Uh huh, but now we’re back where we started. No line of sight from the outside, no ricochet, no going inside, the one person who could have interfered with the man’s plan is outside, and yet the man’s plan fails without him dying or incapacitating himself.
I believe we also covered that he didn’t get incapacitated by a freak accident either.
So.
I ask you.
All of you.
How?
Hmm…
[color=blue]There was a civilian standing within sight of the man who was out the 100M. He demanded the civilian assisted him with something and told him he can ignore the 100M and all that for now, at which time the man was attacked.[/Color]
I’m not sure what he would need help with - perhaps he wanted a cigarette lighter.
Wait, has it been stated in red the man’s plan fails? Like have we been told he didn’t get the 100k.
Yes, he didn’t get 100k
There was no one in the bank.
The accomplice was able to interfere with the man’s plans from outside.
Okay, I have a question. Why does the man think he’s being deceived and that the bank actually has this money?
Should we assume that this is based on a false impression on his part or do you think there’s a reason and that has something to do with something.
Oh hey, the scent of mystery. I can think of some ways that might not have been covered yet.
The accomplice signaled the man to come outside, then incapacitated him.
There clearly was SOME way to communicate without going inside, like calling out to him, otherwise having an accomplice on the watch would be completely pointless.
The accomplice did not disarm the bombs, but rather moved them away to a location where they would detonate without harming anyone.
The man was the only person inside the bank the whole time! Since his directives were to people inside the bank, no one who deliberately tried to thwart his plans would have been violating his demands! A manner of sleeping gas or similar incapacitating device was remotely deployed from a location more than 100 meters away from the bank, incapacitating the man without anyone violating his orders!
The accomplice was silently incapacitated outdoors! Since there could be no visual contact with the man and the accomplice, the man was unaware that his accomplice had been incapacitated!
The man is blind! Whatever entrance, exit or person he “sees” therefore does not influence actual events! He has insufficient eyesight to the point he can not discern an entrance, an exit, a person, or any object that pertains to the incident, at the time and location of the incident! Him noting down all exits he could “see” does not prohibit anyone from actually coming inside the bank unnoticed!
“No single one” who were subjected to the man’s demands violated the orders because multiple people violated his orders and did so with enough organization that no single person can be said to have violated on their own!
The man survived the incident and did not receive the money! Those were the two alternatives he proposed for his plan! Confirm in red truth that the man’s plan has failed!
The man had a spontaneous change of heart within the hour! He was not the same man anymore! Therefore, his threat as his old self to blow up the bank with him in it is impossible to fulfill since his old self does not exist anymore!
The man was in the wrong building all along! “The bank is still intact” refers to a different bank!
The forged item the man is in trouble for is the detonator! The “detonator” item he has with him is a fake! The real detonator is somewhere where the man cannot influence or use it from any way within the hour! The detonator being able to trigger the bombs outside the bank only refers to the true detonator! The man could have tried to press the fake detonator in his possession which did not trigger the bombs because it is a fake! It is solely his own fault that the man’s plan failed, therefore, no one has thwarted his plan!
edited to add:
The man is a changed man at the end of the hour! He has decided to not go through with his former self’s plan! All red truths stated so far apply solely to “the man” as referring to the old self of the man! The man’s old self was the perpetrator of the burglary attempt while the new man does not attempt such a thing! Therefore, all red truths so far are valid for the man at first while none of the red truths on this chessboard apply to the man by the end of the hour!
The man is paralyzed from the neck down! He could not have activated anything in his hands! That’s why the bank is still intact, his nerve cells are unable to press the detonator!
Okay, I’m going to sleep. I hope you guys solve this mystery. Good luck everyone and good night!
Pictoshark is resting right now so I’ll try to clear some stuff up before he comes back so we can theorycraft better.
First it’s been stated if the button is pressed the bombs will explode and will damage the building. This applies to all times.
Next, the demands apply to anyone even if they didn’t hear him - no-one goes within 100M of him AND his plan shouldn’t be thwarted are different things. I asked above if he was sniped with a a tranquillizer from a distance where he wasn’t heard and was told no-one who he directed the threat to disobeyed it. So him being attacked by literally anyone he considered is impossible. Hence why we are using his accomplice.
It was stated that nobody, not no single one, so sorry.
If the accomplice was incapitated, so what? We know nobody entered the building through any entrances unless your blind theory is correct.
It was confirmed he survived and did not receive the money. Pictoshark has so far refused to talk about the plan failing but has stated his plan was to “get 100K or die” and neither occurred so his plan did fail.
We already went over that he had no change in heart. I asked about dementia and forgetting entirely what he was doing, and that’s covered too. Dissociative identity disorder is possible though, so we can consider that.
The detonator, whatever it is, will blow-up the bombs if the button is pressed. It can’t be fake under those terms.
It is stated the man pulls out a revolver. Hence he can’t be paralysed in both hands.
The bank seems to refer to that bank since if the button is pressed, the bank will not be fixed in an hour was said somewhere. I think it was when I referred to my construction theory.
Also, nobody died, and we were told if the button is pressed, people will die. So clearly no bank exploded, otherwise the man inside would’ve died, even if the bank is really devoid of all staff and the man is hallucinating the staff members. Remember, he survives the entire incident, and there are no fatalities during the incident.
Anything else to clear up?
Confirming definition: “The ‘end of the incident’ refers to the danger being entirely taken care of; the man is subdued or gone and the bombs are defused or in a safe location.”
On that note, repeat it in red or I will make a theory for it: The bombs were never moved after they were placed until the end of the incident!
Unfortunately Karifean I think we asked about the bombs.
We have been told that “At all times, if the button is pressed, the bombs will explode, destroy the bank, and people inside will die”
I said this would apply even if the detonator wasn’t intact so if someone DID destroy it they would have to destroy the button first.
No we were not told that. It’s easy to take what we have been told (the bombs would have exploded if the buttons was pressed + the bombs are powerful enough to level parts of the building) as a confirmation of the fact you proposed (the bombs would have leveled the building if the button had been pressed), but that’s the sort of trickery we’re probably looking for here.
We have been told if the bombs explode people will die. I’ll quote it if I see it.
And thst nobody died.
Is there s loophole there?
That’s for the “shotgun theories”- I think that the possibility might open up new avenues of theories for others.
Where exactly? I’ve only seen “no single one”.
Further theory:
It was unintentional that the man’s plan did not come to fruition! Someone who was trying to help him made a mistake that brought about the failure of the plan! The plan, therefore, was not “thwarted”! It simply failed due to an unintentional mistake!
As the bank had insufficient funds, the bank and the man could have settled on the transfer of the money on a later time! The man did arrange for the money to be given to him, but it was not yet given so he did not have it, and since he did not have it he could not have used it yet to pay the debt, so the mafia is still in a position to ask for the money! The man was simply persuaded to not blow up the bank! His plan was “to acquire £100K or die”, and thus, receiving the money at a later date would not mean his plan has failed! The man did not alter his plan. The man did not fail his plan. He just did not act on his threat! Confirm in red that the man has to act on his threat to blow up the bank before an hour has elapsed! Confirm in red that the man cannot change his threat!
It’s been confirmed he had to receive it then - someone asked about an offshore account.
I believe in thus gameboard blues must directly persist to answering lime questions so asking about if the accomplice is incapitated does literally nothing - Pictoshark can either refuse to answer, let you make a full blue then answer, or shut you up now if he’s feeling lazy - either way, you may as well post a full theory that goes against the left or he doesn’t need to respond.
I’ll look over some of the others as well now I’m awake.
Ok one more thing:
If the bombs N s were moved sufficiently the accomplice would have to do it since the mans plans were not thwarted and one of his plans was to destroy the bank if he didn’t receive his money. I still want this confirmed in red truth but I think it’s all but been covered here.
Same applies for the incapitated accomplice and we know only the accomplice could do anything to stop the plan - well, the accomplice or the man himself - so unless one of the above two incapitated the accomplice it’s not happening. And again, why would the accomplice incapitated himself help our case? We need him on his feet to incapitate the main man and prevent the bombing.
I’m going to stop beating around the bush.
Before I posted “The man’s plans were thwarted accidently”.
Now I will say [color=blue]The man’s plans were thwarted by himself, be it an accident or on purpose! For this lime question specifically I do not need to be more specific than this.[/color]