Thick As Thievesexpert series

Look at the Philosophical Railway puzzle for some ideas as to how to represent people’s claims. You also need to formulate the inspector’s assumptions and find a way to generate a solution that minimises the number of guilty parties.

Following a robbery at Sparkles the Jeweller’s, Inspector Korner of the Yard interviewed six of the usual suspects. He supposed that any of them who happened to be innocent would tell the truth, but that the guilty ones (if any) might lie, so any statement they made could be either true or false. He further decided to give them all the benefit of the doubt by accusing the smallest possible number of them. What they said was:

ARTIE: “It wasn’t me; it was either Edgy or Fingers.”
BILL: “Crackitt was in it up to his neck.”
CRACKITT: “No I wasn’t. I was with Edgy all the time, so we’re both innocent.”
DODGY: “If Crackitt did it, Bill did it with him.”
EDGY: “Nobody did it alone.”
FINGERS: “All I know is that either Crackitt or Dodgy is lying.”

If the good inspector’s suppositions were correct, who dunnit?

Solver

Sorts:

Vocabulary:

Constraints:

Please log in or create an account to use the solver.

Save Title:

Saved Solutions
Name	Time saved
Class Submissions
Name	Time submitted

Number of solutions:

Time limit:

Pretest limit:

Print finder job:

Print solutions:

Print statistics:

Auto Parser Results

No errors found.