Murder mystery sudoku — the daily cases for 18 August 2026

Every detective in the world got these same crime scenes on 2026-08-18 — 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 Royal Greenhouse

A 5×5 grid across 4 rooms: Fountain, Palm house, Potting shed, Orchid room. Six statements, five squares nobody could stand on, and no assumption anywhere: elimination alone closes it.

Cracked by 5 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.

Marina was in the palm house. leaves 7 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Marina: 7 of 22.
Marina was in row 2. leaves 1 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Marina: 1 of 22.
Victor was in the rightmost column. leaves 3 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Victor: 3 of 22.
Tobias was in the orchid room. leaves 4 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Tobias: 4 of 22.
Dora was in the fountain court. leaves 7 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Dora: 7 of 22.
Dora was in row 3. leaves 1 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Dora: 1 of 22.

Show the squares Victor had left

The squares still open to Victor 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:

Victor can only be in Potting shed (row 5, column 5) — down from 3 possible squares.
Tobias can only be in Orchid room (row 1, column 4) — down from 4 possible squares.
Selma can only be in Palm house (row 4, column 2) — down from 22 possible squares.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Beginner · time attack — The Museum of Curiosities

A 5×5 grid across 4 rooms: Atrium, Office, Archive, Gallery. Seven statements, eight 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) · CH — chest · CR — crate · F — floor lamp · M — mirror (square stays free) · P — potted plant · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

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

Jonas was in the top row. leaves 4 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Jonas: 4 of 20.
Jonas was in the rightmost column. leaves 1 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Jonas: 1 of 20.
Greta was in row 3. leaves 5 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Greta: 5 of 20.
Greta was in the atrium. leaves 1 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Greta: 1 of 20.
Octavio was in row 2. leaves 4 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Octavio: 4 of 20.
Enzo was in column 2. leaves 4 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Enzo: 4 of 20.
Enzo was in the bottom row. leaves 1 of 20 squares

Show the squares Octavio had left

The squares still open to Octavio once their own statements are taken into account — 4 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:

Felix can only be in Archive (row 4, column 4) — down from 20 possible squares.
Octavio can only be in Archive (row 2, column 3) — down from 4 possible squares.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Octavio, in Archive (row 2, column 3).

Show the solved board

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

Easy — The Courtroom

A 6×6 grid across 4 rooms: Gallery, Hallway, Archive, Judge's Chambers. Seven statements, eleven 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. A — armchair (square stays free) · B — bookshelf · C — carpet (square stays free) · D — desk · F — floor lamp · G — grandfather clock · P — potted plant · S — statue · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

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

Wanda was beside the statue. leaves 4 of 29 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Wanda: 4 of 29.
Pablo was on the carpet. leaves 2 of 29 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Pablo: 2 of 29.
Fabio was in the gallery. leaves 7 of 29 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Fabio: 7 of 29.
Enzo was in row 5. leaves 5 of 29 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Enzo: 5 of 29.
Enzo was in the archive or in the judge's chambers. leaves 2 of 29 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Enzo: 2 of 29.
Yago was beside a window. leaves 2 of 29 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Yago: 2 of 29.
Yago was in the judge's chambers. leaves 1 of 29 squares

Show the squares Pablo had left

The squares still open to Pablo 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:

Luna can only be in Hallway (row 1, column 4) — down from 29 possible squares.
Wanda can only be in Judge's Chambers (row 3, column 2) — down from 4 possible squares.
Pablo can only be in Hallway (row 2, column 6) — down from 2 possible squares.
Fabio can only be in Gallery (row 6, column 5) — down from 7 possible squares.
Enzo can only be in Judge's Chambers (row 5, column 1) — down from 2 possible squares.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Easy · time attack — The Museum of Curiosities

A 6×6 grid across 5 rooms: Garden, Archive, Workshop, Atrium, Library. Seven statements, twelve squares nobody could stand on, 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. B — bookshelf · CH — chest · CR — crate · F — flower bush · G — grandfather clock · 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.

Nico was in the rightmost column. leaves 5 of 27 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Nico: 5 of 27.
Nico was in the top row. leaves 1 of 27 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Nico: 1 of 27.
Helena was in row 5. leaves 5 of 27 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Helena: 5 of 27.
Helena was in column 4. leaves 1 of 27 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Helena: 1 of 27.
Xavier was beside the flower bush. leaves 2 of 27 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Xavier: 2 of 27.
Quentin was in row 3. leaves 4 of 27 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Quentin: 4 of 27.
Gordon was in the garden. leaves 6 of 27 squares

Show the squares Xavier had left

The squares still open to Xavier once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 27.

What the testimony settles on its own

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

Xavier can only be in Garden (row 4, column 1) — down from 2 possible squares.
Quentin can only be in Workshop (row 3, column 3) — down from 4 possible squares.
Ines can only be in Archive (row 2, column 5) — down from 27 possible squares.
Gordon can only be in Garden (row 6, column 2) — down from 6 possible squares.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Medium · time attack — The Art School

A 7×7 grid across 5 rooms: Kiln Room, Courtyard, Locker Room, Atelier, Gallery. Eight statements, fifteen 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 — 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, and how much of the board it rules out.

Dorian was in the same column as the crate. leaves 5 of 37 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Dorian: 5 of 37.
Dorian was beside the floor lamp. leaves 1 of 37 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Dorian: 1 of 37.
Victor was in the same column as a painting. leaves 9 of 37 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Victor: 9 of 37.
Victor was in the same room as the Colonel.
Zeno was in the kiln room or in the atelier. leaves 10 of 37 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Zeno: 10 of 37.
Rita was in the same room as Gaspar.
Gaspar was beside the potted plant. leaves 2 of 37 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Gaspar: 2 of 37.
Wilfred was beside the desk. leaves 2 of 37 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Wilfred: 2 of 37.

Show the squares Gaspar had left

The squares still open to Gaspar once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 37.

What the testimony settles on its own

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

Wilfred can only be in Gallery (row 6, column 6) — down from 2 possible squares.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 14 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Tamara stood in Locker Room (row 4, column 1), Rita would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Victor in Gallery (row 7, column 2) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Put Zeno in Atelier (row 1, column 1) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Put Rita in Atelier (row 1, column 1) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 10 squares fell the same way.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Medium — The Theatre Royal

A 7×7 grid across 5 rooms: Wings, Stage, Balcony, Dressing, Foyer. Fourteen statements, thirteen 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 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. One of these 7 is the killer's accomplice and every word they said is false — but not which one, not yet.

Wanda was in row 5. if true, leaves 6 of 39
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Wanda: 6 of 39.
Wanda was beside the chest. if true, leaves 1 of 39
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Wanda: 1 of 39.
Wanda was not in the wings.
Greta was on the stage or in the dressing room. if true, leaves 15 of 39
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Greta: 15 of 39.
Greta was in the same column as a window. if true, leaves 6 of 39
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Greta: 6 of 39.
Greta was in the same row as the grandfather clock. if true, leaves 1 of 39
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Greta: 1 of 39.
Felix was in the northern half of the scene. if true, leaves 16 of 39
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Felix: 16 of 39.
Felix was in the balcony or in the foyer. if true, leaves 1 of 39
Simon was in the same row as the chest. if true, leaves 4 of 39
Simon was in the same column as the grandfather clock. if true, leaves 1 of 39
Ivan was in the same row as the harp. if true, leaves 5 of 39
Ivan was in the same column as a window. if true, leaves 2 of 39
Helena was in the same row as the floor lamp. if true, leaves 33 of 39
Helena was beside the chest. if true, leaves 30 of 39

Show the squares Ivan had left

The squares still open to Ivan once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 39.

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 Wanda were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Greta were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Delia were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Felix were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.

Another 2 candidates collapse the same way.

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

Read backwards, Helena actually told you:

Helena was NOT in the same row as the floor lamp.
Helena was NOT beside the chest.

What the testimony settles on its own

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

Delia can only be in Foyer (row 7, column 3) — down from 39 possible squares.
Ivan can only be in Wings (row 1, column 4) — down from 2 possible squares.
Helena can only be in Dressing (row 4, column 6) — down from 30 possible squares.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Felix, in Foyer (row 3, column 1). Helena lied throughout and was never charged.

Show the solved board

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

Hard — The Cookie Thief

An 8×8 grid across 6 rooms: Cellar, Kitchen, Hallway, Living room, Attic, Nursery. Ten statements, nineteen squares nobody could stand on, 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. 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) · BE — bed (square stays free) · BO — bookshelf · CA — carpet (square stays free) · CH — Christmas tree · CL — clock · G — gift · PA — painting (square stays free) · PL — plate of cookies · PO — potted plant · S — stove

The testimony

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

Wilfred was in the same column as a painting. leaves 13 of 50 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Wilfred: 13 of 50.
Wilfred was in the same row as the potted plant. leaves 2 of 50 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Wilfred: 2 of 50.
Petra was exactly 7 columns west of Helena.
Petra was in row 5. leaves 7 of 50 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Petra: 7 of 50.
Helena was exactly 4 rows south of the Magician.
Gaspar was in the same column as the gift. leaves 6 of 50 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Gaspar: 6 of 50.
Luna was exactly 3 columns east of Wilfred.
Luna was exactly 1 row north of Frida.
Beatrix was exactly 5 rows south of the Doctor.
Frida was exactly 1 row north of Gaspar.

Show the squares Wilfred had left

The squares still open to Wilfred once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 50.

What the testimony settles on its own

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

Petra can only be in Hallway (row 5, column 1) — down from 7 possible squares.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 54 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Wilfred stood in Cellar (row 4, column 5), Luna would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Dorian in Living room (row 1, column 3) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Put Helena in Cellar (row 8, column 8) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Put Gaspar in Attic (row 4, column 7) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 50 squares fell the same way.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Hard · time attack — The Hiking Trip

A 10×8 grid across 7 rooms: Ranger Station, Meadow, Cave, Overlook, Trailhead, Summit, Forest Path. Twelve statements, eighteen 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.

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 · CA — campfire · CR — crate · D — desk · 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.

Gilda was exactly 4 rows south of the Chef.
Olivia was in the same column as the boulder. leaves 4 of 62 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Olivia: 4 of 62.
Wren was exactly 2 rows south of Milo.
Wren was in the same column as the floor lamp. leaves 6 of 62 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Wren: 6 of 62.
Ivan was in the same row as a crate. leaves 17 of 62 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ivan: 17 of 62.
Ivan was exactly 5 columns west of the Diva.
Zeno was all alone in a room.
Zeno was in the same column as a crate. leaves 11 of 62 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Zeno: 11 of 62.
Percy was in row 2. leaves 9 of 62 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Percy: 9 of 62.
Percy was exactly 1 column west of the Colonel.
Milo was all alone in a room.
Nobody was in the ranger station.

Show the squares Olivia had left

The squares still open to Olivia once their own statements are taken into account — 4 of 62.

What the testimony settles on its own

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

Percy can only be in Forest Path (row 2, column 7) — down from 9 possible squares.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 51 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Gilda stood in Forest Path (row 5, column 6), Ivan would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Olivia stood in Overlook (row 1, column 1), Ivan would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Wren in Meadow (row 7, column 9) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Put Ivan in Overlook (row 1, column 1) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 47 squares fell the same way.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Percy, in Forest Path (row 2, column 7).

Show the solved board

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

Expert — The Royal Greenhouse

A 9×9 grid across 7 rooms: Shed, Arbor, Palm house, Potting shed, Orchid room, Terrace, Fountain. Fourteen statements, twenty 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.

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. A — armchair (square stays free) · CA — carpet (square stays free) · CH — chest · CR — crate · D — desk · FL — floor lamp · FO — flower bush · G — grandfather clock · M — mirror (square stays free) · P — potted plant · 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 9 is the killer's accomplice and every word they said is false — but not which one, not yet.

Cesar was in the same row as the armchair. if true, leaves 8 of 67
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Cesar: 8 of 67.
Cesar was in the same column as the carpet. if true, leaves 2 of 67
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Cesar: 2 of 67.
Alistair was in the same column as the statue. if true, leaves 7 of 67
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Alistair: 7 of 67.
Tamara was in the western half of the scene. if true, leaves 30 of 67
Tamara was in the same row as the grandfather clock. if true, leaves 3 of 67
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Tamara: 3 of 67.
Ines was in the same column as a window. if true, leaves 14 of 67
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ines: 14 of 67.
Ines was in the same row as the floor lamp. if true, leaves 2 of 67
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ines: 2 of 67.
Elena was beside the desk. if true, leaves 1 of 67
Felix was in the same column as the armchair. if true, leaves 59 of 67
Felix was in the same row as the mirror. if true, leaves 52 of 67
Rufus was in the same column as the mirror. if true, leaves 7 of 67
Xavier was in the same row as the potted plant. if true, leaves 6 of 67
Exactly 2 people were in the terrace.
Exactly 2 people were in the arbor.

Show the squares Cesar had left

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

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 Cesar were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Alistair were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Tamara were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Paloma were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.

Another 4 candidates collapse the same way.

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

Read backwards, Felix actually told you:

Felix was NOT in the same column as the armchair.
Felix was NOT in the same row as the mirror.

What the testimony settles on its own

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

Cesar can only be in Arbor (row 9, column 1) — down from 2 possible squares.
Tamara can only be in Shed (row 3, column 4) — down from 3 possible squares.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 63 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Alistair stood in Arbor (row 7, column 5), Ines would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Paloma in Shed (row 2, column 5) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Put Ines in Arbor (row 7, column 5) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Put Felix in Shed (row 2, column 3) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 59 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.

Ines's motive would have been ambition.
Tamara's motive would have been jealousy.
Rufus's motive would have been blackmail.
Xavier's motive would have been inheritance.
Elena's motive would have been revenge.
Felix was not driven by debts.
Whoever did it was not driven by obsession.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Felix, in Terrace (row 4, column 7). Felix lied throughout and was never charged.

The only motive left standing for Felix is buried secrets.

Show the solved board

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

Expert · time attack — The Hotel Meridian

A 9×9 grid across 8 rooms: Cellar, Suite, Kitchen, Bar, Lobby, Ballroom, Gallery, Terrace. Eighteen statements, 21 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.

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) · CA — carpet (square stays free) · CH — chest · CL — clock · D — desk · F — floor lamp · M — mirror (square stays free) · PI — piano · PO — potted plant · S — sofa (square stays free) · 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.

Pablo was in the same column as the carpet. if true, leaves 17 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Pablo: 17 of 68.
Pablo was in the same row as an armchair. if true, leaves 3 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Pablo: 3 of 68.
Nestor was in the same column as the sofa. if true, leaves 15 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Nestor: 15 of 68.
Wilfred was in the same column as the mirror. if true, leaves 8 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Wilfred: 8 of 68.
Gaspar was in the same column as an armchair. if true, leaves 52 of 68
Gaspar was not touching the outer wall. if true, leaves 23 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Gaspar: 23 of 68.
Vera was in the same row as a bed. if true, leaves 25 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Vera: 25 of 68.
Vera was in the same column as a chest. if true, leaves 6 of 68
Tristan was in column 8. if true, leaves 7 of 68
Tristan was in the same row as an armchair. if true, leaves 2 of 68
Margot was in the same row as the mirror. if true, leaves 7 of 68
Margot was in the same column as an armchair. if true, leaves 1 of 68
Margot was not in the suite.
Kira was not lying in any bed. if true, leaves 64 of 68
Kira was in the same column as the sofa. if true, leaves 15 of 68
Kira was in the kitchen or in the terrace. if true, leaves 7 of 68
Kira was in the same row as a bed. if true, leaves 1 of 68
Exactly 2 people were in the bar.

Show the squares Tristan had left

The squares still open to Tristan once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 68.

Unmasking the liar

If Pablo were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Nestor were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Wilfred were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Frida were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.

Another 4 candidates collapse the same way.

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

Read backwards, Gaspar actually told you:

Gaspar was NOT in the same column as an armchair.
Gaspar WAS touching the outer wall.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 68 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Nestor stood in Terrace (row 1, column 4), Pablo would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Wilfred stood in Terrace (row 1, column 1), Pablo would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Gaspar in Terrace (row 1, column 1) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Put Frida in Terrace (row 1, column 1) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 64 squares fell the same way.

Pablo can only be in Gallery (row 1, column 6) — down from 3 possible squares.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Gaspar, in Bar (row 9, column 2). Gaspar lied throughout and was never charged.

Show the solved board

The only arrangement the testimony allows. Gaspar 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

The standard docket kept investigators reasonably occupied across several varied crime scenes. At The Royal Greenhouse, a five-by-five beginner inquiry saw four solutions from eight attempts, led by david in thirty-five seconds. David also took top honours in The Courtroom, clearing the six-by-six easy board in two minutes and twelve seconds. Things grew more tangled at The Theatre Royal, where a liar complicated the medium seven-by-seven grid; a guest detective sorted through the deceit in three minutes and forty seconds. A guest detective also claimed the remaining standard files, solving the eight-by-eight case of The Cookie Thief in five minutes and thirty-nine seconds, and untangling a demanding nine-by-nine expert return to The Royal Greenhouse—complete with both a liar and a required motive—in nine minutes and thirty-five seconds.

The time attack roster, by contrast, saw almost no movement against the clock. A single attempt was logged at The Museum of Curiosities on the six-by-six easy board, though it went unsolved. The five-by-five beginner file at The Museum of Curiosities, the seven-by-seven search at The Art School, the ten-by-eight trek across The Hiking Trip, and a deceitful nine-by-nine expert case at The Hotel Meridian with a liar all sat untouched without a single play.

Fastest detectives of the day

Beginner: david — 0m 35s · Easy: david — 2m 12s · Medium: a guest detective — 3m 40s · Hard: a guest detective — 5m 39s · Expert: a guest detective — 9m 35s

The solutions

The solved boards — spoilers for every case of 18 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 Royal Greenhouse

The cell door shut on Marina (doctor), on the evidence of 4 detectives.

Easy — The Courtroom

2 detectives put Pablo (curator) away before the day was out.

Medium — The Theatre Royal

Felix (gardener) is in custody — the case was closed by 2 detectives. Helena lied for them and was never charged.

Hard — The Cookie Thief

Petra (diva) ended the day behind bars — convicted by one detective.

Expert — The Royal Greenhouse

Felix (curator) was named and charged; one detective closed this one. The motive — buried secrets — was proved along with the name. Felix lied for them and was never charged.

Beginner · time attack — The Museum of Curiosities

Octavio (curator) slipped away — no detective cracked this board. The morning mail brought a postcard with no signature and a foreign stamp.

Easy · time attack — The Museum of Curiosities

Nico (gardener) was never charged — the day produced no conviction. A hired car left the coast road before dawn and was never returned.

Medium · time attack — The Art School

Dorian (butler) walked free: nobody closed this case. Last seen boarding the night ferry with a single case.

Hard · time attack — The Hiking Trip

Percy (magician) is still at large — the day ended without a conviction. A berth on the sleeper train was booked that evening under a name nobody recognized.

Expert · time attack — The Hotel Meridian

Nobody named Gaspar (chauffeur); the file stays open. The harbormaster remembers a late rowboat and no lantern. Gaspar lied for them and was never charged.

Read this recap in: Català · Deutsch · Español · Euskara · Français · Galego · हिन्दी · Italiano · 日本語 · 한국어 · Nederlands · Português · Русский · 中文

Every day's cases — the calendar · ← the cases for 17 August

Play free — no download