Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 5892490" data-attributes="member: 32740">Tight schedule and with no authority to even detain suspects without sufficient supporting evidence I would hope I'm being well paid regardless of the outcome of the investigation as it's likely to end in failure (and since the PC's DID toss the necklace, even if I nail them to the wall circumstantially, without them having the goods on their persons, in their belongings or stashed aboard ship it IS a failure.)Otherwise I proceed on a few basic, detective story tenets - who has motive, means and opportunity to commit the theft?  Eliminate the impossible, what remains must be the truth.  And, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.  Everyone is questioned (separately I hope) and is asked for as detailed an explanation of their comings and goings from the time of the last appearance of the necklace up to at least the point where it was noticed to be missing if not to the present.  Everyone is asked who THEY think may have done it, why, and how.  Get them suspecting everyone else and thus working FOR me to narrow the possibilities.Doesn't mean one of them didn't do it, but without incriminating testimony from someone or evidence of some other kind I'll initially write them off.Just because you're not supposed to have had access doesn't mean you didn't or don't still.  They can also be complicit in the crime even if they didn't lift the necklace personally.  In particular, I'm thinking that at least two of this group could be providing each others alibis. [A says he saw B on deck all through breakfast on Thursday, B says he saw A when he went on deck at that time and was still there when he returned to his cabin, etc.]  I'd likely draw up as detailed a schedule as possible of everyone's alibis throughout the voyage and see if there's some timeframe like that to draw suspicion.And I can only assume that they provide no especially useful information despite being cooperative.Suspect #1.  Having not stated WHEN the necklace disappeared it is odd to mention the closing party and not some other time, or indeed to mention some specific time period AT ALL.  On the assumption that the suspect is attempting to mislead with regard to the time frame of the actual crime I would look particularly closely at his verifiable movements prior to the party, and/or between the time of the party and the time of the discovery of the crime.  Who's providing his alibi?  Are they mistaken or actually lying about the suspects location?Which, of course, is a classic detective story reversal.  Again: motive, means, opportunity.</blockquote>

Verification