Murder mystery sudoku — the daily cases for 29 August 2026

Every detective in the world got these same crime scenes on 2026-08-29 — 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 4 rooms: Workshop, Vault, Office, Archive. Five statements, seven 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.

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. C — carpet (square stays free) · D — desk · M — mirror (square stays free) · 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.

Elena was beside the mirror. leaves 1 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Elena: 1 of 22.
Ursula was in the workshop. leaves 4 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ursula: 4 of 22.
Ursula was in row 3. leaves 1 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ursula: 1 of 22.
Irene was in the archive. leaves 8 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Irene: 8 of 22.
Simon was in the office. leaves 5 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Simon: 5 of 22.

Show the squares Simon had left

The squares still open to Simon once their own statements are taken into account — 5 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:

Oscar can only be in Workshop (row 4, column 4) — down from 22 possible squares.
Irene can only be in Archive (row 2, column 3) — down from 8 possible squares.
Simon can only be in Office (row 1, column 5) — down from 5 possible squares.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Beginner · time attack — The Courtroom

A 5×5 grid across 4 rooms: Hallway, Press Room, Courtroom, Gallery. Six statements, five 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.

The testimony

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

Ulises was in the gallery. leaves 3 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ulises: 3 of 22.
Paloma was in row 4. leaves 4 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Paloma: 4 of 22.
Paloma was in column 4. leaves 1 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Paloma: 1 of 22.
Ines was in the press room. leaves 4 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ines: 4 of 22.
Felix was in the leftmost column. leaves 4 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Felix: 4 of 22.
Felix was in the top row. leaves 1 of 22 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Felix: 1 of 22.

Show the squares Ulises had left

The squares still open to Ulises 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:

Hilda can only be in Courtroom (row 2, column 5) — down from 22 possible squares.
Ulises can only be in Gallery (row 3, column 3) — down from 3 possible squares.
Ines can only be in Press Room (row 5, column 2) — down from 4 possible squares.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Easy — Movie Night

A 6×6 grid across 5 rooms: Pantry, Study, Hallway, Laundry, TV Den. Eight statements, eight 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.

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) · CO — computer · 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.

Celeste was on the carpet. leaves 2 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Celeste: 2 of 30.
Celeste was in row 3. leaves 1 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Celeste: 1 of 30.
Octavio was beside the radio. leaves 2 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Octavio: 2 of 30.
Helena was in the laundry. leaves 7 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Helena: 7 of 30.
Helena was in the top row. leaves 3 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Helena: 3 of 30.
Nestor was in the pantry. leaves 6 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Nestor: 6 of 30.
Nestor was in the bottom row. leaves 1 of 30 squares
Greta was in the hallway. leaves 9 of 30 squares

Show the squares Octavio had left

The squares still open to Octavio 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:

Octavio can only be in Study (row 5, column 4) — down from 2 possible squares.
Helena can only be in Laundry (row 1, column 3) — down from 3 possible squares.
Greta can only be in Hallway (row 4, column 2) — down from 9 possible squares.
Felix can only be in Laundry (row 2, column 5) — down from 30 possible squares.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Helena, in Laundry (row 1, column 3).

Show the solved board

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

Easy · time attack — The Museum of Curiosities

A 6×6 grid across 5 rooms: Workshop, Gallery, Office, Archive, Vault. Eight statements, nine 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 — floor lamp · G — grandfather clock · 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.

Irene was in row 3. leaves 4 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Irene: 4 of 30.
Irene was in the archive. leaves 2 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Irene: 2 of 30.
Quentin was on the carpet. leaves 4 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Quentin: 4 of 30.
Quentin was beside the floor lamp. leaves 1 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Quentin: 1 of 30.
Leo was in the gallery. leaves 6 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Leo: 6 of 30.
Petra was beside the sofa. leaves 4 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Petra: 4 of 30.
Enzo was in the bottom row. leaves 6 of 30 squares
Enzo was in the gallery or in the archive. leaves 1 of 30 squares

Show the squares Irene had left

The squares still open to Irene 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:

Irene can only be in Archive (row 3, column 3) — down from 2 possible squares.
Leo can only be in Gallery (row 1, column 2) — down from 6 possible squares.
Petra can only be in Office (row 5, column 4) — down from 4 possible squares.
Nadia can only be in Vault (row 4, column 5) — down from 30 possible squares.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Medium · time attack — The Bunker

A 7×7 grid across 5 rooms: Pantry, Hydroponics, Dormitory, Radio Room, Generator Room. Eleven statements, twelve 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 — 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.

Kurt was in the same room as Enzo.
Kurt was in the same row as the cabinet. leaves 5 of 39 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Kurt: 5 of 39.
Dorian was in the same room as Enzo.
Paloma was in the same row as the radio. leaves 5 of 39 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Paloma: 5 of 39.
Paloma was somewhere west of the Colonel.
Paloma was in the hydroponics bay or in the radio room. leaves 3 of 39 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Paloma: 3 of 39.
Jimena was beside the carpet. leaves 4 of 39 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Jimena: 4 of 39.
Jimena was beside the cabinet. leaves 2 of 39 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Jimena: 2 of 39.
Queralt was in the same column as the crate. leaves 4 of 39 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Queralt: 4 of 39.
Queralt was in the pantry. leaves 1 of 39 squares
Enzo was in the same column as the stove. leaves 6 of 39 squares

Show the squares Jimena had left

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

What the testimony settles on its own

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

Helena can only be in Radio Room (row 3, column 2) — down from 39 possible squares.
Kurt can only be in Dormitory (row 5, column 6) — down from 5 possible squares.
Dorian can only be in Dormitory (row 4, column 7) — down from 39 possible squares.
Paloma can only be in Hydroponics (row 2, column 5) — down from 3 possible squares.
Jimena can only be in Radio Room (row 6, column 1) — down from 2 possible squares.
Enzo can only be in Dormitory (row 7, column 4) — down from 6 possible squares.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Medium — The Mystery Island

An 8×7 grid across 6 rooms: Cave, Beach, Wreck, Lookout, Jungle, Dock. Eight statements, eleven 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 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. 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 · F — floor lamp · P — palm tree · S — shrub

The testimony

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

Lorenzo was beside the floor lamp. leaves 2 of 44 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Lorenzo: 2 of 44.
Clara was in the cave or in the dock. leaves 12 of 44 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Clara: 12 of 44.
Yolanda was beside the crate. leaves 2 of 44 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Yolanda: 2 of 44.
Nora was in the same room as the Butler.
Kurt was beside the chest. leaves 1 of 44 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Kurt: 1 of 44.
Felix was in the same row as the bench. leaves 4 of 44 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Felix: 4 of 44.
Felix was somewhere west of Nora.
Nobody was in the beach.

Show the squares Lorenzo had left

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

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 50 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Lorenzo stood in Dock (row 1, column 1), Dante would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Clara in Dock (row 1, column 1) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Put Yolanda in Dock (row 4, column 1) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Put Nora in Lookout (row 1, column 4) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 46 squares fell the same way.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Kurt, in Wreck (row 6, column 7).

Show the solved board

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

Hard — The Movie Studio

A 9×8 grid across 7 rooms: Cafeteria, Director's Office, Desert Set, Editing Bay, Backlot, Sound Stage, Wardrobe. Twelve statements, fifteen 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 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. BE — bed (square stays free) · BO — bookshelf · CA — cactus · CO — computer · CR — carpet (square stays free) · CT — crate · FI — film camera · FL — floor lamp · M — mirror (square stays free) · P — painting (square stays free) · T — television

The testimony

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

Dora was in the same row as a painting. leaves 15 of 62 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Dora: 15 of 62.
Percy was in the same column as a painting. leaves 15 of 62 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Percy: 15 of 62.
Percy was in the same room as Walter.
Nestor was exactly 4 columns east of Julian.
Nestor was in the same row as the film camera. leaves 7 of 62 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Nestor: 7 of 62.
Ivan was all alone in a room.
Sofia was in row 5. leaves 9 of 62 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Sofia: 9 of 62.
Sofia was exactly 4 columns east of the Magician.
Julian was all alone in a room.
Julian was in the same row as the floor lamp. leaves 8 of 62 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Julian: 8 of 62.
Walter was in the same column as the carpet. leaves 7 of 62 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Walter: 7 of 62.
Walter was exactly 1 column east of the Professor.

Show the squares Nestor had left

The squares still open to Nestor once their own statements are taken into account — 7 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:

Sofia can only be in Editing Bay (row 5, column 9) — down from 9 possible squares.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 53 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Dora stood in Wardrobe (row 1, column 4), Nestor would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Percy in Backlot (row 2, column 6) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Had Nestor stood in Wardrobe (row 1, column 5), Walter would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Ivan in Director's Office (row 2, column 1) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 49 squares fell the same way.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Sofia, in Editing Bay (row 5, column 9).

Show the solved board

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

Hard · time attack — The Theatre Royal

An 8×8 grid across 7 rooms: Wings, Office, Dressing, Bar, Balcony, Workshop, Stage. Sixteen statements, fifteen 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 — and one of the eight 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. A — armchair (square stays free) · CA — carpet (square stays free) · CH — chest · CR — crate · D — desk · F — floor lamp · G — grandfather clock · H — harp · P — piano · S — sofa (square stays free) · W — window (square stays free)

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.

Vasco was in the same room as Marco.
Vasco was in the same room as Horacio.
Jimena was in the same column as the piano. if true, leaves 6 of 54
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Jimena: 6 of 54.
Jimena was somewhere east of Horacio.
Jimena was in the same row as the crate. if true, leaves 1 of 54
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Jimena: 1 of 54.
Dora was in the same column as the crate. if true, leaves 7 of 54
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Dora: 7 of 54.
Dora was in the same row as the armchair. if true, leaves 1 of 54
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Dora: 1 of 54.
Marco was in the same row as the piano. if true, leaves 5 of 54
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Marco: 5 of 54.
Marco was somewhere west of Jimena.
Horacio was somewhere east of Dora.
Paloma was in the same row as a window. if true, leaves 13 of 54
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Paloma: 13 of 54.
Paloma was in the balcony or in the workshop. if true, leaves 3 of 54
Paloma was not beside a window. if true, leaves 2 of 54
Boris was in the bar or in the balcony. if true, leaves 34 of 54
Boris was somewhere south of Paloma.
Boris was touching the outer wall. if true, leaves 20 of 54

Show the squares Paloma had left

The squares still open to Paloma 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.

If Vasco were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Jimena were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Dora were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Marco were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.

Another 3 candidates collapse the same way.

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

Read backwards, Boris actually told you:

Boris was in neither the bar nor the balcony.
Boris was NOT south of Paloma.
Boris was NOT touching the outer wall.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 53 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Vasco stood in Bar (row 6, column 2), Horacio would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Marco stood in Bar (row 7, column 3), Paloma would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Horacio in Bar (row 6, column 2) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Put Alma in Stage (row 2, column 2) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 49 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.

Marco's motive would have been debts.
Vasco's motive would have been ambition.
Jimena's motive would have been revenge.
Paloma's motive would have been blackmail.
Boris was not driven by jealousy.
Whoever did it was not driven by buried secrets.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Boris, in Dressing (row 4, column 6). Boris lied throughout and was never charged.

The only motive left standing for Boris is inheritance.

Show the solved board

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

Expert — The Hotel Meridian

A 10×9 grid across 8 rooms: Kitchen, Terrace, Gallery, Ballroom, Bar, Cellar, Suite, Lobby. Fourteen statements, seventeen 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.

The twist: the accusation also demands the motive, not just the name.

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 — bed (square stays free) · CA — carpet (square stays free) · CH — chest · CL — clock · D — desk · F — floor lamp · 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.

Ruben was in the same row as the floor lamp. leaves 7 of 80 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ruben: 7 of 80.
Ruben was exactly 4 columns west of Ada.
Fabio was exactly 4 rows north of the Professor.
Fabio was exactly 4 columns west of the Journalist.
Helena was somewhere north of the Chef.
Ada was all alone in a room.
Luna was in the same row as a sofa. leaves 34 of 80 squares
Luna was in the same column as the potted plant. leaves 3 of 80 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Luna: 3 of 80.
Beatrix was in the same row as a bed. leaves 19 of 80 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Beatrix: 19 of 80.
Tristan was somewhere east of Helena.
Tristan was beside a bed. leaves 4 of 80 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Tristan: 4 of 80.
Vivienne was in the same column as a clock. leaves 15 of 80 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Vivienne: 15 of 80.
Exactly 2 people were in the cellar.
Exactly 3 people were in the suite.

Show the squares Luna had left

The squares still open to Luna once their own statements are taken into account — 3 of 80.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 149 eliminations across 2 rounds of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Enzo stood in Suite (row 1, column 2), Ruben would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Ruben stood in Gallery (row 8, column 1), Enzo would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Fabio in Kitchen (row 2, column 1) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.
Had Helena stood in Suite (row 1, column 1), Fabio would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 145 squares fell the same way.

Fabio can only be in Suite (row 1, column 1) — down from 2 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.

Helena's motive would have been debts.
Ada's motive would have been jealousy.
Vivienne's motive would have been ambition.
Luna's motive would have been revenge.
Tristan's motive would have been obsession.
Ruben was not driven by buried secrets.
Ruben was not driven by inheritance.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Ruben, in Cellar (row 8, column 4).

The only motive left standing for Ruben is blackmail.

Show the solved board

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

Expert · time attack — The Backyard Garden

A 9×9 grid across 8 rooms: Garden, Kitchen, Bedroom, Pond, Living room, Backyard, Patio, Shed. Sixteen statements, nineteen 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. A — armchair (square stays free) · BE — bed (square stays free) · BO — bookshelf · CA — carpet (square stays free) · CH — chest · D — desk · FL — floor lamp · FO — flower bush · P — painting (square stays free) · SO — sofa (square stays free) · ST — 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.

Victor was in the same column as a bookshelf. if true, leaves 5 of 70
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Victor: 5 of 70.
Victor was somewhere east of the Professor.
Victor was somewhere south of the Magician.
Oscar was somewhere west of Julian.
Oscar was in the same row as a tree. if true, leaves 13 of 70
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Oscar: 13 of 70.
Oscar was in the same column as the flower bush. if true, leaves 1 of 70
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Oscar: 1 of 70.
Julian was in the same column as a tree. if true, leaves 16 of 70
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Julian: 16 of 70.
Marco was in the same column as a tree. if true, leaves 16 of 70
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Marco: 16 of 70.
Ivan was somewhere south of Marco.
Petra was in the same row as the bed. if true, leaves 16 of 70
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Petra: 16 of 70.
Beatrix was somewhere south of the Journalist.
Beatrix was somewhere east of the Magician.
Beatrix was in the same column as a tree. if true, leaves 54 of 70
Flora was beside a sofa. if true, leaves 4 of 70
Exactly 2 people were in the kitchen.
Exactly 3 people were in the patio.

Show the squares Flora had left

The squares still open to Flora once their own statements are taken into account — 4 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 Victor were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Oscar were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Julian were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Marco were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.

Another 4 candidates collapse the same way.

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

Read backwards, Beatrix actually told you:

Beatrix was NOT south of the Journalist.
Beatrix was NOT east of the Magician.
Beatrix was NOT in the same column as a tree.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 120 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Victor stood in Shed (row 6, column 3), Petra would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Julian stood in Pond (row 6, column 8), Petra would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Marco stood in Backyard (row 1, column 5), Petra would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Ivan stood in Kitchen (row 2, column 4), Flora would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 116 squares fell the same way.

Julian can only be in Backyard (row 3, column 8) — down from 4 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.

Victor's motive would have been buried secrets.
Oscar's motive would have been blackmail.
Ivan's motive would have been ambition.
Marco's motive would have been jealousy.
Julian's motive would have been obsession.
Whoever did it was not driven by debts.
Beatrix was not driven by revenge.

The answer

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

The only motive left standing for Beatrix is inheritance.

Show the solved board

The only arrangement the testimony allows. Beatrix 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 dockets for the twenty-ninth of August opened at The Museum of Curiosities, where five of eight investigators cleared the floor, led by a guest detective in fifteen seconds. Detective chentian was swift on Movie Night, solving it in twenty seconds as all five attempts succeeded. The Mystery Island tripped up one of its five visitors before a guest detective set the mark at one minute seven seconds, while chentian navigated The Movie Studio without a hitch in two minutes fifty-seven seconds. At The Hotel Meridian, where motive was strictly required, three out of four sleuths untangled the eight rooms, a guest detective claiming the best time in four minutes seventeen seconds.

The time attack circuit belonged entirely to chentian, who posted a clean sweep across all five boards. Quick work was made of The Courtroom in ten seconds, The Museum of Curiosities in eleven, and The Bunker in one minute seventeen seconds. The final two scenes added deceptive twists, introducing both a liar and a required motive; chentian cracked The Theatre Royal in three minutes forty-one seconds, before closing out the day at The Backyard Garden in eight minutes twenty-nine seconds.

Fastest detectives of the day

Beginner: a guest detective — 0m 15s · Easy: chentian — 0m 20s · Medium: a guest detective — 1m 07s · Hard: chentian — 2m 57s · Expert: a guest detective — 4m 17s · Beginner · time attack: chentian — 0m 10s · Easy · time attack: chentian — 0m 11s · Medium · time attack: chentian — 1m 17s · Hard · time attack: chentian — 3m 41s · Expert · time attack: chentian — 8m 29s

The solutions

The solved boards — spoilers for every case of 29 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 Museum of Curiosities

Ursula (doctor) ended the day behind bars — convicted by 5 detectives.

Easy — Movie Night

Helena (doctor) was named and charged; 5 detectives closed this one.

Medium — The Mystery Island

The cell door shut on Kurt (magician), on the evidence of 4 detectives.

Hard — The Movie Studio

3 detectives put Sofia (heiress) away before the day was out.

Expert — The Hotel Meridian

Ruben (colonel) is in custody — the case was closed by 3 detectives. The motive — blackmail — was proved along with the name.

Beginner · time attack — The Courtroom

Paloma (chef) ended the day behind bars — convicted by one detective.

Easy · time attack — The Museum of Curiosities

Quentin (gardener) was named and charged; one detective closed this one.

Medium · time attack — The Bunker

The cell door shut on Jimena (professor), on the evidence of one detective.

Hard · time attack — The Theatre Royal

one detective put Boris (colonel) away before the day was out. The motive — inheritance — was proved along with the name. Boris lied for them and was never charged.

Expert · time attack — The Backyard Garden

Beatrix (professor) is in custody — the case was closed by one detective. The motive — inheritance — was proved along with the name. Beatrix 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 28 August

Play free — no download