He could have used sedatives on all three of them.
He could have waited for two of them to commit suicide and only kill one of them afterwards without a struggle
He could have simply been the one to switch on the electrical rig on the man that was planning to commit suicide by means of electricity before he was ready counting as murder.
The definition of murder could include assisted suicide, which means a fourth person could have switched on the electricity or shot one of them while they were perfectly willing and have it considered as murder.
I stated in a previous red that at least one of âthe three menâ was murdered. Let me add to that. Any of âthe three menâ that were murdered did not want to die.
If you wish to stand by that blue then answer me this:
Did that man mentioned in the latter half of your theory want to die?
This could simply refer to his state of mind at the time of death. He could have set up the electricity and then have decided at the end that he no longer wanted to go along with it.
He did not. The health of the men was not stated. He could have been in a terminally ill or other state that would explain why he went along with the other men to commit suicide, but after seeing them commit suicide he got cold feet, where he was killed by the fourth man.
Define âwant to dieâ. Does this refer to them entering the âhaunted houseâ with suicidal intent, or wishing to live in their final one or two seconds?
If multiple of âthe three menâ were murdered then any of those that were murdered did not enter the âhauntedâ house wanting to die, and never wished to die or accepted their death after entering the house.
The location on the manâs head of the bullet wound is unspecified. He could have been murdered by the murderer without a struggle if he was a supposed accomplice who was there to make sure the men killed themselves if they got cold feet, and was shot by the murderer in the back of the head to clean up loose ends.
The killer attacked and killed all three men by organizing a group suicide and the three men went to try to convince the man to not die. A trap using electric wire killed one of them, and a gun incapitated one and killed the other. This gun may have been a different gun to that found at the crime scene. Then the incapitated man was knocked out with a chair and then the chair was used alongside the curtain rope to feign a hanging suicide.
Not sure if that was too much detail or not. The group suicide reached the police explaining why a policeman entered the scene first before a random passerby. As to why a detective cameâŚperhaps sandwiches interrupted other officers? I dunno
The culprit isnât the detective. I donât think a question mark wouldâve been used if the man was expecting the scene.
The true killer organized a group suicide with the other three. He then killed them with assorted traps and a chair, in such a way that lines up with the scene.
Is this valid? Iâll counter it once you confirm. @King_Titanite_XV
The detective killed them all using a method from outside, entered in as the âfirst to walk in through the door after their deathsâ and set the scene up as a suicide.
and he said âWhat on earth is this?â for no reason?
If we assume, he is the murderer, we have to assume when he saw the crime scene then that either:
A - He was with someone and put up a facade
B - There was something unexpected about the scene, e.g. the wall was not stained with blood or something
C - He has a split personality or is equally fucked in the head.
Also that âintent to end livesâ red reeks to me. Though Iâm not sure how to tackle itâŚ
The three men were killed in such a way that is consistent with the wounds on their body that you would expect to see from the way the scene was described.
But the detective was truly surprised by the scene that he saw.
and
The scene that was described in the narrative was what greeted the detective when he entered through the door.