Murder mystery sudoku — the daily cases for 3 August 2026

Every detective in the world got these same crime scenes on 2026-08-03 — 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 Golf Course

A 5×5 grid across 3 rooms: Water Hazard, Green, Pro Shop. Six statements, five squares nobody could stand on, and no assumption anywhere: elimination alone closes it.

Cracked by 4 detectives 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. BE — bench · BO — boulder · F — flag (square stays free) · T — tree · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

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

  1. Vasco was in the water hazard. leaves 9 of 22 squares
    Show it on the board
    TFBEBOW
    The squares this one statement leaves Vasco: 9 of 22.
  2. Lidia was in the bottom row. leaves 5 of 22 squares
    Show it on the board
    TFBEBOW
    The squares this one statement leaves Lidia: 5 of 22.
  3. Lidia was in the water hazard. leaves 1 of 22 squares
    Show it on the board
    TFBEBOW
    The squares this one statement leaves Lidia: 1 of 22.
  4. Walter was in the green. leaves 5 of 22 squares
    Show it on the board
    TFBEBOW
    The squares this one statement leaves Walter: 5 of 22.
  5. Walter was in column 4. leaves 1 of 22 squares
    Show it on the board
    TFBEBOW
    The squares this one statement leaves Walter: 1 of 22.
  6. Gaspar was in the pro shop. leaves 8 of 22 squares
    Show it on the board
    TFBEBOW
    The squares this one statement leaves Gaspar: 8 of 22.
Show the squares Gaspar had left
TFBEBOW
The squares still open to Gaspar once their own statements are taken into account — 8 of 22.
What the testimony settles on its own

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

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Walter, in Green (row 2, column 4).

Show the solved board
TFBEBOWVLWG✕
The only arrangement the testimony allows. Walter is ringed in red.

Easy — The Repair Shop

A 6×6 grid across 4 rooms: Repair Bay, Parts Room, Storeroom, Paint Booth. Eight statements, nine squares nobody could stand on, and no assumption anywhere: elimination alone closes it.

Cracked by 3 detectives 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 — cabinet · CO — computer · CR — crate · F — floor lamp · O — oil slick (square stays free) · P — potted plant · T — television · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

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

  1. Abel was in the repair bay or in the storeroom. leaves 18 of 30 squares
  2. Pablo was in column 4. leaves 6 of 30 squares
    Show it on the board
    OCATCOPCRFWW
    The squares this one statement leaves Pablo: 6 of 30.
  3. Pablo was in the repair bay. leaves 2 of 30 squares
    Show it on the board
    OCATCOPCRFWW
    The squares this one statement leaves Pablo: 2 of 30.
  4. Margot was in the paint booth. leaves 5 of 30 squares
    Show it on the board
    OCATCOPCRFWW
    The squares this one statement leaves Margot: 5 of 30.
  5. Margot was in row 3. leaves 1 of 30 squares
    Show it on the board
    OCATCOPCRFWW
    The squares this one statement leaves Margot: 1 of 30.
  6. Ivan was in row 4. leaves 6 of 30 squares
    Show it on the board
    OCATCOPCRFWW
    The squares this one statement leaves Ivan: 6 of 30.
  7. Ivan was in the repair bay. leaves 3 of 30 squares
    Show it on the board
    OCATCOPCRFWW
    The squares this one statement leaves Ivan: 3 of 30.
  8. Nora was beside the television. leaves 2 of 30 squares
Show the squares Pablo had left
OCATCOPCRFWW
The squares still open to Pablo once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 30.
What the testimony settles on its own

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

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Margot, in Paint Booth (row 3, column 6).

Show the solved board
OCATCOPCRFWWAPMI✕N
The only arrangement the testimony allows. Margot is ringed in red.

Medium — The Hiking Trip

A 7×7 grid across 6 rooms: Overlook, Forest Path, Meadow, Campsite, Riverbank, Trailhead. Eight statements, seven 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 2 detectives 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. Nobody can stand on one, which is why the counts above are of free squares, not of all of them. BE — bear · BO — boulder · F — floor lamp · R — radio · S — shrub · TE — tent · TR — tree

The testimony

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

  1. Tesa was in the campsite or in the trailhead. leaves 13 of 42 squares
    Show it on the board
    TRRBOFSTEBE
    The squares this one statement leaves Tesa: 13 of 42.
  2. Ruben was in column 2. leaves 7 of 42 squares
    Show it on the board
    TRRBOFSTEBE
    The squares this one statement leaves Ruben: 7 of 42.
  3. Ruben was in the same row as the shrub. leaves 1 of 42 squares
    Show it on the board
    TRRBOFSTEBE
    The squares this one statement leaves Ruben: 1 of 42.
  4. Zaida was beside the radio. leaves 3 of 42 squares
    Show it on the board
    TRRBOFSTEBE
    The squares this one statement leaves Zaida: 3 of 42.
  5. Conrad was beside the floor lamp. leaves 1 of 42 squares
    Show it on the board
    TRRBOFSTEBE
    The squares this one statement leaves Conrad: 1 of 42.
  6. Olivia was in the same room as Yago.
  7. Yago was in the same column as the shrub. leaves 5 of 42 squares
    Show it on the board
    TRRBOFSTEBE
    The squares this one statement leaves Yago: 5 of 42.
  8. Nobody was in the riverbank.
Show the squares Zaida had left
TRRBOFSTEBE
The squares still open to Zaida once their own statements are taken into account — 3 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:

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 22 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Show what goes wrong
TRRBOFSTEBERZCT
Suppose Tesa stood on the dashed square. Enzo then has nowhere left to stand: every square still open to them is shaded out.

Another 18 squares fell the same way.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Ruben, in Meadow (row 1, column 2).

Show the solved board
TRRBOFSTEBETRZCO✕Y
The only arrangement the testimony allows. Ruben is ringed in red.

Hard — The Mystery Island

An 8×8 grid across 6 rooms: Jungle, Cliffs, Dock, Lookout, Beach, Lagoon. Fourteen statements, nine squares nobody could stand on, and one round of assume-and-test after elimination ran dry — and one of the eight was lying throughout.

The twist: one suspect is an accomplice — every statement they make is false.

Cracked by 2 detectives 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. Nobody can stand on one, which is why the counts above are of free squares, not of all of them. BE — bench · BO — boulder · CA — campfire · CH — chest · CO — crocodile · CR — crate · P — palm tree · S — shrub · T — tent

The testimony

What each person said. One of these 8 is the killer's accomplice and every word they said is false — but not which one, not yet.

  1. Vera was in the same column as the tent. if true, leaves 7 of 54
    Show it on the board
    BOCHCAPCRTSCOBE
    The squares this one statement leaves Vera: 7 of 54.
  2. Zaida was in the same row as the palm tree. if true, leaves 47 of 54
  3. Zaida was not touching the outer wall. if true, leaves 19 of 54
    Show it on the board
    BOCHCAPCRTSCOBE
    The squares this one statement leaves Zaida: 19 of 54.
  4. Zaida was not in the lookout. if true, leaves 4 of 54
    Show it on the board
    BOCHCAPCRTSCOBE
    The squares this one statement leaves Zaida: 4 of 54.
  5. Percy was in the dock or in the lookout. if true, leaves 19 of 54
    Show it on the board
    BOCHCAPCRTSCOBE
    The squares this one statement leaves Percy: 19 of 54.
  6. Percy was in the eastern half of the scene. if true, leaves 7 of 54
    Show it on the board
    BOCHCAPCRTSCOBE
    The squares this one statement leaves Percy: 7 of 54.
  7. Ruben was in the same column as the chest. if true, leaves 5 of 54
    Show it on the board
    BOCHCAPCRTSCOBE
    The squares this one statement leaves Ruben: 5 of 54.
  8. Nestor was in the same row as the bench. if true, leaves 5 of 54
  9. Nestor was not beside the boulder. if true, leaves 4 of 54
  10. Katia was in the same column as the crocodile. if true, leaves 12 of 54
  11. Katia was in the same row as the shrub. if true, leaves 2 of 54
  12. Milo was in the same column as the boulder. if true, leaves 7 of 54
  13. Milo was in the same row as the palm tree. if true, leaves 1 of 54
  14. Milo was not beside the tent.
Show the squares Katia had left
BOCHCAPCRTSCOBE
The squares still open to Katia once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 54.
Unmasking the liar

One of these 8 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.

Another 3 candidates collapse the same way.

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

Read backwards, Zaida actually told you:

  1. Zaida was NOT in the same row as the palm tree.
  2. Zaida WAS touching the outer wall.
  3. Zaida WAS in the lookout.
What the testimony settles on its own

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

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Vera, in Beach (row 7, column 3). Zaida lied throughout and was never charged.

Show the solved board
BOCHCAPCRTSCOBEVZ✕PRNKM
The only arrangement the testimony allows. Vera is ringed in red.

Expert — The Art School

A 9×9 grid across 7 rooms: Kiln Room, Print Room, Locker Room, Courtyard, Sculpture Hall, Supply Closet, Gallery. Sixteen statements, sixteen squares nobody could stand on, 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.

Cracked by 2 detectives 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 · C — crate · D — desk · E — easel · F — floor lamp · G — garbage can · M — mirror (square stays free) · PA — painting (square stays free) · PO — potted plant · S — statue

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.

  1. Frida was in the same row as the mirror. if true, leaves 7 of 68
    Show it on the board
    SCFEGBDPODCGESMPAPA
    The squares this one statement leaves Frida: 7 of 68.
  2. Ada was in the same row as the bookshelf. if true, leaves 61 of 68
  3. Ada was in the kiln room or in the courtyard. if true, leaves 43 of 68
  4. Percy was in the same column as a crate. if true, leaves 14 of 68
    Show it on the board
    SCFEGBDPODCGESMPAPA
    The squares this one statement leaves Percy: 14 of 68.
  5. Percy was in the same row as an easel. if true, leaves 4 of 68
    Show it on the board
    SCFEGBDPODCGESMPAPA
    The squares this one statement leaves Percy: 4 of 68.
  6. Oscar was beside a crate. if true, leaves 5 of 68
    Show it on the board
    SCFEGBDPODCGESMPAPA
    The squares this one statement leaves Oscar: 5 of 68.
  7. Selma was not in the locker room. if true, leaves 58 of 68
  8. Selma was in the same column as an easel. if true, leaves 8 of 68
    Show it on the board
    SCFEGBDPODCGESMPAPA
    The squares this one statement leaves Selma: 8 of 68.
  9. Gaspar was in the same row as a desk. if true, leaves 15 of 68
    Show it on the board
    SCFEGBDPODCGESMPAPA
    The squares this one statement leaves Gaspar: 15 of 68.
  10. Nadia was in the same column as a painting. if true, leaves 17 of 68
  11. Tobias was in the same row as a statue. if true, leaves 14 of 68
  12. Tobias was not in the gallery. if true, leaves 9 of 68
  13. Tobias was in the same column as a garbage can. if true, leaves 2 of 68
  14. Exactly 2 people were in the kiln room.
  15. Exactly 2 people were in the supply closet.
  16. Exactly 2 people were in the print room.
Show the squares Tobias had left
SCFEGBDPODCGESMPAPA
The squares still open to Tobias once their own statements are taken into account — 2 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.

Another 4 candidates collapse the same way.

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

Read backwards, Ada actually told you:

  1. Ada was NOT in the same row as the bookshelf.
  2. Ada was in neither the kiln room nor the courtyard.
The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 150 eliminations across 2 rounds of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Show what goes wrong
SCFEGBDPODCGESMPAPAF
Suppose Frida stood on the dashed square. Tobias then has nowhere left to stand: every square still open to them is shaded out.

Another 146 squares fell the same way.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Nadia, in Kiln Room (row 2, column 7). Ada lied throughout and was never charged.

Show the solved board
SCFEGBDPODCGESMPAPAFA✕POSGNT
The only arrangement the testimony allows. Nadia 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 2 August

Play free — no download