Sleuth Home - Message Boards - Sleuth Talk

Jun-29-2004 02:14

Do witnesses ever give false positive evidence?

I just attempted "The Excruciating Hunt for the Lost Answer" - but one of the witnesses (Adelaide) said she saw something suspicious about Prudence (whom I accused) - but the real killer was Solomon!

Is this a bug??

Jul-2-2004 01:07

im almost sure 1 piece of physical is good enough if u have false alibi to go with and u checked the hall of records. i usually get them only on that 1 physical, i ask verbals only if i cant confirm the physical evidence.

Jul-2-2004 01:22

ANY evidence is convicting if the suspect has a false alibi, even witness evidence. All you need is one piece of evidence and a false alibi to accuse the right person.

Jul-2-2004 02:31

Sorry Raider, but I'm not sure that one is entirely bullit proof. In every case there are 2 witnesses pointing at the person who did it, and that person has of course a false alibi. But there's also 1 person naming someone else, and I've experienced that he or she has had both false and real alibis. So I'm not sure you can feel 100% safe with a false alibi and just 1 witness, unless the questions you've asked allow you to eliminate other options :)

Jul-2-2004 05:02

One evidence and false alibi as always worked for me so far. But I do have research that allow me to eliminate one false (haven't had an evidence pointing to somebody cleared by research yet) If once I'm proved wrong, well... Shardy Guy, here I come.

Jul-2-2004 15:43

False alibi AND evidence for the same suspect would invariably lead to false accusations if it were possible to NOT be the right suspect, therefore, ONLY 1 piece of evidence, of any variety, with a false alibi (and a motive) is all that is ever required.

The city hall suspect owns no evidence, physical or verbal, since having any would lead to a false accusation.

Proof cannot be offered for you doubters since one cannot prove a negative. But just try to think about the logical consequences of the alternative.

Jul-2-2004 22:31

Once I got two pieces of evidence pointing to someone and accused her- it was really someone with only one piece of evidence, and that evidence was only witness evidence. Poop!

Jul-2-2004 22:36

"1 piece of evidence, of any variety, with a false alibi (and a motive) is all that is ever required"

Not quite. It's easy to get two pieces of evidence pointing to two different people, both of whom may have false or no alibis. It's best to have more than one piece of ecidence, 3 is best I think but I don't really know, I'm not great at this game :)

Jul-3-2004 00:39

1 piece of evidence and a fake alibi are enough to convict a suspect. End of story.

A few people have complained of experiencing cases where that wasn't true, but until now examination of these cases proved the players wrong.
I have solved 250 cases and never experienced something that invalidates the above.

Jul-3-2004 08:40

"It's easy to get two pieces of evidence pointing to two different people, both of whom may have false or no alibis."

It is not easy. It is impossible. It is only best to have more than one piece of evidence if you are careless with your notes and not sure who has false alibis. Even then, you are taking risks that you will get it wrong since I'm sure it is possible to have a physical and a witness evidence against an innocent person. (There are never 2 physical against the same person.)

Jul-3-2004 10:12

When I said I wasn't great at this game I meant it, it's ALWAYS possible I'm wrong. I just firgured since it seemed to have happened to me a couple of times that it would be possible. Maybe not, but that's my opinion on this... sorry if I'm wrong