EPTLets Play Crack the Case - Page 30
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
E-Coffee
Canada519 Posts
| ||
|
noddyz
United Kingdom462 Posts
| ||
|
izlong
Singapore108 Posts
is the missing body part an internal organ? is the missing body part hair? | ||
|
Pensivesoul
United States23 Posts
 So far we know that the only missing piece of the body was destroyed because it was evidence. We also know it wasn't the head. I think that it probably means that the body part betrays how the murder was committed. My theory. This sounds like a case of jealousy. This guy (a fellow sideshow-ite) always aspired to be the person conducting the "woman without a body" show/was in love with Thelma. But more importantly, he had just fought with Tony (possibly because Thelma and Tony were going out? They do work together and were getting closer?). What better way to send a message to tell any competing aspiring stars to stay away from this particular sideshow and frame Tony for the murder? As to the body part, it should incriminate him. I think to figure out what body part it is, he must have left whatever mark his sideshow act was on that body part. He could have lured Thelma into his tent to help him with his sideshow act and then proceeded to blindfold her and chop away at her? Maybe it was something she had clasped in her arm? and then rigamortis (body stiffening) set in? So he could not extract it from her right/left hand. But I think we need to figure out the murderer's act before we can really figure out which body part is missing. EDIT: Can't be the right or left hand...that question received a negative from Zap. | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
On July 17 2010 12:12 ZapRoffo wrote: Yup, there's a building that's actually not far from the south pole, which is the one he was referring to. That was just me being logically pedantic on that one, it's well and truly a classic teaser. | ||
|
tissue
Malaysia441 Posts
I'm not 100% on the body part, possibly lower torso, or more probably a leg. The dwarf/midget could only reach high enough to stab her in a rather uncommon spot for stabbing, so it would be obvious he did it. Cutting off the bit where he stabbed her would be equally telltale, so he had to dismember her and scatter the pieces to make it look like it was the work of a maniac, hoping that they wouldn't try to piece her back together and find a bit missing. Edit: He definitely would have had the chance to stab her in multiple areas once she was down, to cover it up. However if he started the attack by stabbing her multiple times below the belt, it would still look rather fishy. | ||
|
chaoser
United States5541 Posts
Was the murderer working as part of the Slideshow? | ||
|
Xis
Sweden18 Posts
| ||
|
chaoser
United States5541 Posts
On July 18 2010 03:35 tissue wrote: Throwing in my own speculations. I'm not 100% on the body part, possibly lower torso, or more probably a leg. The dwarf/midget could only reach high enough to stab her in a rather uncommon spot for stabbing, so it would be obvious he did it. Cutting off the bit where he stabbed her would be equally telltale, so he had to dismember her and scatter the pieces to make it look like it was the work of a maniac, hoping that they wouldn't try to piece her back together and find a bit missing. Edit: He definitely would have had the chance to stab her in multiple areas once she was down, to cover it up. However if he started the attack by stabbing her multiple times below the belt, it would still look rather fishy. actually, this sounds pretty good | ||
|
Pensivesoul
United States23 Posts
On July 18 2010 03:35 tissue wrote: Throwing in my own speculations. I'm not 100% on the body part, possibly lower torso, or more probably a leg. The dwarf/midget could only reach high enough to stab her in a rather uncommon spot for stabbing, so it would be obvious he did it. Cutting off the bit where he stabbed her would be equally telltale, so he had to dismember her and scatter the pieces to make it look like it was the work of a maniac, hoping that they wouldn't try to piece her back together and find a bit missing. Edit: He definitely would have had the chance to stab her in multiple areas once she was down, to cover it up. However if he started the attack by stabbing her multiple times below the belt, it would still look rather fishy. I dunno...doesn't sounds convincing enough to me. Not that I think rigamortis is the answer either. For starters, she was murdered with an ax. One blow should do the trick...also as you said, once she was down, he could have cut her as many times as he wanted to...he could have made her a human wound canvas and she would have been unrecognizable...I think it was more a gory message to all aspiring stars to stay the heck away from the act with the added chance to frame Tony. As for the body part, I think we need to break down what the murderer does...maybe he's one of those human flamethrowers and burned a part of her skin which would definitely give him away. No matter how much he cut her up, he couldn't hide a burn? I feel it should be something he couldn't have hidden by cutting her up. | ||
|
Neon_Monkey
United States270 Posts
On July 18 2010 04:37 Pensivesoul wrote: I dunno...doesn't sounds convincing enough to me. Not that I think rigamortis is the answer either. For starters, she was murdered with an ax. One blow should do the trick...also as you said, once she was down, he could have cut her as many times as he wanted to...he could have made her a human wound canvas and she would have been unrecognizable...I think it was more a gory message to all aspiring stars to stay the heck away from the act with the added chance to frame Tony. As for the body part, I think we need to break down what the murderer does...maybe he's one of those human flamethrowers and burned a part of her skin which would definitely give him away. No matter how much he cut her up, he couldn't hide a burn? I feel it should be something he couldn't have hidden by cutting her up. That's my line of thinking right now, but it couldn't be a flamethrower because we got an "I don't know" to if the body part was burned. | ||
|
XeliN
United Kingdom1755 Posts
| ||
|
Pensivesoul
United States23 Posts
On July 17 2010 16:09 ZapRoffo wrote: Was her right hand the missing body part? (or left hand, if she's left handed) No It leaves torso and limbs...unless it was a bone that was shattered? Am i missing something? I had originally thought it could be a puncture wound on her leg or arm which was where he drugged her/poisoned her... I've been trying to look through the questions...was she murdered with the ax or just cut up with it? If she was only cut up with the ax, then it's very possible it could also be the way she died that he was trying to hide... I also don't think it was an internal organ that he kept hidden and destroyed...once something spread into the body, it would be hard to accurately recover it from one internal organ...it would spread pretty fast...whatever was in the lungs, stomach, heart would have been running through the entire body pretty fast. | ||
|
beefhamburger
United States3962 Posts
Is the missing body part from above the waist? Below the waist? Above the neck? Part of the trunk? A limb? Was the murderer physically injured by Thelma (i.e. scratched, punched, bitten)? | ||
|
XeliN
United Kingdom1755 Posts
I guess it could still be a singular finger then, altho the idea becomes far more stretched and implausible if it is only 1 finger. Is this missing body part a finger? | ||
|
ZapRoffo
United States5544 Posts
No Was the missing body part her torso? No Was the missing body part one of her limbs? No Was the murderer trying to make a point? No Was thelma promiscuous? Not necessarily Did thelma commit a crime? No Was the murderer well acquainted with tony? I don't know Did the murderer have access to tony's axe and knives? Not Are the locations of where her body parts were found of any significance? No | ||
|
ZapRoffo
United States5544 Posts
Yes to some degree Did the murderer know beforehand that he would have to destroy the body part? I don't think it had crossed his mind before Was she killed with the axe? No Is the surname Nobody an pun or any significant to this case? No Is the missing part the Thelma's head? No Was a mirror box used as a murder tool as well? No Is there a Mr. Nobody? No Was the missing body part tattoo'd? No was there the killer's DNA on the missing body part? No is the missing body part an internal organ? No is the missing body part hair? No | ||
|
ZapRoffo
United States5544 Posts
On July 18 2010 02:50 Pensivesoul wrote: This sounds like a case of jealousy. This guy (a fellow sideshow-ite) always aspired to be the person conducting the "woman without a body" show/was in love with Thelma. But more importantly, he had just fought with Tony (possibly because Thelma and Tony were going out? They do work together and were getting closer?). What better way to send a message to tell any competing aspiring stars to stay away from this particular sideshow and frame Tony for the murder? A little bit yes at the beginning, no for the rest. Do the mirrors have anything to do with the murder? No Was the murderer working as part of the Slideshow? Yes Was Thelma pregnant? No Is the method of destroying the missing body part significant (i.e. burning, shredding, eaten)? No Is the missing body part from above the waist? Below the waist? Above the neck? Part of the trunk? A limb? Yes above the waist. No not above the neck. I'm not sure what part of the trunk exactly entails. Not a limb. Was the murderer physically injured by Thelma (i.e. scratched, punched, bitten)? Yes Is this missing body part a finger? No | ||
|
unsoundlogic
United States391 Posts
Was Thelma burned? Did the missing piece include bone? | ||
|
snotboogie
Australia3550 Posts
| ||
| ||
