Murder mystery sudoku — the daily cases for 29 September 2026

Every detective in the world got these same crime scenes on 2026-09-29 — 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 Royal Greenhouse

A 5×5 grid across 4 rooms: Potting shed, Seed bank, Arbor, Orchid room. Five statements, six squares nobody could stand on, and no assumption anywhere: elimination alone closes it.

Cracked by 12 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.

Yolanda was in column 4. leaves 4 of 21 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Yolanda: 4 of 21.
Katia was in row 2. leaves 4 of 21 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Katia: 4 of 21.
Katia was in column 2. leaves 1 of 21 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Katia: 1 of 21.
Estela was in the potting room. leaves 4 of 21 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Estela: 4 of 21.
Ximena was beside the sofa. leaves 2 of 21 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ximena: 2 of 21.

Show the squares Ximena had left

The squares still open to Ximena once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 21.

What the testimony settles on its own

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

Yolanda can only be in Arbor (row 3, column 4) — down from 4 possible squares.
Felix can only be in Arbor (row 5, column 3) — down from 21 possible squares.
Estela can only be in Potting shed (row 1, column 5) — down from 4 possible squares.
Ximena can only be in Orchid room (row 4, column 1) — down from 2 possible squares.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Beginner · time attack — The Royal Greenhouse

A 5×5 grid across 3 rooms: Shed, Apiary, Potting shed. Six statements, eight squares nobody could stand on, and no assumption anywhere: elimination alone closes it.

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) · C — crate · FL — floor lamp · FO — flower bush · M — mirror (square stays free) · S — stove · T — tree · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

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

Abel was in the leftmost column. leaves 4 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Abel: 4 of 20.
Olivia was in column 3. leaves 4 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Olivia: 4 of 20.
Olivia was in the potting room. leaves 1 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Olivia: 1 of 20.
Vasco was in the potting room. leaves 9 of 20 squares
Wilfred was in column 4. leaves 3 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Wilfred: 3 of 20.
Wilfred was in the potting room. leaves 1 of 20 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Wilfred: 1 of 20.

Show the squares Abel had left

The squares still open to Abel 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:

Abel can only be in Shed (row 4, column 1) — down from 4 possible squares.
Vasco can only be in Potting shed (row 2, column 5) — down from 9 possible squares.
Helena can only be in Shed (row 5, column 2) — down from 20 possible squares.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Abel, in Shed (row 4, column 1).

Show the solved board

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

Easy — The Royal Greenhouse

A 6×6 grid across 4 rooms: Seed bank, Fountain, Potting shed, Arbor. Seven statements, nine squares nobody could stand on, and no assumption anywhere: elimination alone closes it.

Cracked by 9 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 — bonsai · CA — carpet (square stays free) · CR — crate · F — flower bush · G — grandfather clock · S — statue · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

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

Simon was seated on the armchair. leaves 1 of 31 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Simon: 1 of 31.
Tamara was in the fountain court. leaves 13 of 31 squares
Wilfred was beside a window. leaves 3 of 31 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Wilfred: 3 of 31.
Ignacio was in column 4. leaves 5 of 31 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ignacio: 5 of 31.
Ignacio was in the top row. leaves 1 of 31 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ignacio: 1 of 31.
Milo was in the rightmost column. leaves 5 of 31 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Milo: 5 of 31.
Milo was in row 4. leaves 1 of 31 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Milo: 1 of 31.

Show the squares Wilfred had left

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

Tamara can only be in Fountain (row 3, column 5) — down from 13 possible squares.
Wilfred can only be in Potting shed (row 6, column 2) — down from 3 possible squares.
Luna can only be in Arbor (row 2, column 3) — down from 31 possible squares.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Ignacio, in Arbor (row 1, column 4).

Show the solved board

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

Easy · time attack — The Royal Greenhouse

A 6×6 grid across 5 rooms: Fountain, Palm house, Apiary, Orchid room, Arbor. Six 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 · D — desk · F — flower bush · SO — sofa (square stays free) · ST — statue · SV — stove · T — tree · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

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

Quentin was in the bottom row. leaves 5 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Quentin: 5 of 30.
Nestor was on the carpet. leaves 2 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Nestor: 2 of 30.
Kaspar was in the rightmost column. leaves 6 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Kaspar: 6 of 30.
Kaspar was in the fountain court. leaves 1 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Kaspar: 1 of 30.
Clara was in column 2. leaves 5 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Clara: 5 of 30.
Alma was beside the sofa. leaves 3 of 30 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Alma: 3 of 30.

Show the squares Nestor had left

The squares still open to Nestor 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:

Quentin can only be in Apiary (row 6, column 4) — down from 5 possible squares.
Nestor can only be in Orchid room (row 5, column 1) — down from 2 possible squares.
Clara can only be in Arbor (row 1, column 2) — down from 5 possible squares.
Victor can only be in Arbor (row 2, column 3) — down from 30 possible squares.
Alma can only be in Palm house (row 4, column 5) — down from 3 possible squares.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Medium · time attack — The Royal Greenhouse

An 8×7 grid across 6 rooms: Shed, Palm house, Seed bank, Terrace, Apiary, Potting shed. Ten statements, sixteen squares nobody could stand on, almost as many rooms as suspects, so a room claim nearly names a square, and one round of assume-and-test after elimination ran dry.

Cracked by one detective so far.

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

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

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

The testimony

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

Ximena was in the same column as the potted plant. leaves 5 of 45 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ximena: 5 of 45.
Ximena was in the same room as the Gardener.
Vasco was in the same row as a window. leaves 12 of 45 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Vasco: 12 of 45.
Selma was in the same room as Julian.
Selma was in the same row as the crate. leaves 3 of 45 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Selma: 3 of 45.
Zaida was in the apiary or in the potting room. leaves 15 of 45 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Zaida: 15 of 45.
Zaida was touching the outer wall. leaves 2 of 45 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Zaida: 2 of 45.
Julian was in the same column as the bonsai. leaves 5 of 45 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Julian: 5 of 45.
Nadia was beside the statue. leaves 2 of 45 squares
Nobody was in the seed bank.

Show the squares Zaida had left

The squares still open to Zaida once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 45.

What the testimony settles on its own

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

Selma can only be in Palm house (row 7, column 8) — down from 3 possible squares.
Nadia can only be in Shed (row 6, column 1) — down from 2 possible squares.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 24 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Ximena stood in Apiary (row 1, column 4), Zaida would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Vasco stood in Apiary (row 4, column 3), Zaida would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Gaspar stood in Shed (row 1, column 2), Zaida would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Zaida in Apiary (row 1, column 4) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 20 squares fell the same way.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Medium — The Royal Greenhouse

A 7×7 grid across 6 rooms: Apiary, Arbor, Shed, Orchid room, Fountain, Terrace. Ten statements, thirteen squares nobody could stand on, almost as many rooms as suspects, so a room claim nearly names a square, and enough testimony that the surplus is what pins the last two down.

Cracked by 9 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 — bonsai · CA — carpet (square stays free) · CH — chest · D — desk · FL — floor lamp · FO — flower bush · G — grandfather clock · M — mirror (square stays free) · P — potted plant · S — sofa (square stays free) · T — tree · W — window (square stays free)

The testimony

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

Percy was touching the outer wall. leaves 20 of 41 squares
Percy was in the apiary or in the fountain court. leaves 4 of 41 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Percy: 4 of 41.
Alma was in column 5. leaves 7 of 41 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Alma: 7 of 41.
Alma was in the same row as the armchair. leaves 1 of 41 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Alma: 1 of 41.
Ursula was beside the bonsai. leaves 2 of 41 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ursula: 2 of 41.
Marina was somewhere south of the Heiress.
Marina was in the same column as the sofa. leaves 14 of 41 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Marina: 14 of 41.
Beatrix was in the same room as Walter.
Walter was in the same row as the potted plant. leaves 6 of 41 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Walter: 6 of 41.
Walter was beside the desk. leaves 1 of 41 squares

Show the squares Ursula had left

The squares still open to Ursula once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 41.

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 Fountain (row 1, column 4) — down from 4 possible squares.
Sol can only be in Terrace (row 2, column 7) — down from 41 possible squares.
Ursula can only be in Orchid room (row 5, column 2) — down from 2 possible squares.
Marina can only be in Terrace (row 4, column 6) — down from 14 possible squares.
Beatrix can only be in Orchid room (row 7, column 1) — down from 41 possible squares.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Marina, in Terrace (row 4, column 6).

Show the solved board

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

Hard — The Royal Greenhouse

An 8×8 grid across 7 rooms: Apiary, Fountain, Shed, Palm house, Seed bank, Orchid room, Arbor. Fifteen statements, twelve 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.

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. A — armchair (square stays free) · B — bonsai · C — crate · D — desk · FL — floor lamp · FO — flower bush · 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 8 is the killer's accomplice and every word they said is false — but not which one, not yet.

Walter was somewhere east of the Gardener.
Sofia was somewhere east of the Magician.
Sofia was in the same row as the desk. if true, leaves 7 of 55
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Sofia: 7 of 55.
Sofia was somewhere west of Dorian.
Boris was in the same column as the stove. if true, leaves 7 of 55
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Boris: 7 of 55.
Boris was in the same row as the window. if true, leaves 1 of 55
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Boris: 1 of 55.
Yolanda was in the same row as the armchair. if true, leaves 6 of 55
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Yolanda: 6 of 55.
Dorian was in the same room as Horacio.
Dorian was in the same row as the floor lamp. if true, leaves 50 of 55
Vivienne was in the same row as the statue. if true, leaves 6 of 55
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Vivienne: 6 of 55.
Vivienne was in the same column as the bonsai. if true, leaves 1 of 55
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Vivienne: 1 of 55.
Vivienne was somewhere north of the Butler.
Vivienne was somewhere east of the Professor.
Horacio was in the same row as the sofa. if true, leaves 8 of 55
Horacio was in the same column as the sofa. if true, leaves 2 of 55

Show the squares Horacio had left

The squares still open to Horacio once their own statements are taken into account — 2 of 55.

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 Walter were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Sofia were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Ruben were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Boris were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.

Another 3 candidates collapse the same way.

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

Read backwards, Dorian actually told you:

Dorian was NOT in the same room as Horacio.
Dorian was NOT in the same row as the floor lamp.

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 Fountain (row 8, column 8) — down from 55 possible squares.
Sofia can only be in Palm house (row 2, column 3) — down from 7 possible squares.
Ruben can only be in Shed (row 4, column 6) — down from 55 possible squares.
Yolanda can only be in Arbor (row 5, column 1) — down from 6 possible squares.
Dorian can only be in Shed (row 3, column 7) — down from 50 possible squares.
Horacio can only be in Orchid room (row 7, column 2) — down from 2 possible squares.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Hard · time attack — The Royal Greenhouse

A 9×8 grid across 7 rooms: Arbor, Terrace, Potting shed, Orchid room, Fountain, Seed bank, Apiary. 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 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 — bonsai · CA — carpet (square stays free) · CH — chest · CR — crate · D — desk · FL — floor lamp · FO — flower bush · G — grandfather clock · 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.

Vasco was exactly 3 columns west of the Diva.
Vasco was in the same column as the sofa. leaves 15 of 61 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Vasco: 15 of 61.
Vasco was in the same room as Simon.
Ximena was in the same row as a window. leaves 16 of 61 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Ximena: 16 of 61.
Clara was in the same row as the desk. leaves 7 of 61 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Clara: 7 of 61.
Fabio was in the same row as the grandfather clock. leaves 7 of 61 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Fabio: 7 of 61.
Fabio was somewhere west of the Doctor.
Simon was in the same room as the Chef.
Simon was exactly 4 columns west of the Butler.
Jimena was in the same row as the statue. leaves 7 of 61 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Jimena: 7 of 61.
Lidia was somewhere south of Fabio.
Lidia was in the same column as the grandfather clock. leaves 7 of 61 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Lidia: 7 of 61.

Show the squares Clara had left

The squares still open to Clara once their own statements are taken into account — 7 of 61.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 26 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Vasco stood in Apiary (row 5, column 3), Fabio would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Dorian stood in Orchid room (row 2, column 1), Simon would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Ximena stood in Seed bank (row 1, column 6), Vasco would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Clara stood in Seed bank (row 4, column 7), Fabio would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 22 squares fell the same way.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

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

Expert — The Royal Greenhouse

A 9×9 grid across 8 rooms: Apiary, Shed, Potting shed, Arbor, Fountain, Seed bank, Palm house, Terrace. Eighteen statements, eighteen squares nobody could stand on, almost as many rooms as suspects, so a room claim nearly names a square, and two rounds of assume-and-test after elimination ran dry — and one of the nine was lying throughout.

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

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 — bonsai · CA — carpet (square stays free) · CH — chest · CR — crate · D — desk · FL — floor lamp · FO — flower bush · G — grandfather clock · 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.

Margot was somewhere north of the Colonel.
Margot was somewhere east of Ivan.
Oscar was somewhere south of the Butler.
Oscar was somewhere east of the Diva.
Oscar was in the same column as the grandfather clock. if true, leaves 8 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Oscar: 8 of 68.
Oscar was in the same row as the floor lamp. if true, leaves 1 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Oscar: 1 of 68.
Queralt was somewhere north of the Colonel.
Dora was in the same row as the carpet. if true, leaves 16 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Dora: 16 of 68.
Dora was in the same column as the sofa. if true, leaves 4 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Dora: 4 of 68.
Ruben was in the eastern half of the scene. if true, leaves 40 of 68
Ruben was in the same row as the chest. if true, leaves 36 of 68
Lidia was in the same row as the armchair. if true, leaves 9 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Lidia: 9 of 68.
Lidia was somewhere west of the Chef.
Ivan was somewhere west of the Doctor.
Selma was in column 5. if true, leaves 9 of 68
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Selma: 9 of 68.
Selma was somewhere north of the Journalist.
Exactly 2 people were in the palm house.
Exactly 2 people were in the fountain court.

Show the squares Dora had left

The squares still open to Dora once their own statements are taken into account — 4 of 68.

Unmasking the liar

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

If Margot were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.
If Bruno 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 Queralt were the one lying, no arrangement satisfies the rest. Not them.

Another 4 candidates collapse the same way.

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

Read backwards, Ruben actually told you:

Ruben was NOT in the eastern half of the scene.
Ruben was NOT in the same row as the chest.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 117 eliminations of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Margot stood in Apiary (row 2, column 2), Lidia would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Bruno stood in Shed (row 1, column 1), Ivan would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Queralt stood in Shed (row 1, column 2), Margot would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Put Dora in Arbor (row 5, column 7) and the testimony cannot be satisfied at all. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 113 squares fell the same way.

Margot can only be in Terrace (row 7, column 2) — down from 3 possible squares.

The answer

That leaves one arrangement, and one person who could have done it: Ruben, in Potting shed (row 8, column 4). Ruben lied throughout and was never charged.

Show the solved board

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

Expert · time attack — The Royal Greenhouse

A 10×9 grid across 8 rooms: Apiary, Shed, Fountain, Terrace, Orchid room, Potting shed, Palm house, Arbor. Twelve statements, eighteen squares nobody could stand on, almost as many rooms as suspects, so a room claim nearly names a square, and two rounds of assume-and-test after elimination ran dry.

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) · B — bonsai · CA — carpet (square stays free) · CH — chest · CR — crate · D — desk · FL — floor lamp · FO — flower bush · G — grandfather clock · 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, and how much of the board it rules out.

Ursula was somewhere south of the Journalist.
Selma was exactly 2 columns west of the Chef.
Rosa was exactly 6 columns west of Ada.
Rosa was exactly 1 row north of Bruno.
Ada was exactly 2 rows north of Ursula.
Kaspar was somewhere north of Queralt.
Bruno was in the same column as the desk. leaves 8 of 77 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Bruno: 8 of 77.
Queralt was all alone in a room.
Victor was exactly 2 rows north of Kaspar.
Victor was in column 2. leaves 8 of 77 squares
Show it on the board
The squares this one statement leaves Victor: 8 of 77.
Exactly 3 people were in the terrace.
Exactly 2 people were in the arbor.

Show the squares Bruno had left

The squares still open to Bruno once their own statements are taken into account — 8 of 77.

The squares that had to be tested

The rest does not fall out on its own. It takes 271 eliminations across 2 rounds of the same move: put someone on a square, follow the consequences, and watch the board contradict itself.

Had Ursula stood in Shed (row 5, column 6), Bruno would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Selma stood in Palm house (row 1, column 2), Victor would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Rosa stood in Palm house (row 1, column 2), Victor would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.
Had Ada stood in Shed (row 3, column 7), Ursula would have had nowhere left to stand. So not there.

Show what goes wrong

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

Another 267 squares fell the same way.

Ursula can only be in Terrace (row 9, column 9) — down from 2 possible squares.

The answer

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

Show the solved board

The only arrangement the testimony allows. Kaspar 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

What the Tide Keeps — 4 of them saw through the testimony at The Royal Greenhouse. 3 was the bar; 4 leaves nothing to argue about.

All ten investigations for the day unfolded beneath the glass panes of The Royal Greenhouse. The standard dockets began smoothly across the smaller layouts, where chentian set the pace on the 5x5 beginner board in ten seconds, and a guest detective solved the 6x6 easy room in eighteen seconds. Chentian returned to claim the 7x7 medium grid in twenty-five seconds, but complications soon took root. Deceit entered the foliage on the 8x8 hard and 9x9 expert scenes, each introducing a liar among the statements. Chentian dismantled the seven-room hard puzzle in two minutes and five seconds, while a guest detective untangled the eight-room expert case in seven minutes and seventeen seconds. Neither inquiry required a motive to close the file.

The time attack boards drew solitary pursuit rather than bustling crowds, yet the clock proved manageable. Chentian swept every single timed case in the greenhouse, moving from the three-room beginner scene in eleven seconds to the 6x6 easy grid in fifteen. The 8x7 medium room fell in forty-seven seconds, followed by the 9x8 hard board in five minutes and twenty-five seconds. The day concluded with the sprawling 10x9 expert challenge, where chentian navigated eight rooms without encountering a single liar, securing the final solution in sixteen minutes and fifty-six seconds.

Fastest detectives of the day

Beginner: chentian — 0m 10s · Easy: a guest detective — 0m 18s · Medium: chentian — 0m 25s · Hard: chentian — 2m 05s · Expert: a guest detective — 7m 17s · Beginner · time attack: chentian — 0m 11s · Easy · time attack: chentian — 0m 15s · Medium · time attack: chentian — 0m 47s · Hard · time attack: chentian — 5m 25s · Expert · time attack: chentian — 16m 56s