Deception: Murder on Quarter to Three Forum Game


Well that rules me out.


Well that seems to imply strength involved, otherwise he’d point to Average. Sticking with the Kitchen theme, Blender seems to stand out, along with Sack maybe, or Cleaver. Strength would be required to bash someone to death with a blender, inflicting a Severe Injury without requiring a lot of blood loss. Same with a sack, though that might belong better with Storage Room.

And I’ll agree with soon that it might be spork also, since it’d require a muscular person to off someone with a spork, though seems like it’d be pretty bloody. Maybe one of those coffee cans could be used to bash them too?


Poor Tom. Looking like it’s a pretty grisly way to go. We’ll know for sure in the last scene.


I really enjoy this game, and I find watching this play out interesting.


This seems to raise the chances that it is a physical attack type murder weapon. Something where strength would matter.

My gunpowder idea is less impressive now.


Yeah, muscular definitely fits with any of the smashing weapons we have on hand.

Hmm, I’m leaning towards peanut/ candlestick I think. The cause was severe injury, not blood, strength is a key component which also reinforced bludgeoning, kitchen location…

And yes @Lantz I think we can safely eliminate gunpowder from the queue.


The Good Doctor tells me that a single strong blow to the cranium with a cleaver would essentially bifurcate the brain. This would cause instant death, stopping the heart almost instantly. Thus minimal blood.


I am not sure which would be worse. That you’re just blowing smoke up our collective posteriors, or that you’re not and knew this off hand.

The Good Doctor is referring to a show, right?


No, sir. The Good Doctor is referring to my good friend Dr. Watson. Surely you have heard of him?


But is he John, or James? Walks with a limp, or has a bad shoulder? Married or single? What’s his wife’s name?


Also, too, if being hit with a cleaver or an axe (!) by s muscular assailant doesn’t cause a severe injury, then nothing does.


His name is John, sir. His wife has sadly passed. He was injured by a bullet to the shoulder in the war.


LOL. The continuity errors in Conan Doyle are something else. Dan Simmons used them as the basis for a novel.

(He was introduced as James, then became John. His war wound was a shattered shoulder, then became a bad leg. He was married, then single, then married again, though I think the name changed.)


Haven’t read any for a while. My memory of the books and the Basil Rathbone films get mixed up. :)


That’s funny, because I’m leaning toward cleaver.

It means that the death was by the injury, not that there couldn’t be blood. It’s about what would kill you. If someone cut your artery, you would die by blood loss. If someone cut off your head, you’d be bleeding, but it wouldn’t be the thing that kills you.


Though it would hardly help.


I just mean the death doesn’t have to be bloodless.


Actually it would. It has been seen that guillotine victims still move their eyes and facial muscles for a minute of so after the head is removed. Blood loss to the brain kills them. Whereas a direct blow through the skull kills the brain due to trauma. Much more quickly.


Okay, well, I don’t know much about biology, but I think my point stands? I guess if you beat someone to death they would probably bleed somewhere.


Oh, certainly. Internally if nowhere else.