Note: I just decided to steal names from the Murder Riddles by Segaco and Something_Smart (and move them around), but this is not like those at all -- this puzzle is pure logic. Therefore it is likely to be solved in one guess and somewhat quickly.
This also follows the long-standing tradition that Purple Declaration is always true unless said by a culprit (and in this case, also a bribed witness).
Anyway, what we have here is a murder. It does not matter who was murdered or how. It only matters whodunnit.
There are
five main suspects
and
eight witnesses
. However, some of the witnesses have been
bribed
by the killers to lie in order to further confuse the situation.
A guilty suspect's
Purple Declaration
will ALWAYS be false, as will a bribed witness's.
Also,
exactly two of the suspects are guilty
.
Suspects:
Orange Duckling
Paul Turner
Quinn Hazard
Ruby Holland
Sarah McCall
Witnesses:
Alder Hutch
Brian Tooley
Catherine Luda
Dave Jones
Edward Sands
Fran Werner
George Werner
Henry Werner
In order to solve the puzzle, you must provide as complete of a description as possible. That means which suspects are guilty
and
which witnesses are telling the truth, at least as much as that information can be logically determined.
Clarifications
When someone says "Either A or B", then it includes the possibility of both being true, unless they explicitly add "but not both".
When someone says "If A then B", and A turns out to be false, the statement is considered true regardless of what B is.
Last edited by 2 718281828459 on Mon Sep 03, 2018 6:28 am, edited 2 times in total.
Retired Account
. I have no replacement.
After 2 years (almost exactly!) of inactivity I am giving MafiaScum a second chance...
Orange innocent
Paul guilty
Quinn guilty
Ruby innocent
Sarah innocent
Alder truthful
Brian bribed
Catherine truthful
Dave truthful
Edward bribed
Fran truthful
George truthful
Henry bribed
Assuming Catherine is referring to Alder/Brian. I don't believe anything contradicts this set of information? This felt too easy though, I just assumed Orange was innocent and went from there.
I need some clarifications regarding the statements of Dave and Fran, because their interpretation can be flexible.
For example if Dave is lying it means Alder lies sometimes, do we interpret that as he is lying if Dave is lying? Basically what I'm saying is if Alder is telling the truth Dave could be both lying and not lying with the information we have.
Similarly with Fran. The use of "if" means she can be right or wrong but not be lying. Say if Paul is one of the killers can we say that Fran is telling the truth?
Just having a little trouble because I have 4 alternate solutions. (2 different pair of killers with 2 alternate bribe distributions each) caused by the uncertainty in Dave and Fran.
Paul and Quinn did it.
Orange, Ruby, Sarah innocent.
Alder is innocent.
Brian was bribed.
Catherine is innocent.
Dave is innocent.
Edward was bribed.
Fran is innocent.
George is innocent.
Henry was bribed.
I thought that by having 13 different statements that
maybe
I might be able to stave off correct answers for a while. I wanted something that would take time and evidently this was not that.
Perhaps instead I should try to either
(1) make a murder riddle like those of Secago and Something_Smart, or
(2) make a murder mystery where you ask questions that I respond with yes/no/irrelevant.
Wait a sec...
Retired Account
. I have no replacement.
After 2 years (almost exactly!) of inactivity I am giving MafiaScum a second chance...
These riddles are fun. I didn't participate in the others because they seemed too long and I'm usually on the phone without an ability to take lots of notes.
I think one where there's some Q&A would be very fun.