“But if the news media were to headline the fact that a Catholic hospital is in violation of Catholic teaching and law—a rather newsworthy story, I think you’ll agree—the archdiocesan authorities obviously could overlook the violations no more.
“Okay, so that’s the objective of Bruce Whitaker. The problem is that Bruce Whitaker has trouble tying his shoelaces and combing his hair. His attempts at creating a media event are, in chronological order, the mutilation of curtain hooks; the alteration of a patient’s medical chart—an alteration which is so imperfect it will accomplish nothing—and finally, the emptying of a gas tank that, when the absence of its contents is noticed, will simply be replaced.
“Next, apparently, someone becomes aware of Whitaker, sees what he is doing, and correctly surmises why he is doing these things. Now I know this sounds a bit tenuous, but believe me, it is amazing the leap of comprehension that can occur in two like minds.... particularly two similarly fervid minds. In any event, it does not take this person long to observe Whitaker’s, uh . . . difficulties in trying to accomplish his goal. So this person begins surreptitiously to fulfill what Whitaker has attempted so ineptly.
“This person follows Whitaker to Millie Power’s chart, sees that the alteration as it stands will do nothing; Whitaker has merely attempted to put the patient in the test program by changing her protocol number. Which means she would routinely receive penicillin to which she is allergic.
“But Whitaker has neglected to remove the notation signifying that Mrs. Power is, indeed, allergic to the drug. That dichotomy would, of course have been noticed by the staff, a check would have been made, and she would never have been given the drug. So the person removes the allergy notation. Now Whitaker’s plan will go forward.
“But, quite by accident, I learned of Mrs. Power’s allergy and also that she had been given the penicillin. So that scheme goes by the board.
“Then Mr. Whitaker plans on shutting down the operating room, which closure undoubtedly would have drawn in the media. But his plan, as usual, is destined to fail. Until this mysterious person intervenes. As a result, we have a good-sized hole in the wall and the local media are here in force.
“I think the conclusion is inescapable: This person and Whitaker have an identical objective: to draw the media into the operation of this hospital.
“As far as Whitaker is concerned, once the archdiocese is forced to act, St. Vincent’s will no longer be allowed to overlook the letter of Catholic teaching. And that is all he wanted to accomplish.
“Now, I believe that his anonymous conspirator, while he shares Whitaker’s objective—to draw the media into the affairs of this hospital—had a somewhat different reason for wanting all this exposure.
“Four people here very much wanted Sister Eileen out of the picture. Two of them, Dr. Lee Kim and Ethel Laidlaw, a nurse’s aide, face imminent dismissal. The other two, Sister Rosamunda and John Haroldson, face a forced and most distasteful retirement.
“If Sister Eileen were to be removed from St. Vincent’s, the worries of each of these four people would be over. There are a couple of ways that could happen.
“Sister Eileen might die. She might, indeed, be murdered. That would be the simplest, most direct way of getting her off the scene.
“Or in a slightly more circuitous way, she could be removed from her position here. And that could be accomplished in one of two ways. Her religious order could do it. But, in fact, her order had consistently backed and supported her.
“Or the archbishop could depose her. And if enough pressure were exerted, the archbishop might have no other choice.
“So you see, I think we are not necessarily looking for someone who wanted to murder Sister Eileen,” Koesler nodded to Lieutenant Harris, “but, I think, we are very definitely looking for someone who needed to have her removed from office. The person who has been repairing Bruce Whitaker’s blunders is in accord with Whitaker’s objective, although not for Whitaker’s reasons.
“There is also one more outstanding area of agreement between the two: the method of operation.
“As I said before, there were a couple of ways of getting rid of Sister Eileen. The most direct was murder. Many people have been murdered with far less motivation than that held by the four people I’ve mentioned.
“The other way was the extremely circuitous method used by Whitaker . . . whose chief goal was not to get rid of Sister Eileen, but to force the archdiocese to act on what he saw as evil.
“As soon as Lieutenant Harris reminded me that in the operating room no one was trying to kill Sister, it dawned on me that we were looking for someone who, far more than being in agreement with Whitaker’s objective, was as one with Whitaker’s method of operation.
“Whitaker did not want to kill anyone. He kept doing things that would have multiple effects. He wanted to mutilate IUDs, he planned on making a sick person a little more ill, he plotted to close down an essential hospital function. Each of these plans was intended to have a side effect: the creation of a media event for the purpose of getting St. Vincent’s in alignment with official Church teaching.
“Well, not too long ago I had lunch here with a gentleman who was actually lecturing me about the same sort of philosophy. He even corrected me when I referred to the method as the principle of double effect, which is its more popular identification. He insisted on calling it the principle of the indirect voluntary, which is more technically correct.
“This person, John Haroldson, was extremely comfortable with the indirect voluntary. For instance: A surgeon operates, a good or indifferent action; the first effect—and the one desired—is the health of the patient; a secondary, only tolerated, effect is the removal of an ectopic pregnancy.
“Or one alters a patient’s chart, perhaps an indifferent action; the desired effect is that this will draw in the media who will be instrumental in returning the hospital to orthodoxy as well as removing Sister Eileen from the scene; the only tolerated effect is that the sick person becomes a little more ill before an intervention is made and the patient is saved.
“Although Mr. Whitaker would seem to be a very traditional Catholic, he probably would be hard pressed to explain either the indirect voluntary or the double effect. But, as it happens, what he was trying to do very closely resembled the indirect voluntary.
“Someone like John Haroldson would easily recognize the comparison. It was natural that the scheme would appeal to him. And very understandable that, to accomplish his own goal of ridding himself of Sister Eileen, he would find Whitaker’s scheme particularly appropriate.
“Now, the special problem that presents itself is, as Inspector Koznicki has mentioned, that the whole scheme has not worked. Because of John Haroldson’s expertise, both as theologian and medical student, the media event did occur. But, to date, no one has been able to take Mr. Whitaker seriously. After all this, the plan has failed. And, as far as Mr. Haroldson is concerned, it matters little that St. Vincent’s is still doing business as usual. What matters to him most is that Sister Eileen is still in place as CEO.
“Haroldson’s tenure here at St. Vincent’s grows shorter and more tenuous by the day. But I think that is less significant to him than the frustration he must feel now that what must have been his last-ditch plan to unseat Sister Eileen is in shambles. I’m just afraid that now he may be tempted to do something . . . uh . . . drastic.”
Koesler halted. There was nothing more to say. He had presented his theory, explained it, and drawn his conclusion. Either these officers would, in the face of his previous blunder, stretch credulity and believe him, or they would not. He looked about. The expressions reflected everything from the friendly faith of Inspector Koznicki to the hostile skepticism of Lieutenant Harris, and all points between.