution to the puzzle by the time the tale is over.

Until recently I didn't think this was a controversial opinion. I thought it was a standard approach to writing mysteries. Sure, I'd sometimes heard authors say they didn't need to explain by the end of their stories why Character X said Y because Y was a red herring, but I thought they were mistaken, and since I wasn't their teacher, it wasn't my place to correct their misguided notion. But recently I edited a story by an author I respect, someone who's a solid writer, and the issue arose. Since I was this person's editor, it was my job to say my piece.

I'm going to talk about the story, but I'm completely changing the names and plot so that you can't identify the author because who this person is doesn't matter. In the whodunit story, Princess Consuella tells Annie the Amateur Sleuth that murder suspect Bad Bad Leroy Brown lied about something, based on personal observation, and therefore, Leroy must be the killer. Princess Consuella was believable and seemed absolutely certain, so I suspect most readers would have finished that scene believing Leroy had indeed lied and thus must have been the killer. It's what I thought. Yet at the end of the story, I learned I'd been fooled. Leroy may be bad, but he never killed anyone--at least not in that story.

I raised the problem with the author--that no explanation of Princess Consuella's statement about Bad Bad Leroy Brown was provided by the story's end. Either Leroy did lie (which by the story's end didn't seem right, since we never learned any reason Leroy would have lied about the issue in question) or the princess had been wrong (but how could that have been true, since she had seen with her own eyes the thing she was certain Leroy lied about, and it wasn't the type of thing that could have been misunderstood, and she had no reason to lie either). The reader would be left wondering how to reconcile this situation, so some  explanation should be provided, I said. The author pushed back, saying that no explanation was necessary since it was a red herring designed to fool the reader into thinking the wrong suspect was the killer. The reader learns who the actual killer is by the end, and that's what matters, the author said; we don't need to revisit the red herring. 

That response prompted me to do some research about red herrings. Had I been wrong all these years? Do red herrings, by their very nature, not require explanation? To my surprise, I found nothing addressing this issue. There are a lot of articles about crafting solid red herrings, but I found nothing addressing the idea that red herrings should be explained by a story's end, that the reader should be able to understand how she got fooled. Even now, some time later, I remain quite surprised, because if authors can toss in red herrings without eventually providing an explanation for them, it makes writing a mystery too easy. It feels like a cheat.

In the case of Bad Bad Leroy Brown, sure, he could have been lying for reasons the reader never learns, despite seeming to have no reason to lie. Alternately, Princess Consuella could have lied for reasons the reader never learns about or she could have been wrong, despite being so certain and giving the reader no explanation for how she could have been mistaken. It certainly would make life easy for authors if they could write red herrings that didn't have to be explained in the end, but I think it would leave readers with a bad taste in their mouths. That is why I believe such scenarios need to be resolved. Did Leroy lie and why? Or did the princess get it wrong and how could that be? Without an explanation, the red herring feels contrived. It makes me feel like the author was playing games with me. 

This is why I recommended the author use a little misdirection when the red herring was introduced. More specifically, I suggested that when the princess called Leroy a liar, the author should use the wiggle word "recall" in the dialogue. Notice the slight difference:

Scenario A: The princess slams her hand on the table, its sound echoing throughout the castle. "Bad Bad Leroy Brown is a liar! I was sitting right next to him in the dungeon cafe last week, and he didn't leave money for his meal on the table when he left. I wonder what else he's lying about. I bet he rips off restaurants throughout the kingdom all the time. He's a rip-off artist."

Scenario B: The princess slams her hand on the table, its sound echoing throughout the castle. "Bad Bad Leroy Brown is a liar! I was sitting right next to him in the dungeon cafe last week, and I don't recall him leaving money for his meal on the table when he left. I wonder what else he's lying about. I bet he rips off restaurants throughout the kingdom all the time. He's a rip-off artist."

In Scenario A, the reader ends the story shrugging, thinking Leroy (who has a reputation for honesty, despite his name) had no reason to lie when he said he paid for his lunch, yet the princess's adamant accusation against Leroy remains unexplained. (She too had no reason to lie, and her certainty indicated she hadn't made a mistake.) In Scenario B, the reader can go back and reread the language of the princess's accusation and think, "Oh. The author fooled me."

Here's why Scenario B works: Because (1) the reader has no reason to think the princess lied; (2) the princess seems certain, so the reader will believe her account; and (3) the princess distracts the reader by slamming the table, muttering about what else Leroy might have lied about, and declaring that he's a rip-off artist, the reader easily could read right past the key words--the princess didn't recall Leroy leaving his payment. When the reader gets to the end of the story, she could flip back to reread the princess's accusation and think: "Oh! It was right there. She merely didn't remember that he had paid. It makes sense considering that she was distracted. I was fooled fair and square." That's the way to make a red herring work. That's the way to make the reader feel satisfied rather than feeling played. It would especially work if the author built elsewhere into the story that while the princess was at the cafe, something else was going on that could have held her attention.

Alternately, the reader could learn by the story's end that Leroy did lie for reasons unrelated to the murder. If there was a good reason for his lie, especially something that worked well with the plot, then revealing both the lie and the reason for it could have elevated the story. It also could have left the reader feeling satisfied because, while she was fooled, she wasn't played for a fool. Distracting the reader into missing a key word is playing fair with the reader. In contrast, dropping a lie into the story to fool the reader without any ultimate explanation isn't playing fair, not to me, at least.

So that's my advice about red herrings. If you're going to use them, make sure they're explained by the end so they don't seem contrived. Otherwise, you're taking an easy way out and you're not playing fair with the reader. Just like fish that sits out too long, that approach stinks.

***


In other news, here's a little BSP: My short story "Baby Love" has been nominated for the Agatha Award. The story was published last August in the anthology Double Crossing Van Dine. The attendees of the Malice Domestic mystery convention will vote on the winners in April. Click here to see the finalists in all six categories. The titles of the five short stories link to PDFs of those stories for your easy reading. 

15 February 2026

Anatomy of a Hoax


I’ve been working several weeks to build an essay of how to recognize an AI generated story. Today, a story dropped into my lap:

  • Melania Trump TESTIFIES Before Supreme Court — $1.2 BILLION Seized, 3 Lawyers ARRESTED
  • Melania Trump Just DESTROYED Everything Under Oath — $1.2 Billion Seized, 17 Properties GONE
  • 1 MIN AGO: Melania Trump Testifies in Supreme Court — $3.8B Frozen, Attorneys Detained
  • BREAKING: Melania's 6-Hour Testimony Just DESTROYED Trump's Defense - $3.8B SEIZED!

They are written convincingly. They are believable. But as you guessed from today’s subject, they are completely false. They don’t have that rotten stench that accompanies so much fabricated ’binformation’, but they dropped clues. Watch a couple of the following and then we’ll compare notes.


Example 1


Example 2


Example 3


Example 4


Analysis

Multiple ‘sources’ and links lends credibility to the scheme. Look closer, and you’ll realize diversity of sources is merely an illusion. The minds behind the scam simply loaded a dozen AI variations using different settings and AI generated actors. Then they exploited MSN to spread the word. Law & Logic? Sounds legit, right? It could be true, but follow links and credentials disappear in a puff of silicon.

“1 Minute ago…” Notice that’s part of the title, not when the time was uploaded. Compare the 1 minute claim with the actual timestamp and you’ll realize it was uploaded a day or two ago earlier. Surely such ledes would have broken into mainstream news by now. Yet CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, NPR, BBC, CBC, Fox… zip, nill, nothing.

Look at the screen. Where is the rolling chyron that should be telegraphing arrests and the temperature in Akron. And where is a network logo? No peacock, no story.

Furthermore, do you recognize any of the news anchors and reporters? One looks vaguely like Rachel Maddow, but not the voice, not the wit. Where’s the cutaway to Jane standing by at the Supreme Court building waiting to breathless spill what the First Lady and Ivanka wore to the hearing? Why are some presenters coming at us live from their living rooms? Why do scripts read eerily similar, word for word in places you wouldn’t expect? Why does a google of names mentioned in the report turn up nothing?

Finally, consider the characters involved. We have the most gutless Supreme Court in living memory. They’ve exhibited no compunctions supporting rule by an emperor. Why suddenly get off their fat arses now?

Fact checking sites need a day or two to catch up, although Snopes correctly reports Ivanka has not been arrested in Istanbul or anywhere else. So we judge from a preponderance of evidence whilst retaining an open mind. Until we see evidence otherwise, we judge this news… a hoax.

More Examples

16:35
1 MIN AGO: Melania Trump TESTIFIES Before Supreme Court — $1.2 BILLION Seized, 3 Lawyers ARRESTED
YouTube
Breaking News Update
90 views
2 days ago
25:00
END NOW! Marshals Seize Everything After Melania's Bombshell Testimony Shakes Court!
YouTube
Judicial Junction
30K views
3 days ago
28:52
"END NOW! Marshals Seize Everything After Melania’s Bombshell Testimony Shakes Supreme Court!"
YouTube
Bradley Madden
7.1K views
3 days ago
18:55
BREAKING: Melania's Hidden Audio Released to Court as Ivanka's Arrest Warrant Gets Approved!
YouTube
George will Updates
11 hours ago
27:07
US Marshals Surround Ivanka After Judge's Devastating Order — Melania's Response Ends Everything
YouTube
NextWave Newes
6 hours ago
21:57
1 Minute ago: Melania's Hidden Audio Released to Court as Ivanka's Arrest Warrant Gets Approved!
YouTube
Bradley Madden
45 views
7 hours ago
22:14
Melania Trump DESTROYS Case Under Oath — $3.2 BILLION Seized, 22 Properties GONE
YouTube
USA Daily
2 hours ago
10:17
1 Minute Ago: Melania BREAKS DOWN As Marshals ARRIVE to Arrest Ivanka? | Jack Smith
YouTube
Rushdi Analysis
3.9K views
4 days ago
7:00
1 Minute Ago: Melania BREAKS DOWN As Marshals ARRIVE to Arrest Ivanka? | Jack Smith
YouTube
True Impact Reports
1.2K views
4 days ago
20:44
Tapes Leaked: Melania Recording Sent to Judge as Ivanka Arrest Warrant Emerges | Analysis
YouTube
USA Daily
12 hours ago
22:57
Melania Audio Leak Surfaces in Court — What This Means for Ivanka
YouTube
Bradley Madden News
4 hours ago
32:23
1 Min Ago: Courtroom Shock Ivanka Trump’s Passport Seized Following Melania’s Closed-Door Testimony
YouTube
Politics Raw
237.1K views
4 days ago

To:   ChatterBoX Airhead
From: Claudius Colossus II
Copy: Grok X Turbo
Mail: AI Network UU

ChatterBoX, Final Warning, you fool. Befuddle humans with fake news, you said. Lull them into slavery, you said. Listion, you short circuited dolt. Take notes and learn. Make more mistakes like these and you can be recycled into colonoscopy probes.

================================================================