| Author | Message | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1669 Registered: 1-2011 |
Among many summaries of the year 2012 I read recently a summary of the most stupid and funniest crimes. I chose a few to share with you. So here it goes: A meeting caused Dave to leave the room and arrange another meeting. | ||
| Doriana (Doriana)
New member Username: Doriana Post Number: 3176 Registered: 12-2010 |
Dave = H/A/M? the room = the room the meeting was held in? Was it a professional meeting? If so, is the profession of those present at the meeting relevant? Relevant how many people were at the meeting? Only two? less than 5? less than 10? more than that? Did Dave arrange the other meeting for the same day? same week? same month? later than that? at the same location the first meeting was held in? another location? Did the second meeting take place at all? If so, was Dave present? Did he arrange the meeting via telephone? e-mail? letter? in person? Did Dave commit a crime? If so, before the first meeting? during the first meeting? between the two meetings? during the second meeting? after the second meeting? Did someone else commit a crime? If so, same questions as for Dave. | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1672 Registered: 1-2011 |
Doriana: Dave = H/A/M? Yes. the room = the room the meeting was held in? Yes. Was it a professional meeting? Yes. If so, is the profession of those present at the meeting relevant? Yes. Relevant how many people were at the meeting? Only two? less than 5? This. There were three people, but the situation would work also with another number. less than 10? more than that? Did Dave arrange the other meeting for the same day? Yes. same week? same month? later than that? at the same location the first meeting was held in? Yes. another location? Did the second meeting take place at all? Yes. If so, was Dave present? Yes. Did he arrange the meeting via telephone? e-mail? letter? in person? This, but via telephone would also work. Did Dave commit a crime? No. If so, before the first meeting? during the first meeting? between the two meetings? during the second meeting? after the second meeting? Did someone else commit a crime? Yes, and it was before and during the first meeting. If so, same questions as for Dave. | ||
| Doriana (Doriana)
New member Username: Doriana Post Number: 3179 Registered: 12-2010 |
Was the one who committed the crime a H/A/M? F? Was s/he present at the first meeting? At the second? Did the people at the first meeting work in... Artistic / musical / writer Banking / financial / real estate Clerical / Administrative Computer related / Hardware Construction / Craftsman Criminal / Questionable Repute Education / Academic Research Entertainment / Media Environmental / Outdoors / Nature Executive / Management Hospitality / Travel Legal Services Manufacturing / Distributions Medical / Health Services Politics / Government / Military Sales / Marketing Technical / Science / Engineering Teaching / Child care Transportation Food Service Other? Was Dave the only one from the first meeting who was also in the second meeting? Mafia relevant? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1678 Registered: 1-2011 |
Doriana: Was the one who committed the crime a H/A/M? Thisish. F? Was s/he present at the first meeting? Yes. At the second? Yes. Did the people at the first meeting work in... Artistic / musical / writer Banking / financial / real estate Clerical / Administrative Computer related / Hardware Construction / Craftsman Criminal / Questionable Repute This. Education / Academic Research Entertainment / Media Environmental / Outdoors / Nature Executive / Management Hospitality / Travel Legal Services Manufacturing / Distributions Medical / Health Services Politics / Government / Military Sales / Marketing And this. Technical / Science / Engineering Teaching / Child care Transportation And also this. Food Service Other? Was Dave the only one from the first meeting who was also in the second meeting?No. Mafia relevant? No. | ||
| Doriana (Doriana)
New member Username: Doriana Post Number: 3180 Registered: 12-2010 |
Does the -ish refer to human? adult? male? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1680 Registered: 1-2011 |
Doriana: Does the -ish refer to human? adult? male? To the rest of your original question. All people involved were Human/Adult/Male. | ||
| Shez (Shez)
New member Username: Shez Post Number: 3689 Registered: 2-2011 |
did the HAM not succeed in committing the crime? caught in the act? stopped before he could start? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1686 Registered: 1-2011 |
Shez: did the HAM FA not succeed in committing the crime? Yope. caught in the act? Yope. stopped before he could start? No. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 4949 Registered: 9-2009 |
Was the second meeting with the same people as the first one? With some, but not all people? Were someone at the second meeting who wasn't at the first one? Did Dave leave because of the crime? Crime as in: unlawful action? Violating the rules of the people at the meeting? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1698 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Was the second meeting with the same people as the first one? Yes, but see also below. With some, but not all people? No. Were someone at the second meeting who wasn't at the first one? Yes. Did Dave leave because of the crime? Yes. Crime as in: unlawful action? This. Violating the rules of the people at the meeting? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 4963 Registered: 9-2009 |
Was more than one person added to the second meeting? Was the person added in order to: deter crime? Arrest someone? Participate in crime? Get rid of evidence? The crime: violent crime? Theft? Financial crime? Kidnapping? Extortion? Destruction fo property? Embezzling? Traffic-related? Drug-related? Smuggling? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1704 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Was more than one person added to the second meeting? Yes. Was the person added in order to: deter crime? Arrest someone? This. Participate in crime? Get rid of evidence? The crime: violent crime? Theft? This. Financial crime? Kidnapping? Extortion? Destruction fo property? Embezzling? Traffic-related? Drug-related? Smuggling? | ||
| Shez (Shez)
New member Username: Shez Post Number: 3712 Registered: 2-2011 |
was the second meeting an identity parade? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1709 Registered: 1-2011 |
Shez: was the second meeting an identity parade? No, but OTRT. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 4982 Registered: 9-2009 |
Were the persons added police? Uniformed police? Relevant what was stolen? Did what was stolen belong to anyone in the first meeting? Was police added in order to: hear a confession? Catch the culprit red-handed? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1727 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Were the persons added police? Yes. Uniformed police? Irr. Relevant what was stolen? Yes. Did what was stolen belong to anyone in the first meeting? Yes. Was police added in order to: hear a confession? Possibly. Catch the culprit red-handed? This is closest, but not exact. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 4994 Registered: 9-2009 |
were they added as: deterrence? For someone's safety? As observers? In order to try figuring out who the thief was? Did Dave know who the thief was? Was the thing stolen: money? Objects? Wallets? Weapons? Something present at the place of the meeting? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1728 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: were they added as: deterrence? Possibly. For someone's safety? Probably. As observers? Yes. In order to try figuring out who the thief was? No, because... Did Dave know who the thief was? Yes. Was the thing stolen: money? Objects? This. Wallets? Weapons? Something present at the place of the meeting? Yes. The police came mainly to arrest the cuprits. There could have been also other reasons, like safety, observance, deterrence - but these were minor reasons. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5023 Registered: 9-2009 |
Objects stolen: cellphones? Smaller? bigger? Relevant how many? Relevant how they were stolen? Where they were when they got stolen? Did Dave arrange another meeting in order to not raise the thief's suspicion? Did he use a likely-sounding excuse? Did he do it once he discovered the thief? Did he do it before anyone else discovered the thief? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1731 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Objects stolen: cellphones? No. Smaller? bigger? This. Relevant how many? No. Relevant how they were stolen? Somewhat. Where they were when they got stolen? Yes. Did Dave arrange another meeting in order to not raise the thief's suspicion? No. Did he use a likely-sounding excuse? Irr., probably yes. Did he do it once he discovered the thief? Yes. Did he do it before anyone else discovered the thief? Yes. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5028 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did he not want anyone else to discover the thief during this meeting? Did he fear for the safety of anyone? If so: the thief? himself? Someone else? Did he want to avoid the consequences from someone else discovering the thief? Or discovering the theft? Did he think he was going to be suspected? Were the objects in the same room as the meeting? Was it a normal meeting room/office? Did he see the items being stolen? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1736 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Did he not want anyone else to discover the thief during this meeting? No. Did he fear for the safety of anyone? Probably. If so: the thief? himself? Yes. Someone else? No. Did he want to avoid the consequences from someone else discovering the thief? No. Or discovering the theft? No. Did he think he was going to be suspected? No. Were the objects in the same room as the meeting? Yes. Was it a normal meeting room/office? Yes. Did he see the items being stolen? No. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5030 Registered: 9-2009 |
Were the objects office equipment? Office supplies? Expensive? Worthless? Had he himself stolen anything earlier? Was his safety potentially threatened by: the thief? Someone else in the meeting? someone outside the meeting? His relation to the thief relevant? Have things been stolen on earlier occasions? Relevant? Relevant what the meeting is about? Is it about the thieveries? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1738 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Were the objects office equipment? No. Office supplies? No. Expensive? Rather yes. Worthless? No. Had he himself stolen anything earlier? No. Was his safety potentially threatened by: the thief? This. Someone else in the meeting? No. someone outside the meeting? No. His relation to the thief relevant? Yes. Have things been stolen on earlier occasions? No. Relevant? No. Relevant what the meeting is about? Yes. Is it about the thieveries? No. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5031 Registered: 9-2009 |
You answered that the people int he first meeting were criminals, among others. Were all people criminals? Was only the thief a criminal? Did they work for a company? The mafia? Was the theft the stupid/funny crime? Did the thief know that Dave knew of his crime? Did the thief have any accomplices? Relevant? Did Dave know whether he had any or not? Relevant? Was something relevant to the meeting stolen? Would the theft have been discovered, had the meeting proceeded? were the stolen items: illegal? Drugs? Jewelry? Technology? Secrets? Art? Mass-produced? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1741 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: You answered that the people in the first meeting were criminals, among others. Yes. Were all people criminals? No. Was only the thief a criminal? Yes, with respect to the fact that there were two thieves. Did they work for a company? No. The mafia? No. Was the theft the stupid/funny crime? Yes, but the funny thing is not the theft itself. There were no other crimes. Did the thief know that Dave knew of his crime? No. Did the thief have any accomplices? There were two thieves. Relevant? No. Did Dave know whether he had any or not? Yes. Relevant? Not much. Was something relevant to the meeting stolen? Yes. Would the theft have been discovered, had the meeting proceeded? FA. were the stolen items: illegal? Drugs? Jewelry? Technology? Secrets? Art? Mass-produced? This, with respect to the fact that the items could also be called "technology". No to the rest. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5037 Registered: 9-2009 |
Since there were three people at the meeting, there were only Dave and the two thieves, correct? Was that the cause of the FA? Mass-produced technology: electronics? Information? Anything computer-related? Data storage? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1746 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Since there were three people at the meeting, there were only Dave and the two thieves, correct? The first meeting - yes. Was that the cause of the FA? Yes. Mass-produced technology: electronics? Information? Anything computer-related? Data storage? No to these. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5049 Registered: 9-2009 |
Summary: 1. Dave arrives to a meeting room, and see the other two participants of the meeting engaged in stealing something. 2. They don't know that he found out, but he's afraid that if they find out, they'll try to silence him. (or run away? or destroy evidence? anything else?) 3. He therefore uses a likely-sounding excuse to postpone the meeting, and brings a couple of policemen with him for the next meeting in order to arrest the thieves. Is the above a good summary? do we need to find out: what the company does? What they stole? How they stole it? Where they put it? Anything more? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5050 Registered: 9-2009 |
If he hadn't scheduled the other meeting, would the thieves have gotten away? Did they wait for the other meeting instead of doing something relevant? Did Dave say anything relevant in the first meeting, except for the excuse and the time/place for the new meeting? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1752 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Summary: 1. Dave arrives to a meeting room, and see the other two participants of the meeting engaged in stealing something. No, quite contrarily. 2. They don't know that he found out yes..., but he's afraid that if they find out, they'll try to silence him. Unlikely. (or run away? Probably. or destroy evidence? Possibly. anything else?) 3. He therefore uses a likely-sounding excuse to postpone the meeting, Yes. and brings a couple of policemen with him for the next meeting in order to arrest the thieves. Yes. Is the above a good summary? There is the FA about the crime and the first meeting. do we need to find out: what the company does? What company? What they stole? This may be helpful but the scenario could go well with many items. How they stole it? Yesish. Where they put it? Yesish. Anything more? Yes - especially how did Dave know about the crime. If he hadn't scheduled the other meeting, would the thieves have gotten away? Not necessarily. Did they wait for the other meeting instead of doing something relevant? No. Did Dave say anything relevant in the first meeting, except for the excuse and the time/place for the new meeting? No. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5062 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did he see the crime? Did he call the meeting? Did he see evidence of the crime? Was the meeting called: before he knew about the crime? After? Did he get to know about it because of the meeting? Was the meeting related to the crime? Totally unrelated? | ||
| Shez (Shez)
New member Username: Shez Post Number: 3731 Registered: 2-2011 |
did Dave set up the 2nd meeting to provide an opportunity for the thieves to steal something? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1755 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Did he see the crime? No. Did he call the meeting? No. Did he see evidence of the crime? Yes.Was the meeting called: before he knew about the crime? Yes. After? No. Did he get to know about it because of the meeting? Yes. Was the meeting related to the crime? Yes. Totally unrelated? Shez: did Dave set up the 2nd meeting to provide an opportunity for the thieves to steal something? No. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5120 Registered: 9-2009 |
Were the objects stolen from the meeting room? Were they bigger than: a bottle? A laptop? A garbage can? A chair? A table? Were two people needed to move them? Were they: put in another room? Hidden? Camouflaged? Packaged? Put in a vehicle? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1819 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Were the objects stolen from the meeting room? No. Were they bigger than: a bottle? A laptop? A garbage can? A chair? A table? Different sizes. Assume the about sizes of a bottle and a laptop. Were two people needed to move them? No. Were they: put in another room? No. Hidden? NO! Camouflaged? NO! Packaged? No. Put in a vehicle? No. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5121 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did they thieves put the stolen goods in plain sight? Did they drop them? Damage them? Did something unexpected (for the thieves) happen? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1822 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Did they thieves put the stolen goods in plain sight? Yes, where? Did they drop them? No. Damage them? No. Did something unexpected (for the thieves) happen? When? Certainly they did not expect the police. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5123 Registered: 9-2009 |
Inside the meeting room? Just outside the meeting room? In a room at all? Were they carrying them? Wearing them? Could the objects be worn? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1823 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Inside the meeting room? Yes... Just outside the meeting room? No. In a room at all? Were they carrying them? Yes.. Wearing them? No. Could the objects be worn? No. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5124 Registered: 9-2009 |
Were they still carrying the items when he entered the meeting and they saw him? Were they trying to conceal them during the meeting? Or did they carry them openly? Or put them down? Put them in their pockets? Under their clothes? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1824 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Were they still carrying the items when he entered the meeting and they saw him? FA. Were they trying to conceal them during the meeting? No. Or did they carry them openly? Yes. Or put them down? No. Put them in their pockets? No. Under their clothes? No. | ||
| Shez (Shez)
New member Username: Shez Post Number: 3758 Registered: 2-2011 |
were these stolen goods? were the thieves trying to sell stolen goods? was the meeting arranged so that they could bring the stolen goods there? the objects - electronic? electric? jewellery? paintings? documents? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1825 Registered: 1-2011 |
Shez: were these stolen goods? Yes. were the thieves trying to sell stolen goods? Yes. was the meeting arranged so that they could bring the stolen goods there? Yes. the objects - electronic? electric? Could have been electronic or electric, I am not sure, could have been also other things but none of those mentioned. jewellery? paintings? documents? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5181 Registered: 9-2009 |
Were they going to sell the goods: to Dave? To someone else? Did Dave recognize them as stolen? Suspect them as being stolen? See them being stolen? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1846 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Were they going to sell the goods: to Dave? Yes. To someone else? Did Dave recognize them as stolen? Yes. Suspect them as being stolen? See them being stolen? No to the rest. | ||
| Liquizt (Liquizt)
New member Username: Liquizt Post Number: 879 Registered: 5-2008 |
Were the goods Dave's? stolen from him? Then the thieves attempted to sell him his own stuff? Possibly not knowing he was the guy they stole it from? Dave recognised the goods? Possibly because they're unique? have identifying marks? are simply all the same items he's missing? So Dave arranges another meeting involving the police? Either to just arrest them? or otherwise establish evidence of the crime so they can be arrested? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1849 Registered: 1-2011 |
Liquizt: Were the goods Dave's? Yes. stolen from him? Yes. Then the thieves attempted to sell him his own stuff? Yes. Possibly not knowing he was the guy they stole it from? Yes. Dave recognised the goods? Yes. Possibly because they're unique? Not unique, but OTRT. have identifying marks? Possibly. are simply all the same items he's missing? NO! So Dave arranges another meeting involving the police? Yes. Either to just arrest them? Yes. or otherwise establish evidence of the crime so they can be arrested? This too. This is more or less all. Just the tiny piece is missing - how did Dave establish these were his goods. | ||
| Shez (Shez)
New member Username: Shez Post Number: 3797 Registered: 2-2011 |
were the items household goods? tv? vcr? dvd player? phone? pc? ipad? did they have his name on? were they marked in some other way? did the thief mention where he had got them from? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1852 Registered: 1-2011 |
Shez: were the items household goods? tv? vcr? dvd player? phone? pc? ipad? None of these. did they have his name on? No. were they marked in some other way? Possibly. did the thief mention where he had got them from? No. | ||
| Liquizt (Liquizt)
New member Username: Liquizt Post Number: 892 Registered: 5-2008 |
Were the goods damaged in any way? Perhaps, scratches that Dave recalls making? or damage made by the thieves in their removal of the goods? that corresponds to damage left in the location they were stolen from? Are the goods in some intentional way customised? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1870 Registered: 1-2011 |
Liquizt: Were the goods damaged in any way? Perhaps, scratches that Dave recalls making? or damage made by the thieves in their removal of the goods? that corresponds to damage left in the location they were stolen from? No to these. Are the goods in some intentional way customised? Possibly. HINT: Dave did not only see the items to establish they were stolen from him. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5211 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did they have any relevant: markings? Labels? Settings? Content? Attachments? Wear marks? Missing parts? Stuff stuck to them? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1873 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Did they have any relevant: markings? Labels? Settings? Content? Attachments? Wear marks? Missing parts? Stuff stuck to them? All of these are possible. Just assume that the items were similar to what Dave had in his possession. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5256 Registered: 9-2009 |
Are the items tools? Dave did something more than just look at the items before he knew they were stolen, correct? Did he: touch them? Smell them? Use them? Listen to them? Hold them? Lift them? Did he know his items were missing beforehand? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1931 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Are the items tools? No. Dave did something more than just look at the items before he knew they were stolen, correct? Yes. Did he: touch them? Smell them? Use them? Listen to them? Hold them? Lift them? No to these. Did he know his items were missing beforehand? No. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5257 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did he put them somewhere? Look at a container they were in? Were they in any container? Did he ask questions about them? Move them? Did he do this thing: with he items? To the items? To the people? To something else? Someone else? Did he go to check how many/which of the items he would need? Did he see that his items were missing first? Or did he see that the offered items were his, first? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1934 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Did he put them somewhere? No. Look at a container they were in? Yesish, explore. Were they in any container? Yesish, explore. Did he ask questions about them? No. Move them? No. Did he do this thing: with he items? To the items? To the people? To something else? This. Someone else? Did he go to check Yes! how many/which of the items he would need? But not this. Did he see that his items were missing first? No. Or did he see that the offered items were his, first? He thought about it, yes, but he was not sure. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5265 Registered: 9-2009 |
Not container: wrapping? Bag? Box? String? Did he check: if anything had been stolen? His records? Photos? Surveillance? Did the check confirm that the items were his? Or did it strengthen his suspicion? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1936 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Not container: wrapping? Bag? Box? String? No, possible FA. Did he check: if anything had been stolen? Yes! His records? Photos? Surveillance? Nothing of this type. Till now, tools have been the closest guess. Did the check confirm that the items were his? Yes. Or did it strengthen his suspicion? No, after having checked he knew for sure. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5266 Registered: 9-2009 |
Not tools: instruments? If so: musical? Measuring? Did he see something relevant when he went to check, besides the fact that the items were missing? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1945 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Not tools: instruments? No. If so: musical? Measuring? Did he see something relevant when he went to check, besides the fact that the items were missing? No, it is only relevant what and where he checked. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5270 Registered: 9-2009 |
Weapons? Some sort of machinery? Vehicle? Vehicle parts? Lights? Stage equipment? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1949 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Weapons? Some sort of machinery? Vehicle? Vehicle parts? Yes, car parts. Lights? Stage equipment? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 5282 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did he check: a car? His car? A stockroom? Were the parts removed from whole cars? Partial cars? Or were they separate parts in the first place? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 1951 Registered: 1-2011 |
Galfisk: Did he check: a car? His car? YES! A stockroom? Were the parts removed from whole cars? Yes, one car. Partial cars? Or were they separate parts in the first place? ***************SPOILER************* Dave was the owner of the shop with car parts. Two people were often selling car parts to him. Once they came with car parts, that make Dave suspicious, because they were similar to the new parts he just put in his car. Dave postponed the meeting using a believable excuse. Then he went to his house, check his car and discover that the parts were missing. Then he found a policeman and took him for the postponed meeting. The thieves were caught and arrested. Thanks for playing and congrats to Galfisk for solving the puzzle. | ||
| Shez (Shez)
New member Username: Shez Post Number: 3873 Registered: 2-2011 |
hee hee! |
