Accomplice cases: solving puzzles where one suspect always lies

In an accomplice case, one suspect is covering for the murderer, and every single statement of theirs is false — a classic liar-logic (knights-and-knaves) twist on the placement puzzle. Everyone else still tells the truth.

The key inversion

A false statement is exact: if the accomplice says "I was in the storeroom or in the car lift", the truth is they were in neither. "I was beside the window" means not beside any window. You are not discarding their testimony — you are flipping it into evidence. An accomplice's lies often pin them down as hard as honest testimony would.

Finding the liar

Hunt contradictions: if two suspects' statements cannot both hold, one of them is your accomplice candidate — everyone honest must be mutually consistent.
Test candidates one at a time: assume a suspect lies, invert everything they said, and check whether the board still admits a valid one-per-row-and-column solution. Only the true accomplice survives that test.
Use the impossible: a suspect whose statements are all satisfiable alongside everyone else's is usually honest; the accomplice's claims tend to break somewhere.

The tools in Kludoku

Mark any suspect with the 🎭 toggle and the game renders their card in negative with every statement rewritten to its logical opposite — no mental double-negation. Combine it with hypothesis branches: each branch can carry its own accomplice assumption, so "what if the Curator lies" and "what if the Butler lies" live side by side until one collapses. Dropping a refuted branch even strikes the disproven candidate for you.

Try it on today's cases — harder dailies regularly carry an accomplice. Play free, or start with the full how-to.

Play free — no download