R0.00
A local business owner is murdered hours after interviewing five candidates for a single job. You’ll consider CVs, forensic findings, interview transcripts, and digital evidence to narrow the suspect list and identify the killer.
DETECTIVE: Mr Louw, do you own a firearm?
TREVOR: Define own.
DETECTIVE: Legally registered in your name.
TREVOR: Oh. Then yes. But I don’t believe in ownership.
DETECTIVE: Were you home the night of the shooting?
TREVOR: Yes. I was live-streaming.
DETECTIVE: Anything else?
TREVOR: Did you know that dentists add listening devices to your fillings?
DETECTIVE: Mrs Jacobs, do you own a firearm?
MRS JACOBS: Yes. A small pistol. It fits in my purse.
DETECTIVE: Were you home the night of the shooting?
MRS JACOBS: Yes. Watching television.
DETECTIVE: Did you hear anything?
MRS JACOBS: A sharp bang. 1:46am exactly.
DETECTIVE: Do you own a firearm?
GYM BRO: Yes. Licensed handgun.
DETECTIVE: Were you home the night of the shooting?
GYM BRO: I was asleep.
DETECTIVE: Can anyone confirm your routine?
GYM BRO: Anyone in this building can. I’m predictable.
GYM BRO: The gym can confirm it too.
GYM BRO: I never left my room that night.
DETECTIVE: Do you own a firearm?
IT GUY: Yes. A bolt-action rifle.
DETECTIVE: Have you fired it recently?
IT GUY: No. I’ve never fired it.
DETECTIVE: Were you home that night?
IT GUY: Yes. Gaming. Headset on.
DETECTIVE: Do you own a firearm?
MR HARRISON: Several. All licensed.
DETECTIVE: Were you home the night of the shooting?
MR HARRISON: Yes.
Press play
Recovered item is a deformed copper-jacketed rifle projectile. No casing was recovered at the scene.
Preliminary measurements indicate a diameter consistent with 7.62mm (.30 calibre) class rifle ammunition.
The projectile exhibits moderate nose deformation and minor jacket separation. Microscopic particulate consistent with gypsum and light concrete composite material was identified within surface grooves.
A full inspection of the hotel room interior was conducted. No lateral entry defect or wall penetration was identified. Adjacent rooms (2126 and 2128) were assessed and show no corresponding discharge or structural damage.
The projectile is therefore unlikely to have originated from the same level.
Further ballistic comparison pending.
Press play
Overview
Building 1 is a commercial office structure positioned opposite the hotel.
Physical Constraints
• All external windows are permanently sealed and non-operable
• No balconies or external ledges suitable for firing positions
• Rooftop access is monitored by fixed surveillance cameras
Security Review
• Rooftop camera footage reviewed for the full incident window
• No movement detected
• No unauthorised access events recorded
• No loitering or equipment staging observed
Given that:
• Windows cannot be opened
• No external firing platform exists
• Rooftop footage shows no activity
A discharge from this building would require firing through commercial-grade sealed glass from inside an office space, leaving interior ballistic and glass signatures.
No such damage or disturbance was found.
Conclusion
Building 1 is eliminated as a viable origin point due to lack of any physical firing position and absence of rooftop activity.
Scope Reduction
The tower contains 200+ residential units – all permanent residents.
Line-of-sight mapping determined:
• Only approximately 50 units had any potential visual corridor toward Room 2127
• Structural overhangs, balcony dividers, and façade alignment eliminated the remainder
Further narrowing focused on units with unobstructed angles.
All residents within the 50 potential units were:
• Identified
• Interviewed
• Background screened
Results:
• 5 residents held firearm licences or had documented firearms experience
• The remaining residents’ background checks revealed only non-violent records (primarily financial offences or unrelated civil matters)
• No history of violent firearm-related crime among any resident in the potential line-of-sight group
The concrete penetration and 240m distance indicate:
• A high-energy rifle platform
• Precision optics
• Stable firing setup
None of the five firearm-licensed residents:
• Possessed rifles consistent with required calibre
• Reported missing or recently discharged firearms
• Showed evidence of recent ammunition purchase anomalies
• Exhibited residue indicators or behavioural red flags during interview
No evidence was found suggesting:
• Weapon transport
• Balcony setup
• Furniture repositioning
• Surface disturbance consistent with a firing platform
• No prolonged balcony presence observed during incident window
• No abrupt light changes or curtain movement in relevant units
• No exterior rifle discharge reports from tower residents
• No secondary façade impact marks on the hotel exterior
For Building 2 to be the origin point, one of five identified firearm-capable residents would need to:
• Deploy a high-energy rifle capable of concrete penetration
• Establish a stable 240m firing position
• Achieve a lethal hit in a limited exposure window
• Leave no physical setup trace
• Avoid all visual and acoustic detection
Investigative findings do not support this scenario.
Building 2 is therefore eliminated as a credible source of the shot.
Additionally, the ballistic findings introduce a further complication: the projectile penetrated a concrete surface prior to striking the victim. At an approximate distance of 240 metres, this would require a high-energy rifle platform capable of maintaining significant velocity after impact. Such a discharge would demand a stable firing position, extended setup time, and would likely produce a pronounced acoustic signature and visible physical disturbance. No evidence of equipment staging, structural impact consistent with a cross-street origin, or associated exterior noise was identified in connection with either building. This additional ballistic requirement further reduces the plausibility of either structure serving as the source of the shot.
Press play
Victim: Daniel Robert Mercer
Location: Hotel Room 2127
Date: 30 January 2026
Time of Discovery: 09:15
Daniel Mercer was discovered unresponsive in his hotel room at 09:15 by housekeeping staff conducting routine cleaning. Mercer was scheduled to check out at 08:00 but did not present at reception or respond to hotel contact attempts.
Hotel security and emergency services were notified immediately.
No signs of forced entry were observed on the main door. Electronic lock logs confirm no recorded entries or exits after Mercer returned to the room at approximately 01:42.
Preliminary examination indicates a single gunshot wound to the lower abdomen. No additional visible trauma was observed. No firearm was recovered inside the room.
The room showed no evidence of struggle. Personal belongings appeared undisturbed.
At this stage, investigators are considering the possibility that the shot may have originated from outside the room, potentially through the balcony access area. However, internal discharge cannot yet be excluded pending full forensic and trajectory analysis.
A preliminary survey of surrounding structures indicates that only two nearby buildings provide a clear line of sight to the victim’s balcony. Further assessment of these structures is ongoing.
#Note:
Cameras pointed at the hotel side where the balcony is located was reviewed, nobody entered or exited through the balcony throughout the night/morning in question
Press play
Subject: Daniel Robert Mercer
DOB: 17 August 1982 (Age 43)
Nationality: American
ID No.: 5842719
Physical Description:
Approx. 180 cm, average build, brown hair, light stubble. Appears fatigued and slightly unkempt in official ID.
Recent Activity (29 January 2026):
CCTV confirms Mercer gambled at the casino from approximately 18:00 until shortly after 01:30. Witnesses and staff report he was visibly intoxicated. No recorded disputes, altercations, or security interventions.
Financial & Social Status:
No excessive debt identified. No outstanding casino markers. No known enemies or ongoing disputes. Gambling losses within manageable range.
Assessment:
Low-profile individual. Non-confrontational behaviour, including while intoxicated. No immediate indicators of retaliation, financial coercion, or known conflict-related motive.
INTERROGATION TRANSCRIPT
Subject: Xolani Mkuku
Date: Tuesday, 24 June 2025
Location: Slummies Central Police Station, Interview Room 5
Interview Conducted By: Detective Inspector Sam Pillay
Recording ID: SCPD-MKUKU-INT-0624
Time: 11:25 AM
DI Pillay: State your full name for the record.
Xolani: Xolani Mkuku.
DI Pillay: You interviewed with Barry Harrowitz last Wednesday?
Xolani: That’s correct. Early afternoon, just after one.
DI Pillay: How did that interview go?
Xolani: Well. He was direct, a bit abrasive, but I could tell he respected what I brought to the table. We talked public sector alignment, transformation strategy, onboarding systems. He challenged me, but I held my ground. I left confident I’d be hearing back soon.
DI Pillay: You were expecting to get the job?
Xolani: Yes. It felt like the momentum was there. I ticked the boxes he needed, and I had the networks he didn’t.
DI Pillay: How did you react when you heard about his death?
Xolani: I was surprised. Sad, actually. Say what you want about the man, he built something. I don’t celebrate setbacks, even when they come from people who challenged me.
DI Pillay: Did you contact him after the interview?
Xolani: No. I didn’t see the need. It felt like he’d be the one reaching out.
DI Pillay: Where were you between 6 PM and midnight on the 18th?
Xolani: Spur restaurant in Beacon Bay. It was my son’s birthday. My wife made a booking. We got there just after six, stayed until about half past eight. Had the whole singing cake moment and everything.
DI Pillay: Names?
Xolani: My wife’s name is Nandi. Son’s name is Sipho. He turned nine. You can call Spur, they’ll confirm it.
DI Pillay: Do you own a firearm or any other weapon?
Xolani: No. I’ve never needed one.
DI Pillay: Do you think anyone had reason to hurt Barry?
Xolani: Possibly. He wasn’t exactly subtle. If you walked in insecure, he’d walk all over you. But I’m not most people. I saw through the performance. I was already thinking about what I’d do once I was on his team.
DI Pillay: Alright, that’s all for now. Don’t leave East London without checking in with this office.
Xolani: You’ll know where to find me.
INTERROGATION TRANSCRIPT
Subject: Maharaj Kholi
Date: Tuesday, 24 June 2025
Location: Slummies Central Police Station – Interview Room 3
Interview Conducted By: Detective Inspector Sam Pillay
Recording ID: SCPD-MAH-INT-0624
Time: 10:04 AM
DI Pillay: Good morning. Please state your full name for the record.
Maharaj: Maharaj Kholi.
DI Pillay: Mr Kholi, we’re speaking with everyone who interacted with Barry Harrowitz on the day of his death, Wednesday, 18 June. You had a scheduled interview with him that morning?
Maharaj: I did. Around 11:15, yes.
DI Pillay: What was the nature of that interview?
Maharaj: Brief. And unpleasant. He was dismissive from the moment I sat down. Made cracks about my background. Spoke like my years in logistics meant nothing.
DI Pillay: Can you give an example?
Maharaj: He said I “had an accent” and wondered if clients would “understand” me. Asked if I could take initiative like I haven’t been managing teams for over a decade. He questioned whether I could “fit in” with corporate culture. Honestly, it felt like he’d made up his mind before I opened my mouth.
DI Pillay: How did you respond?
Maharaj: Professionally. I kept it together, but inside? I was insulted. I’ve worked hard my whole life. That man didn’t see any of it. Just saw someone to look down on.
DI Pillay: Did you reach out to him after the interview?
Maharaj: No. And I wasn’t going to. After that meeting, I wanted nothing to do with that company.
DI Pillay: Where were you between 6 PM and midnight on the 18th?
Maharaj: Around 7, I went for a walk. Same streets I’ve walked every evening. Needed to reflect. That day had left a sour taste in my mouth. I walked, breathed, tried to shake the energy off. Then I went home.
DI Pillay: Alone?
Maharaj: Yes. I stay alone. Didn’t speak to anyone. Didn’t want to.
DI Pillay: Anyone who might have seen you?
Maharaj: Maybe someone saw me passing, but I didn’t interact with anyone. Just needed space.
DI Pillay: Do you own a weapon?
Maharaj: No. Never have.
DI Pillay: Do you believe someone had a reason to harm Barry Harrowitz?
Maharaj: I believe people like that make enemies just by being themselves. Me? I walk away. I’ve worked too hard to throw it all away because of one arrogant man.
DI Pillay: Alright, Mr Kholi. You’re not being charged with anything. But do not leave East London without informing this office.
Maharaj: You won’t have a problem with me.
INTERROGATION TRANSCRIPT
Subject: Susan Peggy
Date: Tuesday, 24 June 2025
Location: Slummies Central Police Station – Interview Room 2
Interview Conducted By: Detective Inspector Sam Pillay
Recording ID: SCPD-SUS-INT-0624
Time: 09:17 AM
DI Pillay: Please state your full name for the record.
Susan: Susan Peggy.
DI Pillay: Thank you. We’re speaking with you today in connection with the death of Barry Harrowitz. You’re aware he was found deceased on the night of Wednesday, 18 June?
Susan: Yes. I heard the following morning. It was… shocking.
DI Pillay: You interviewed with him earlier that day, correct?
Susan: That’s right.
DI Pillay: What was the nature of the interview?
Susan: Let’s just say… enlightening. He was blunt, confrontational, and frankly, condescending. He questioned my qualifications, belittled my experience, and made several remarks I’d consider sexist. But I kept my cool. I always do.
DI Pillay: What kind of remarks?
Susan: Things like asking if I could manage men. Telling me I sounded like a TED Talk. That kind of thing.
DI Pillay: Did it upset you?
Susan: I’ve worked in gender advocacy for a decade. I don’t let men like him get under my skin. He was trying to provoke me and I didn’t give him the satisfaction.
DI Pillay: Did you contact him after the interview?
Susan: No. I had no interest in any further contact. To be honest, I left that interview knowing I wanted nothing to do with him or his company. I’m happy in my current role, I was just exploring options.
DI Pillay: So you wouldn’t have accepted the job?
Susan: Not even if he begged. I have standards, Detective.
DI Pillay: Where were you between 6 PM and midnight on the night of the 18th?
Susan: From 6ish I had a virtual board meeting for the Women’s Future Foundation, I can provide the login details if you need them. After that, I went for my usual evening stroll. I do that most nights, weather permitting. Helps me clear my head.
DI Pillay: Alone?
Susan: Always. I live alone. After the walk, I went home, did some paperwork, maybe watched Netflix. Nothing remarkable.
DI Pillay: Anyone who can confirm that?
Susan: Not really. Like I said, I live alone. But I’m a creature of habit. You can ask my neighbours, I take the same route nearly every evening.
DI Pillay: Did Barry threaten you in any way?
Susan: Only with his attitude. But no, no threats. Just arrogance. And maybe a little fear of women who speak their minds.
DI Pillay: One last question, do you think someone had reason to harm him?
Susan: I think a man who speaks to people the way he spoke to me probably made a lot of enemies. I just chose to walk away.
DI Pillay: Understood. You’re not under arrest, Ms Peggy, but please don’t leave East London without informing this station.
Susan: That won’t be a problem.
INTERROGATION TRANSCRIPT
Subject: David Flynn
Date: Tuesday, 24 June 2025
Location: Slummies Central Police Station, Interview Room 4
Interview Conducted By: Detective Inspector Sam Pillay
Recording ID: SCPD-FLYNN-INT-0624
Time: 10:47 AM
DI Pillay: Let’s begin. State your full name for the record.
David: David Flynn.
DI Pillay: You interviewed with Barry Harrowitz on Wednesday the 18th?
David: Yeah, around noon. Not my favourite meeting, if I’m honest.
DI Pillay: What happened?
David: He made a joke out of me. Mocked my CV, called me unstable. Said my experience looked like chaos. I’ve worked in a lot of places, yeah, but that doesn’t mean I’m flaky.
DI Pillay: He mentioned your work as a DJ?
David: He couldn’t let it go. As if being a DJ means I can’t take anything seriously. I’ve been a chef, mechanic assistant, intern… I’ve done a lot because I’ve tried a lot.
DI Pillay: Did you lose your temper?
David: No. I kept it cool. I wasn’t gonna let him rattle me. But it did sting.
DI Pillay: Did you follow up with him after the interview?
David: No. Didn’t want to. The guy clearly wasn’t interested, and frankly, neither was I by the end of it.
DI Pillay: Where were you that evening, between 6 and midnight?
David: I was with my girlfriend, Sasha Daniels. We went for a walk in Gonubie around 7, grabbed something from the shop. It was quiet. Just a regular night.
DI Pillay: Can anyone confirm that?
David: Sasha, for sure. Maybe the cashier at the shop. I don’t know if they’ll remember, but we were there.
DI Pillay: Do you own any weapons?
David: No. Nothing even close.
DI Pillay: Why apply for the job if you weren’t desperate?
David: I wasn’t desperate. I’m just looking to build something steady. I’ve got ideas, I’ve got skills. Just needed someone to give me a proper chance.
DI Pillay: Do you think anyone had reason to hurt Barry?
David: After the way he spoke to me? I wouldn’t be surprised if he rubbed people the wrong way. But that’s not my style. I walk away.
DI Pillay: You’re free to go. Don’t leave East London without checking in.
David: No stress. I’ll be around.
INTERROGATION TRANSCRIPT
Subject: Axel Gustav
Date: Tuesday, 24 June 2025
Location: Slummies Central Police Station, Interview Room 6
Interview Conducted By: Detective Inspector Sam Pillay
Recording ID: SCPD-GUSTAV-INT-0624
Time: 12:09 PM
DI Pillay: Please state your full name for the record.
Axel: Axel Gustav.
DI Pillay: You interviewed with Barry Harrowitz on Wednesday the 18th?
Axel: I did. Early afternoon.
DI Pillay: How did that conversation go?
Axel: Confrontational. He spent most of the time trying to cut me down. Not unexpected. Some people get defensive around credentials they don’t understand.
DI Pillay: Defensive how?
Axel: He made snide remarks about my qualifications. Implied I was overqualified, or arrogant, or both. I think he felt threatened. He wouldn’t be the first entrepreneur with an ego problem.
DI Pillay: Did you respond?
Axel: I made it clear I wasn’t going to shrink for anyone. But I kept it civil. If he wanted to measure himself against me, that was his business. I’m just here to build things.
DI Pillay: Did you reach out to him after the interview?
Axel: No. And I wouldn’t have. I could already tell we weren’t aligned. I moved on the moment I walked out.
DI Pillay: Where were you on the evening of Wednesday the 18th, between 6 PM and midnight?
Axel: At home in Cambridge. I was looking after my son. He’s two years old. My wife was working late, so it was just the two of us.
DI Pillay: Can anyone confirm that?
Axel: You’re welcome to check with my wife, but she wasn’t there. Still, I wasn’t anywhere near Vincent. Never left Cambridge that night.
DI Pillay: Do you own any weapons?
Axel: No.
DI Pillay: Do you think someone had reason to hurt Barry?
Axel: I think he created friction. He confused confrontation for strength. That’s not uncommon. But whether someone took that personally? That’s not for me to speculate. I had no interest in fighting with him, certainly not over a job I didn’t even want anymore.
DI Pillay: Alright. You’re free to go. Stay available in case we need follow-up.
Axel: Of course. But like I said, I’ve moved on.
FY: Keep the bow going against the waves as long as possible.
The contrast between Billy Merano’s Photo, and how Jack found the body:
John Lewis had his body moved around (Facing a different direction), perhaps empty his pockets, as well as missing tools and a missing clipboard.
Tip: Click the ⛶ icon (top right) to view in full.
Click on the top right X to exit the current popup
Use the arrows to flip between the notes.
Tip: Click the ⛶ icon (top right) to view the full locker.
Tip: Click the ⛶ icon (top right) to view the full locker.
Tip: Click the ⛶ icon (top right) to view the full locker.
Tip: Click the ⛶ icon (top right) to view the full locker.
Use the menu on the right to select any suspect. It is recommended that you read the interrogations from top to bottom in order.
Each suspect section includes the following:
1. Interrogation Presentation
This is a step-by-step reenactment of Jack Kirk’s questioning.
Work through each slide. At the end of every interrogation you will answer four questions. These questions help you track anything that feels off or worth revisiting later.
2. Suspect Profile
A summary of who the suspect is, their duties on the ship, and their general behaviour. This helps you understand their role and whether their story fits their responsibilities.
3. Statement Summary
A short recap of what the suspect claims happened.
4. Jack’s Sticky Notes
These are quick bullet-point notes summarising exactly what they said during the interrogation. The sticky notes do not highlight inconsistencies. They only record what the suspect claimed.
At the end of the module you can view all the sticky notes together on one page. Use them to compare timelines, behaviour, movements across the ship, and any patterns that stand out.
Once you have reviewed all interrogations you must choose four suspects. The captain will allow access to those four lockers for further investigation.
Take your time. Read carefully. Nothing in this investigation is accidental.
Use the Day Shift and Night Shift rosters to work out which crew members were within one room of the tunnel at the time of the murder.
Move between the rosters as needed, compare positions, and note anyone close enough to matter.
Once you have your list, return to the suspect cards.
Each card represents one crew member you may choose to interrogate.
Select at least six of the seven crew members who were realistically near the crime scene.
Do not select more than seven or fewer than six.
Click on the cards of the people you want to interrogate, then check your answers to continue by clicking the check button.
How this works
Use the Day Shift and Night Shift hotspot maps to explore the ship.
Click on any hotspot to see who is assigned to that section during that shift.
Each hotspot will show you:
The department responsible for that area
The crew members working there
Their expected duties during that shift
It can be confirmed that at the time of the murder, everyone was exactly where they were supposed to be on the first night of the voyage.
Move between the Day and Night maps as needed. Compare sections, note patterns, and build a picture of the crew’s movements.
When you are ready, choose who you want to interrogate based on the information you have gathered.
Voyage 748 · Issued 10 Nov 1975 · By order of Capt. Leonard Pike
| Department | Crew Member | Role | Shift | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bridge & Command | ||||
| Bridge & Command | Capt. Leonard Pike | Master of Vessel | Day On-call Night | Commanding Officer (floats) |
| Bridge & Command | Jack Kirk | Acting First Mate | Day On-call Night | Replaced W. Hartman (see Deck entry) |
| Bridge & Command | Frank Reed | Navigator | Day On-call Night | |
| Bridge & Command | Thomas Grady | Radio Operator | Day On-call Night | |
| Bridge & Command | Edward Sloan | Second Officer | Night On-call Day | |
| Bridge & Command | Xolani Mthembu | Assistant Radio Operator | Night On-call Day | |
| Engineering & Mechanical | ||||
| Engineering & Mechanical | Walter Henley | Chief Engineer | Day On-call Night | Department lead |
| Engineering & Mechanical | Raymond Dalton | 1st Assistant Engineer | Day On-call Night | On-call at night (per rule) |
| Engineering & Mechanical | Charles “C.” Maddox | Mechanic | Day On-call Night | |
| Engineering & Mechanical | Anthony Russo | Wiper | Day On-call Night | On-call opposite shift |
| Engineering & Mechanical | Daniel McAllister | 2nd Assistant Engineer | Night On-call Day | On-call by day (per rule) |
| Engineering & Mechanical | Harold Jensen | Electrician | Night On-call Day | On-call opposite shift |
| Engineering & Mechanical | Samuel Darnell | Oiler | Night On-call Day | On-call opposite shift |
| Deck & Cargo | ||||
| Deck & Cargo | Deckhand (original) / now Acting First Mate | Night | Roster amended pre-departure | |
| Deck & Cargo | Viktor Hale | Boatswain | Day On-call Night | |
| Deck & Cargo | Hank Wallace | Carpenter | Day On-call Night | |
| Deck & Cargo | George “Red” Donnelly | Crane Operator | Day On-call Night | |
| Deck & Cargo | Michael “Mick” Turner | Deckhand | Day On-call Night | |
| Deck & Cargo | Thomas “Tommy” Ellis | Deckhand | Day On-call Night | |
| Deck & Cargo | Ricky Smalls | Able Seaman | Night On-call Day | Assigned Hold 3 — Aft Patrol |
| Deck & Cargo | John Lewis | Deckhand | Night On-call Day | Assigned Hold 2 — Tunnel Patrol |
| Deck & Cargo | Robert “Bobby” Greene | Deckhand | Night On-call Day | |
| Deck & Cargo | Pablo Alvarez | Deckhand | Night On-call Day | |
| Galley & Services | ||||
| Galley & Services | Billy Merano | Cook | Flexible | Service windows: 03:30–06:00 (Breakfast), 11:30–14:00 (Lunch), 17:30–20:00 (Dinner) |
| Galley & Services | Leonard Harper | Steward | Day On-call Night | Assists cook during windows |
| Galley & Services | Curtis Malone | Laundryman | Day On-call Night | |
| Galley & Services | Dr. Evelyn Marsh | Medic / Nurse | Day On-call Night | Medical on call 24/7 |
| Administration & General | ||||
| Administration & General | Harold O’Donnell | Purser / Chief Steward | Day On-call Night | Roster & manifests |
| Administration & General | Peter Kowalski | Utility / General Duties | Day On-call Night | |
Notes: On-call indicates availability for the opposite shift. Roster amended at 13:40 by H. O’Donnell (First Mate substitution). Departure 14:15 · Superior Port · All times ship time.
🕮 How to navigate the Interactive Book:
• Use the arrows (← →) or swipe on mobile to turn pages (Slow way).
• Click the menu ☰ icon to open the index of crew members and click on them directly. Then click front cover in the index again to get to the crew list again.
• Tap the ⛶ icon (top right) to enter fullscreen mode.
• Close the book when done to return to your evidence briefcase.
The contrast between Billy Merano’s Photo, and how Jack found the body:
John Lewis had his body moved around (Facing a different direction), perhaps emptied pockets but we can’t be sure, as well as missing tools and a missing clipboard.
Click the top right of this box to exist this popup
John Lewis- Found dead
⚓ How to Play
🎯 Objective
Be the first to correctly identify who the murderer is, what weapon was used, and where the crime took place.
🃏 Setup
🎲 Gameplay
📓 Note Taking
🕵️ REMEMBER: Making an Accusation
⚠️ General Rules