Dr Sheppard (The Criminal)
The Murder of Roger Ackroyd is perhaps unique in the sense that Dr Sheppard is not
necessarily a typical villain of the author. Christie was criticised at the time for breaking an
unofficial set of ‘rulesʼ of crime fiction which forbade the depiction of the narrator as the
criminal, however in retrospect, it seems a masterstroke in view of the juxtaposition of
Sheppardʼs kindly disposition and his murderous instincts. Scaggs (2010) has contended that
Christie ‘consistently saw evil as the motivating force in a criminalʼ, although in this novel,
Sheppardʼs hamartia is depicted simply as ‘a strain of weaknessʼ. Through this it can be argued
that Christie may be reflecting society upon the character of Dr Sheppard regarding the idea
that all members of the upper class could be capable of committing murder since everyone
holds incriminating secrets which force them to strike when the time is right.
Being Purposely Ambiguous
Christie uses double-edged discourse and the lie-by-omission in order to establish her
murderer as the criminal mastermind; after killing Ackroyd, he says that he was ‘wondering
if there was anything (he) had left undoneʼ. The lexis is purposely ambiguous so that
Sheppard can conceal his guilt, marking him out as an extremely intelligent criminal. The
fact that Sheppard is not only the narrator, but also Poirotʼs right-hand man throughout
the investigation – drawing upon the classic Holmes-Watson relationship – provides us
with the upmost trust in his innocence, emphasising how criminals can often be those we
least suspect.
Label of Doctor
The label of doctor (only his sister calls him James), coupled with his narrative authority,
signals his personal integrity, and the bookʼs other characters trust him implicitly with the
result that their confidence consequently boosts the readerʼs.
The very nature of the criminal who seems a kind natured and archetypal doctor strongly
suggests that Christie under-minds the appearance of respectability expended in the
quintessential English village.
Sheppard's profession as a doctor adds a layer of irony to his character. Doctors are
supposed to save lives and uphold the Hippocratic oath, which includes the promise to do
no harm. Sheppard, however, violates this oath by taking a life and engaging in criminal
behaviour. This contrast between Sheppard's professional identity and his criminal actions
adds to the complexity of his character and adds to the mystery of the novel.
Never Lying Just Omitting Information
Dr Shepard interestingly never truly lies to the reader instead just allows them to draw
their own conclusions.
To conceal his secret, Sheppard deceives not only Caroline and Poirot, but also the reader
themselves.
Psychologically not being suspected
The Murder of Roger Ackroyd is perhaps unique in the sense that Dr Sheppard is not
necessarily a typical villain of the author. Christie was criticised at the time for breaking an
unofficial set of ‘rulesʼ of crime fiction which forbade the depiction of the narrator as the
criminal, however in retrospect, it seems a masterstroke in view of the juxtaposition of
Sheppardʼs kindly disposition and his murderous instincts. Scaggs (2010) has contended that
Christie ‘consistently saw evil as the motivating force in a criminalʼ, although in this novel,
Sheppardʼs hamartia is depicted simply as ‘a strain of weaknessʼ. Through this it can be argued
that Christie may be reflecting society upon the character of Dr Sheppard regarding the idea
that all members of the upper class could be capable of committing murder since everyone
holds incriminating secrets which force them to strike when the time is right.
Being Purposely Ambiguous
Christie uses double-edged discourse and the lie-by-omission in order to establish her
murderer as the criminal mastermind; after killing Ackroyd, he says that he was ‘wondering
if there was anything (he) had left undoneʼ. The lexis is purposely ambiguous so that
Sheppard can conceal his guilt, marking him out as an extremely intelligent criminal. The
fact that Sheppard is not only the narrator, but also Poirotʼs right-hand man throughout
the investigation – drawing upon the classic Holmes-Watson relationship – provides us
with the upmost trust in his innocence, emphasising how criminals can often be those we
least suspect.
Label of Doctor
The label of doctor (only his sister calls him James), coupled with his narrative authority,
signals his personal integrity, and the bookʼs other characters trust him implicitly with the
result that their confidence consequently boosts the readerʼs.
The very nature of the criminal who seems a kind natured and archetypal doctor strongly
suggests that Christie under-minds the appearance of respectability expended in the
quintessential English village.
Sheppard's profession as a doctor adds a layer of irony to his character. Doctors are
supposed to save lives and uphold the Hippocratic oath, which includes the promise to do
no harm. Sheppard, however, violates this oath by taking a life and engaging in criminal
behaviour. This contrast between Sheppard's professional identity and his criminal actions
adds to the complexity of his character and adds to the mystery of the novel.
Never Lying Just Omitting Information
Dr Shepard interestingly never truly lies to the reader instead just allows them to draw
their own conclusions.
To conceal his secret, Sheppard deceives not only Caroline and Poirot, but also the reader
themselves.
Psychologically not being suspected
