Murder mystery sudoku — the daily cases for 11 August 2026

Every detective in the world got these same crime scenes on 2026-08-11 — 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 Theatre Royal

A 5×5 grid across 4 rooms: Balcony, Stage, Pit, Workshop. Six statements, six 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.

The testimony

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

Olivia was beside the harp. leaves 4 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Olivia: 4 of 22.
Ines was in row 2. leaves 5 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ines: 5 of 22.
Ines was in the orchestra pit. leaves 1 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ines: 1 of 22.
Zaida was in the workshop. leaves 3 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Zaida: 3 of 22.
Nestor was in column 3. leaves 5 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Nestor: 5 of 22.
Nestor was in the balcony. leaves 1 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Nestor: 1 of 22.

Show the squares Zaida had left

The squares still open to Zaida once their own statements are taken into account — 3 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:

Olivia can only be in Stage (row 3, column 1) — down from 4 possible squares.
Zaida can only be in Workshop (row 1, column 2) — down from 3 possible squares.
Tristan can only be in Balcony (row 4, column 5) — down from 22 possible squares.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Nestor, in Balcony (row 5, column 3).

Show the solved board

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

Beginner · time attack — The Backyard Garden

A 5×5 grid across 3 rooms: Kitchen, Patio, Garden. Seven statements, four squares nobody could stand on, and enough testimony that the surplus is what pins the last two down.

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.

The testimony

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

Frida was in row 2. leaves 4 of 23 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Frida: 4 of 23.
Kaspar was in row 3. leaves 5 of 23 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Kaspar: 5 of 23.
Kaspar was in the rightmost column. leaves 1 of 23 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Kaspar: 1 of 23.
Greta was in column 3. leaves 5 of 23 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Greta: 5 of 23.
Greta was in the kitchen. leaves 2 of 23 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Greta: 2 of 23.
Yolanda was in the leftmost column. leaves 5 of 23 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Yolanda: 5 of 23.
Yolanda was in the bottom row. leaves 1 of 23 squares

Show the squares Greta had left

The squares still open to Greta once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 23.

What the testimony settles on its own

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

Frida can only be in Kitchen (row 2, column 4) — down from 4 possible squares.
Greta can only be in Kitchen (row 1, column 3) — down from 2 possible squares.
Bianca can only be in Garden (row 4, column 2) — down from 23 possible squares.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Yolanda, in Garden (row 5, column 1).

Show the solved board

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

Easy — The Art School

A 6×6 grid across 4 rooms: Atelier, Kiln Room, Print Room, Supply Closet. Eight statements, seven 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.

The testimony

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

Zaida was in row 5. leaves 6 of 31 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Zaida: 6 of 31.
Zaida was in the leftmost column. leaves 1 of 31 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Zaida: 1 of 31.
Wren was beside a painting. leaves 2 of 31 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Wren: 2 of 31.
Katia was in the kiln room. leaves 6 of 31 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Katia: 6 of 31.
Katia was in row 2. leaves 3 of 31 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Katia: 3 of 31.
Jimena was in column 5. leaves 5 of 31 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Jimena: 5 of 31.
Bruno was in the rightmost column. leaves 5 of 31 squares
Bruno was in the print room. leaves 1 of 31 squares

Show the squares Wren had left

The squares still open to Wren once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 31.

What the testimony settles on its own

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

Lorenzo can only be in Supply Closet (row 4, column 3) — down from 31 possible squares.
Wren can only be in Atelier (row 6, column 2) — down from 2 possible squares.
Katia can only be in Kiln Room (row 2, column 4) — down from 3 possible squares.
Jimena can only be in Kiln Room (row 3, column 5) — down from 5 possible squares.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Zaida, in Supply Closet (row 5, column 1).

Show the solved board

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

Easy · time attack — The Courtroom

A 6×6 grid across 5 rooms: Archive, Courtroom, Evidence Room, Judge's Chambers, Gallery. Nine statements, seven squares nobody could stand on, and enough testimony that the surplus is what pins the last two down.

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) · CO — computer · G — grandfather clock · PA — painting (square stays free) · PO — potted plant · S — statue · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

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

Tesa was in column 5. leaves 6 of 32 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Tesa: 6 of 32.
Tesa was in row 3. leaves 1 of 32 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Tesa: 1 of 32.
Yago was in the top row. leaves 6 of 32 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Yago: 6 of 32.
Yago was in the evidence room. leaves 3 of 32 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Yago: 3 of 32.
Vera was in the bottom row. leaves 5 of 32 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Vera: 5 of 32.
Vera was beside the computer. leaves 2 of 32 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Vera: 2 of 32.
Zeno was in the leftmost column. leaves 6 of 32 squares
Zeno was in row 4. leaves 1 of 32 squares
Elena was in the judge's chambers. leaves 9 of 32 squares

Show the squares Vera had left

The squares still open to Vera once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 32.

What the testimony settles on its own

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

Yago can only be in Evidence Room (row 1, column 4) — down from 3 possible squares.
Vera can only be in Judge's Chambers (row 6, column 3) — down from 2 possible squares.
Ximena can only be in Courtroom (row 2, column 2) — down from 32 possible squares.
Elena can only be in Judge's Chambers (row 5, column 6) — down from 9 possible squares.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Tesa, in Courtroom (row 3, column 5).

Show the solved board

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

Medium · time attack — The Hotel Meridian

A 7×7 grid across 6 rooms: Terrace, Kitchen, Office, Lobby, Ballroom, Suite. Nine statements, twelve squares nobody could stand on, almost as many rooms as suspects, so a room claim nearly names a square, and no assumption anywhere: elimination alone closes it.

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. A — armchair (square stays free) · B — bed (square stays free) · C — carpet (square stays free) · D — desk · F — floor lamp · G — grandfather clock · PA — painting (square stays free) · PI — piano · PO — 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.

Milo was in the same column as the desk. leaves 6 of 44 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Milo: 6 of 44.
Milo was in the kitchen or in the office. leaves 2 of 44 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Milo: 2 of 44.
Elena was in the same column as the floor lamp. leaves 5 of 44 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Elena: 5 of 44.
Alistair was somewhere south of the Chauffeur.
Nestor was beside the painting. leaves 1 of 44 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Nestor: 1 of 44.
Irene was in column 4. leaves 7 of 44 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Irene: 7 of 44.
Irene was on the carpet. leaves 1 of 44 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Irene: 1 of 44.
Lorenzo was somewhere east of Milo.
Lorenzo was in the same row as the armchair. leaves 7 of 44 squares

Show the squares Milo had left

The squares still open to Milo once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 44.

What the testimony settles on its own

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

Milo can only be in Kitchen (row 1, column 6) — down from 2 possible squares.
Elena can only be in Terrace (row 2, column 3) — down from 5 possible squares.
Alistair can only be in Office (row 7, column 2) — down from 44 possible squares.
Beatrix can only be in Kitchen (row 4, column 5) — down from 44 possible squares.
Lorenzo can only be in Lobby (row 3, column 7) — down from 7 possible squares.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Medium — The Royal Greenhouse

A 7×7 grid across 5 rooms: Terrace, Seed bank, Palm house, Shed, Arbor. Thirteen statements, ten squares nobody could stand on, and one round of assume-and-test after elimination ran dry — and one of the seven was lying throughout.

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

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. CH — chest · CR — crate · FL — floor lamp · FO — flower bush · G — grandfather clock · SO — sofa (square stays free) · ST — statue · SV — stove · T — tree · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

What each person said. One of these 7 is the killer's accomplice and every word they said is false — but not which one, not yet.

Walter was in the seed bank or in the palm house. if true, leaves 26 of 41
Walter was in the same column as the floor lamp. if true, leaves 22 of 41
Walter was not touching the outer wall. if true, leaves 10 of 41
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Walter: 10 of 41.
Helena was in the same column as the statue. if true, leaves 6 of 41
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Helena: 6 of 41.
Helena was in the same row as the flower bush. if true, leaves 1 of 41
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Helena: 1 of 41.
Kira was seated on the sofa. if true, leaves 2 of 41
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Kira: 2 of 41.
Kira was in column 6. if true, leaves 1 of 41
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Kira: 1 of 41.
Ines was in the same row as the grandfather clock. if true, leaves 6 of 41
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ines: 6 of 41.
Ines was in the terrace or in the arbor. if true, leaves 3 of 41
Julia was in the terrace or in the palm house. if true, leaves 14 of 41
Julia was in the same column as the floor lamp. if true, leaves 4 of 41
Vasco was in the same row as the statue. if true, leaves 6 of 41
Vasco was in the same column as the flower bush. if true, leaves 1 of 41

Show the squares Ines had left

The squares still open to Ines once their own statements are taken into account — 3 of 41.

Unmasking the liar

One of these 7 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 Helena were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Kira were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Ines were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Julia were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.

Another 2 candidates collapse the same way.

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

Read backwards, Walter actually told you:

Walter was in neither the seed bank nor the palm house.
Walter was NOT in the same column as the floor lamp.
Walter WAS touching the outer wall.

What the testimony settles on its own

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

Walter can only be in Arbor (row 7, column 7) — down from 10 possible squares.
Ines can only be in Terrace (row 5, column 1) — down from 3 possible squares.
Julia can only be in Terrace (row 6, column 2) — down from 4 possible squares.
Zeno can only be in Arbor (row 4, column 4) — down from 41 possible squares.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Hard — The Repair Shop

An 8×8 grid across 7 rooms: Yard, Repair Bay, Car Lift, Parts Room, Pit Lane, Waiting Room, Paint Booth. Twelve statements, fourteen 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.

The twist: 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. CA — cabinet · CO — computer · CR — car · CT — crate · F — floor lamp · O — oil slick (square stays free) · P — potted plant · R — radio · T — television · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

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

Dora was in the same row as a crate. leaves 12 of 53 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Dora: 12 of 53.
Ofelia was not in the parts room. leaves 44 of 53 squares
Ivan was all alone in a room.
Ivan was exactly 2 columns east of the Diva.
Paloma was exactly 1 column east of the Chef.
Paloma was in the same row as a window. leaves 12 of 53 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Paloma: 12 of 53.
Paloma was in the same column as the oil slick. leaves 3 of 53 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Paloma: 3 of 53.
Margot was exactly 5 columns east of Ofelia.
Margot was somewhere south of the Diva.
Rita was in the same row as the oil slick. leaves 8 of 53 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Rita: 8 of 53.
Nestor was exactly 3 columns east of Dora.
Nestor was exactly 2 rows north of Margot.

Show the squares Paloma had left

The squares still open to Paloma once their own statements are taken into account — 3 of 53.

What the testimony settles on its own

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

Rita can only be in Pit Lane (row 1, column 5) — down from 8 possible squares.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 47 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Put Dora in Waiting Room (row 7, column 3) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Put Ofelia in Car Lift (row 3, column 2) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Had Ivan stood in Waiting Room (row 2, column 8), Paloma would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Paloma in Repair Bay (row 5, column 6) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 43 squares fell the same way.

The motive

This case demands the why as well as the who: naming the killer without proving the motive counts for nothing. 7 motives are in play, and these statements narrow them.

Dora's motive would have been debts.
Paloma's motive would have been jealousy.
Ofelia's motive would have been inheritance.
Rita's motive would have been obsession.
Nestor was not driven by buried secrets.
Nestor was not driven by blackmail.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Nestor, in Parts Room (row 3, column 4).

The only motive left standing for Nestor is ambition.

Show the solved board

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

Hard · time attack — The Bunker

An 8×8 grid across 6 rooms: Workroom, Hydroponics, Shelter, Airlock, Dormitory, Generator Room. Eleven statements, eleven squares nobody could stand on, and one round of assume-and-test after elimination ran dry.

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 — bed (square stays free) · CA — cabinet · CO — computer · CR — carpet (square stays free) · CT — crate · F — floor lamp · G — garbage can · P — potted plant · R — radio · S — stove

The testimony

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

Boris was exactly 2 rows north of Jonas.
Vivienne was exactly 2 rows north of the Butler.
Walter was in the same row as the bed. leaves 15 of 55 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Walter: 15 of 55.
Walter was in the same column as the potted plant. leaves 1 of 55 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Walter: 1 of 55.
Elena was exactly 2 columns west of the Butler.
Elena was in the same room as the Diva.
Hilda was somewhere north of the Professor.
Frida was somewhere east of Elena.
Frida was exactly 3 rows south of the Diva.
Jonas was somewhere west of Vivienne.
Jonas was somewhere east of Frida.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 20 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Boris stood in Airlock (row 5, column 6), Elena would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Vivienne stood in Airlock (row 3, column 6), Boris would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Dora stood in Workroom (row 8, column 3), Boris would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Elena in Generator Room (row 2, column 1) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 16 squares fell the same way.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Expert — The Botanical Garden

A 9×9 grid across 8 rooms: Orchid House, Palm Pavilion, Lily Pond, Garden Path, Compost Yard, Seed Vault, Cactus House, Tropical House. Seventeen statements, thirteen 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. BE — bench · BO — boulder · C — cactus · FL — flower bush · FO — fountain · L — lily pad (square stays free) · P — potted plant · SH — shrub · ST — statue · T — tree

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.

Margot was in the same row as the boulder. if true, leaves 7 of 70
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Margot: 7 of 70.
Yolanda was in the same column as the cactus. if true, leaves 7 of 70
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Yolanda: 7 of 70.
Horacio was in the same column as the boulder. if true, leaves 8 of 70
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Horacio: 8 of 70.
Horacio was in the same row as a fountain. if true, leaves 2 of 70
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Horacio: 2 of 70.
Fabio was in the same column as the shrub. if true, leaves 7 of 70
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Fabio: 7 of 70.
Fabio was in row 5. if true, leaves 1 of 70
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Fabio: 1 of 70.
Fabio was not beside a lily pad.
Jimena was in the same column as a statue. if true, leaves 16 of 70
Jimena was in the same row as the potted plant. if true, leaves 2 of 70
Enzo was in the same row as a lily pad. if true, leaves 53 of 70
Enzo was in the eastern half of the scene. if true, leaves 27 of 70
Selma was in the same column as a statue. if true, leaves 16 of 70
Alma was not beside a statue. if true, leaves 65 of 70
Alma was in the same column as a lily pad. if true, leaves 14 of 70
Alma was in the same row as a lily pad. if true, leaves 4 of 70
Exactly 2 people were in the compost yard.
Exactly 2 people were in the tropical house.

Show the squares Horacio had left

The squares still open to Horacio once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 70.

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 Margot were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Yolanda were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Horacio were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Fabio were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.

Another 4 candidates collapse the same way.

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

Read backwards, Enzo actually told you:

Enzo was NOT in the same row as a lily pad.
Enzo was NOT in the eastern half of the scene.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 108 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Margot stood in Garden Path (row 6, column 1), Selma would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Yolanda stood in Lily Pond (row 4, column 2), Alma would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Horacio in Garden Path (row 8, column 3) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Had Lidia stood in Cactus House (row 1, column 1), Jimena would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 104 squares fell the same way.

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.

Horacio's motive would have been revenge.
Selma's motive would have been buried secrets.
Fabio's motive would have been ambition.
Margot's motive would have been obsession.
Jimena's motive would have been blackmail.
Whoever did it was not driven by inheritance.
Whoever did it was not driven by jealousy.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Yolanda, in Compost Yard (row 2, column 2). Enzo lied throughout and was never charged.

The only motive left standing for Yolanda is debts.

Show the solved board

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

Expert · time attack — The Repair Shop

A 9×9 grid across 7 rooms: Paint Booth, Car Lift, Pit Lane, Repair Bay, Office, Waiting Room, Parts Room. 21 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; the accusation also demands the motive, not just the name.

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 — car · CT — crate · F — floor lamp · O — oil slick (square stays free) · P — potted plant · R — radio · T — television · 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.

Yolanda was in the same column as a computer. if true, leaves 13 of 67
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Yolanda: 13 of 67.
Yolanda was not beside a car. if true, leaves 11 of 67
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Yolanda: 11 of 67.
Cesar was in the same column as a window. if true, leaves 17 of 67
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Cesar: 17 of 67.
Cesar was in the same row as a car. if true, leaves 6 of 67
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Cesar: 6 of 67.
Nico was not beside the radio. if true, leaves 65 of 67
Nico was in the same column as an oil slick. if true, leaves 22 of 67
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Nico: 22 of 67.
Delia was beside the cabinet. if true, leaves 3 of 67
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Delia: 3 of 67.
Delia was not beside a floor lamp.
Felix was not beside the radio. if true, leaves 65 of 67
Felix was in the same column as a window. if true, leaves 16 of 67
Felix was in the same row as the potted plant. if true, leaves 2 of 67
Walter was in the same row as the television. if true, leaves 6 of 67
Walter was not beside the cabinet.
Ofelia was in the same column as a floor lamp. if true, leaves 53 of 67
Ofelia was in the office. if true, leaves 47 of 67
Victor was in the same row as the cabinet. if true, leaves 8 of 67
Victor was not beside the potted plant.
Victor was in the same column as a car. if true, leaves 3 of 67
Exactly 2 people were in the waiting room.
Exactly 2 people were in the car lift.
Exactly 2 people were in the office.

Show the squares Felix had left

The squares still open to Felix once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 67.

Unmasking the liar

If Yolanda were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Cesar were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Nico were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Delia were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.

Another 4 candidates collapse the same way.

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

Read backwards, Ofelia actually told you:

Ofelia was NOT in the same column as a floor lamp.
Ofelia was NOT in the office.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 151 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Yolanda stood in Paint Booth (row 3, column 5), Victor would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Nico in Pit Lane (row 2, column 1) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Had Delia stood in Repair Bay (row 3, column 7), Victor would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Felix stood in Pit Lane (row 6, column 2), Cesar would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 147 squares fell the same way.

Cesar can only be in Parts Room (row 5, column 2) — down from 6 possible squares.
Nico can only be in Paint Booth (row 1, column 1) — 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.

Nico's motive would have been ambition.
Delia's motive would have been inheritance.
Yolanda's motive would have been jealousy.
Victor's motive would have been buried secrets.
Felix's motive would have been debts.
Ofelia was not driven by revenge.
Ofelia was not driven by obsession.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Ofelia, in Car Lift (row 9, column 9). Ofelia lied throughout and was never charged.

The only motive left standing for Ofelia is blackmail.

Show the solved board

The only arrangement the testimony allows. Ofelia 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

11 August 2026 put five sealed scenes in front of the world's detectives — the same five for everyone, as always. The day led with The Theatre Royal and climbed to The Botanical Garden on the Expert rung — a 9×9 scene across 8 rooms, with an accomplice lying through every statement, and a motive to prove on top of the name.

40 investigations were opened across the five cases and 14 closed with the right accusation — a 35% conviction rate for the day. 3 cases hid a liar, which is where conviction rates usually go to die: an accomplice's testimony is false from the first word, and finding the lie is the case.

More than one of the day's cases demanded a motive as well as a name — naming the killer without proving the why counts for nothing on those boards.

Fastest detectives of the day

Beginner: david in 0m 32s · Beginner: david in 0m 32s · Easy: annemarie in 1m 43s · Easy: annemarie in 1m 43s · Medium: david in 2m 37s · Medium: david in 2m 37s

The solutions

Reveal the solved boards — spoilers for every case of 11 August 2026

Key: red ring = the murderer · amber dashes = the lying accomplice · ✕ = the victim · initials mark where each suspect was proved to stand.

Beginner — The Theatre Royal

Nestor did it. 3 detectives closed this case.

Beginner — The Backyard Garden

Yolanda did it. 3 detectives closed this case.

Easy — The Art School

Zaida did it. 2 detectives closed this case.

Easy — The Courtroom

Tesa did it. 2 detectives closed this case.

Medium — The Hotel Meridian

Milo did it. 2 detectives closed this case.

Medium — The Royal Greenhouse

Walter did it; Walter lied to cover for the killer. 2 detectives closed this case.

Hard — The Repair Shop

Nestor did it — and the motive had to be proved too. Unsolved by the crowd — the board keeps its secret for now.

Hard — The Bunker

Walter did it. Unsolved by the crowd — the board keeps its secret for now.

Expert — The Botanical Garden

Yolanda did it; Enzo lied to cover for the killer — and the motive had to be proved too. The case file stays open: nobody has cracked it.

Expert — The Repair Shop

Ofelia did it; Ofelia lied to cover for the killer — and the motive had to be proved too. The case file stays open: nobody has cracked it.

Every day's cases — the calendar · ← the cases for 10 August

Play free — no download