IT WAS A CASE OF POISOINING (Part 4. THE END) If the food at home wasn't the source, and the evidence from the evening's outing didn't implicate his friend, where had the poison come from? IF YOU MISSED PART 1,2&3, LOCATE THEM THROUGH THE QUOTED POSTS. We returned to the patient's timeline. Then someone asked a question that changed the direction of the investigation. "What did you eat in the afternoon?" The man remembered. His salesgirl had bought him food earlier that day. Wait. Could the answer lie in that meal? Police officers were sent with the neighbour to investigate the shop. They searched for the food flask. And luckily, it was found. There were still a few grains of rice inside. The flask was brought to the hospital for testing. We waited for the results. Then they came. The test detected poison in the remaining rice. We finally had a possible source. But we had another problem. A very serious one. The food had been bought by his salesgirl. But she hadn't necessarily prepared it. Someone else had sold it to her. So who had introduced the poison? Was it the salesgirl? Or was it the woman who sold the food? And this was where this case became particularly difficult. Because finding poison in a meal is one thing. Proving who put it there is another. Two women were now at the centre of the investigation. The salesgirl who bought the food. And the woman who sold it. We couldn't accuse either of them without evidence. Luckily, the CCTV camera in the plaza passage worked. This one covered the passage where the salesgirl and others had walked. Footage was examined. It was found that the sales girl worked straight to the shop without opening the food. And the salesgirl was cleared. That left the woman who sold the food. She became the primary suspect. She was arrested, and investigators examined her phone. Then the investigation uncovered something that changed everything. ........... Continue 👇🏾