Murder mystery sudoku — the daily cases for 25 July 2026

Every detective in the world got these same crime scenes on 2026-07-25 — each difficulty published twice, once untimed and once as time attack. Each case is procedurally generated and then proved to have exactly one logical solution before it is published, including the cases where somebody is lying. You place every suspect back on the map using only their testimony: exactly one person per row, never two in a column. Whoever is left alone with the victim did it.

Beginner — The Museum of Curiosities

A 5×5 grid across 3 rooms: Workshop, Library, Office. Seven statements, seven squares nobody could stand on, and enough testimony that the surplus is what pins the last two down.

Cracked by one detective so far.

How this case was cracked — the full solution to this board, step by step

Every step below is the solver’s own — the same one that proved this board has exactly one answer. The counts are real: you can check them against the grid.

Lettered squares are objects. Most take the square out of play — which is why the counts above are of free squares, not of all of them — but the ones marked below do not: their square is still in play. B — bookshelf · CH — chest · CR — crate · G — grandfather clock · P — potted plant · S — sofa (square stays free) · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

What each person said, and how much of the board it rules out.

Marco was in the workshop. leaves 6 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Marco: 6 of 20.
Katia was in the workshop. leaves 6 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Katia: 6 of 20.
Katia was in row 2. leaves 1 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Katia: 1 of 20.
Elias was in the bottom row. leaves 4 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Elias: 4 of 20.
Elias was in the rightmost column. leaves 1 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Elias: 1 of 20.
Dante was in the workshop. leaves 6 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Dante: 6 of 20.
Dante was in the top row. leaves 2 of 20 squares

Show the squares Dante had left

The squares still open to Dante once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 20.

What the testimony settles on its own

Nobody shares a row or a column, so each placement narrows everyone else. Before a single guess:

Marco can only be in Workshop (row 3, column 2) — down from 6 possible squares.
Wanda can only be in Library (row 4, column 4) — down from 20 possible squares.
Dante can only be in Workshop (row 1, column 3) — down from 2 possible squares.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Elias, in Library (row 5, column 5).

Show the solved board

The only arrangement the testimony allows. Elias is ringed in red.

Easy — The Museum of Curiosities

A 6×6 grid across 4 rooms: Gallery, Rotunda, Garden, Vault. Eight statements, ten squares nobody could stand on, and no assumption anywhere: elimination alone closes it.

Cracked by one detective so far.

How this case was cracked — the full solution to this board, step by step

Every step below is the solver’s own — the same one that proved this board has exactly one answer. The counts are real: you can check them against the grid.

Lettered squares are objects. Most take the square out of play — which is why the counts above are of free squares, not of all of them — but the ones marked below do not: their square is still in play. CA — carpet (square stays free) · CH — chest · CR — crate · D — desk · F — flower bush · P — potted plant · SO — sofa (square stays free) · ST — statue · T — tree · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

What each person said, and how much of the board it rules out.

Sofia was in the garden. leaves 8 of 29 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Sofia: 8 of 29.
Sofia was in row 3. leaves 2 of 29 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Sofia: 2 of 29.
Abel was beside the sofa. leaves 3 of 29 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Abel: 3 of 29.
Percy was beside the sofa. leaves 3 of 29 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Percy: 3 of 29.
Percy was beside the chest. leaves 1 of 29 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Percy: 1 of 29.
Gaspar was in column 4. leaves 5 of 29 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Gaspar: 5 of 29.
Gaspar was in the rotunda. leaves 2 of 29 squares
Beatrix was in the rightmost column. leaves 5 of 29 squares

Show the squares Sofia had left

The squares still open to Sofia once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 29.

What the testimony settles on its own

Nobody shares a row or a column, so each placement narrows everyone else. Before a single guess:

Sofia can only be in Garden (row 3, column 3) — down from 2 possible squares.
Abel can only be in Vault (row 6, column 1) — down from 3 possible squares.
Wren can only be in Gallery (row 2, column 5) — down from 29 possible squares.
Gaspar can only be in Rotunda (row 5, column 4) — down from 2 possible squares.
Beatrix can only be in Gallery (row 1, column 6) — down from 5 possible squares.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Beatrix, in Gallery (row 1, column 6).

Show the solved board

The only arrangement the testimony allows. Beatrix is ringed in red.

Medium — The Museum of Curiosities

A 7×7 grid across 5 rooms: Gallery, Workshop, Office, Vault, Rotunda. Nine statements, ten squares nobody could stand on, and no assumption anywhere: elimination alone closes it.

Cracked by one detective so far.

How this case was cracked — the full solution to this board, step by step

Every step below is the solver’s own — the same one that proved this board has exactly one answer. The counts are real: you can check them against the grid.

Lettered squares are objects. Most take the square out of play — which is why the counts above are of free squares, not of all of them — but the ones marked below do not: their square is still in play. B — bookshelf · CA — carpet (square stays free) · CH — chest · CR — crate · F — floor lamp · P — potted plant · S — sofa (square stays free) · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

What each person said, and how much of the board it rules out.

Rufus was in the same column as the carpet. leaves 13 of 42 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Rufus: 13 of 42.
Rufus was in the gallery or in the rotunda. leaves 3 of 42 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Rufus: 3 of 42.
Dora was somewhere west of Lorenzo.
Dora was beside the bookshelf. leaves 2 of 42 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Dora: 2 of 42.
Lorenzo was beside the bookshelf. leaves 2 of 42 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Lorenzo: 2 of 42.
Vivienne was not touching the outer wall. leaves 23 of 42 squares
Clara was in the same column as the window. leaves 6 of 42 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Clara: 6 of 42.
Clara was in the southern half of the scene. leaves 2 of 42 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Clara: 2 of 42.
Irene was in the workshop or in the rotunda. leaves 10 of 42 squares

Show the squares Dora had left

The squares still open to Dora once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 42.

What the testimony settles on its own

Nobody shares a row or a column, so each placement narrows everyone else. Before a single guess:

Rufus can only be in Gallery (row 3, column 4) — down from 3 possible squares.
Dora can only be in Rotunda (row 7, column 1) — down from 2 possible squares.
Elias can only be in Office (row 1, column 7) — down from 42 possible squares.
Lorenzo can only be in Rotunda (row 6, column 2) — down from 2 possible squares.
Vivienne can only be in Vault (row 2, column 3) — down from 23 possible squares.
Clara can only be in Office (row 5, column 6) — down from 2 possible squares.
Irene can only be in Workshop (row 4, column 5) — down from 10 possible squares.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Clara, in Office (row 5, column 6).

Show the solved board

The only arrangement the testimony allows. Clara is ringed in red.

Hard — The Museum of Curiosities

An 8×8 grid across 7 rooms: Atrium, Rotunda, Archive, Vault, Workshop, Library, Gallery. Fourteen statements, sixteen squares nobody could stand on, almost as many rooms as suspects, so a room claim nearly names a square, and one round of assume-and-test after elimination ran dry.

Cracked by one detective so far.

How this case was cracked — the full solution to this board, step by step

Every step below is the solver’s own — the same one that proved this board has exactly one answer. The counts are real: you can check them against the grid.

Lettered squares are objects. Most take the square out of play — which is why the counts above are of free squares, not of all of them — but the ones marked below do not: their square is still in play. B — bookshelf · CA — carpet (square stays free) · CH — chest · CR — crate · D — desk · F — floor lamp · G — grandfather clock · P — potted plant · SO — sofa (square stays free) · ST — statue · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

What each person said, and how much of the board it rules out.

Horacio was in the same column as a crate. leaves 12 of 51 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Horacio: 12 of 51.
Horacio was exactly 4 rows north of the Chef.
Horacio was in the same row as the grandfather clock. leaves 2 of 51 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Horacio: 2 of 51.
Petra was in the same row as the bookshelf. leaves 4 of 51 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Petra: 4 of 51.
Petra was all alone in a room.
Jonas was in the same column as the sofa. leaves 13 of 51 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Jonas: 13 of 51.
Jonas was somewhere south of the Doctor.
Flora was exactly 4 rows north of the Doctor.
Flora was all alone in a room.
Rosa was in the same room as the Doctor.
Rosa was exactly 4 columns west of Flora.
Rosa was somewhere west of the Doctor.
Ada was somewhere west of Petra.
Elena was in the same row as the chest. leaves 5 of 51 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Elena: 5 of 51.

Show the squares Horacio had left

The squares still open to Horacio once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 51.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 77 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Put Horacio in Atrium (row 2, column 1) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Had Petra stood in Archive (row 4, column 3), Horacio would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Jonas stood in Vault (row 6, column 7), Elena would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Flora in Workshop (row 1, column 6) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

Suppose Petra stood on the dashed square. Horacio then has nowhere left to stand: every square still open to them is shaded out.

Another 73 squares fell the same way.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Horacio, in Archive (row 2, column 6).

Show the solved board

The only arrangement the testimony allows. Horacio is ringed in red.

Expert — The Museum of Curiosities

A 9×9 grid across 8 rooms: Office, Archive, Workshop, Atrium, Rotunda, Vault, Gallery, Library. Nineteen statements, eighteen squares nobody could stand on, almost as many rooms as suspects, so a room claim nearly names a square, and two rounds of assume-and-test after elimination ran dry — and one of the nine was lying throughout.

The twist: one suspect is an accomplice — every statement they make is false; the accusation also demands the motive, not just the name.

Cracked by one detective so far.

How this case was cracked — the full solution to this board, step by step

Every step below is the solver’s own — the same one that proved this board has exactly one answer. The counts are real: you can check them against the grid.

Lettered squares are objects. Most take the square out of play — which is why the counts above are of free squares, not of all of them — but the ones marked below do not: their square is still in play. B — bookshelf · CA — carpet (square stays free) · CH — chest · CR — crate · D — desk · F — floor lamp · G — grandfather clock · PA — painting (square stays free) · PO — potted plant · SO — sofa (square stays free) · ST — statue · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

What each person said. One of these 9 is the killer's accomplice and every word they said is false — but not which one, not yet.

Luna was in the same column as the grandfather clock. if true, leaves 6 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Luna: 6 of 68.
Luna was somewhere east of Wanda.
Luna was in the same room as the Diva.
Luna was not beside the potted plant.
Percy was somewhere south of the Doctor.
Flora was in the same column as the sofa. if true, leaves 8 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Flora: 8 of 68.
Ada and the Magician were in different rooms.
Ada was somewhere south of Wanda.
Dante was in the same row as the grandfather clock. if true, leaves 8 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Dante: 8 of 68.
Dante was in the same column as the desk. if true, leaves 1 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Dante: 1 of 68.
Hilda was somewhere north of the Colonel.
Hilda was somewhere south of the Chef.
Rosa was somewhere west of the Journalist.
Rosa was in the same column as the grandfather clock. if true, leaves 62 of 68
Wanda was somewhere north of Rosa.
Wanda was somewhere west of the Colonel.
Exactly 3 people were in the rotunda.
Exactly 2 people were in the atrium.
Exactly 2 people were in the workshop.

Show the squares Luna had left

The squares still open to Luna once their own statements are taken into account — 6 of 68.

Unmasking the liar

One of these 9 people is the killer's accomplice, and every word they said is false — but you are not told which. Take each in turn: read their statements backwards and ask whether the rest of the testimony can still be satisfied.

If Luna were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Elias were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Percy were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Flora were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.

Another 4 candidates collapse the same way.

Only Rosa survives the test. That is the accomplice, and everything they said is now read backwards.

Read backwards, Rosa actually told you:

Rosa was NOT west of the Journalist.
Rosa was NOT in the same column as the grandfather clock.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 155 eliminations across 2 rounds of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Elias stood in Gallery (row 1, column 3), Wanda would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Percy stood in Workshop (row 5, column 4), Luna would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Ada stood in Atrium (row 3, column 4), Luna would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Hilda stood in Gallery (row 2, column 1), Flora would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

Suppose Elias stood on the dashed square. Wanda then has nowhere left to stand: every square still open to them is shaded out.

Another 151 squares fell the same way.

Luna can only be in Atrium (row 1, column 4) — down from 3 possible squares.

The motive

This case demands the why as well as the who: naming the killer without proving the motive counts for nothing. 8 motives are in play, and these statements narrow them.

Hilda's motive would have been jealousy.
Ada's motive would have been debts.
Luna's motive would have been buried secrets.
Percy's motive would have been ambition.
Rosa's motive would have been obsession.
Dante was not driven by revenge.
Dante was not driven by inheritance.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Dante, in Workshop (row 6, column 6). Rosa lied throughout and was never charged.

The only motive left standing for Dante is blackmail.

Show the solved board

The only arrangement the testimony allows. Dante is ringed in red.

How to read a case above

The grid size is the size of the crime scene, so a 10×9 expert case is a far larger search than a 5×5 beginner one — but the difficulty is really carried by the clues, not the square count. A beginner case tells you almost directly where somebody stood. An expert case tells you where somebody was not, three times, and expects you to do the rest — and on half of them one of those statements is a lie told to protect the killer. If a case lists a motive, naming the right person is not enough on its own; you have to prove why.

How to play · Solving cases with a liar · Techniques

The day in review for this date has not been written yet — it appears here once it is.

Every day's cases — the calendar · ← the cases for 24 July

Play free — no download