¶ … Rose for Emily In William Faulkner's short story "A Rose for Emily," the noted author doesn't give very strong evidence that Emily Grierson actually killed Homer Barron, and worse yet, that she slept with his corpse for years. Faulkner teases the reader into believing that Emily did indeed commit these horrific acts. In the process of teasing the reader, Faulkner succeeds in producing what amounts to a satire of sensationalized, hackneyed reporting, Thesis: Despite Faulkner's attention to detail in portraying Emily as possibly the murderer, a sharp attorney could counter the circumstantial evidence in a court of law and Emily would be exonerated.

Why does Emily probably kill Homer?

One of the strengths of this story is how brilliantly Faulkner drops hints -- without having to provide any proof -- that Emily either was likely or not likely the perpetrator of this heinous crime. For example a hint that she was not guilty came when the community was trying to figure out why there was such a terrible smell, Judge Stevens said it was "…probably just a snake or a rat that nigger of hers killed in the yard." Hence, blame falls on the black man who worked for her (this was still the Jim Crow era in the South). The word "rat" also came up when people wondered why she bought arsenic; the druggist said it might be "for rats and such," removing blame. A hint that she may have killed Homer given by the narrator was that she was crazy. A great aunt had gone "completely crazy" and so when Emily turned thirty and was still single, "…even with insanity in the family" she wouldn't have turned away potential suitors -- but she did, hence, she must be crazy. Also no one knows whose skeleton...

And that was the last we saw of Homer Barron."
As far as the community was concerned, Emily certainly could have been considered the culprit in the death / disappearance of Homer, because there was a history of her weirdness in that regard. To wit, it took three days for neighbors, the minister and the doctors to coax her into letting the dispose of her father's body after he passed away. That was very weird, and should have aroused suspicions; Faulkner used that scene effectively, because readers can easily put two and two together and come to the conclusion that Emily had some bizarre fascination with dead bodies. The circumstantial evidence builds up with the disappearance of Homer and the discovery of a skeleton on Emily's bed. Her hair "…grew grayer and grayer" and right up to her death it was a "vigorous iron-gray" -- that led to circumstantial evidence because on the pillow beside the skeleton there was a "long strand of iron-gray hair." Moreover, there were two pillows, and an "indentation of a head" next to the skeleton -- which Faulkner clearly wanted the reader to assume that was where Emily's had lain.

The reason readers assume Emily "probably" killed Homer is because there are multiple hints but also a definite shortage of evidence that would be compelling enough to be presented in a murder trial. Faulkner deliberately used hints, like noting that she…