Five players take part in this long form: one detective (inspector), three suspects, one victim. It runs 30–45 minutes.
Round 1: Introductions
The host plays the inspector.
He can ask the audience for a prompt for himself: a tic, a catchphrase he keeps using, or a former profession (e.g. the inspector used to be an astrophysicist).
The other four players also receive prompts from the audience. Each player then introduces themselves individually, each introduction lasting about a minute. It works best to use only first names so the development of the story isn't pinned down too early.
Important: the characters have nothing to do with each other and should be as different as possible.
The audience now decides — by vote, or via a single audience member — which of the four players is to be the victim.
Round 2: Conversations with the suspects *(relationship to the victim)*
The three remaining suspects are visited individually by the inspector — three short scenes. The suspects learn about the murder and are asked for an alibi for the time of the crime. A connection or relationship to the victim now emerges: the victim was the neighbour, the brother, a friend; they ran into each other on the way to the office, and so on. It is also possible for one of the suspects to (initially) deny knowing the victim — which obviously makes them more suspicious.
Important: this round is not yet about motive!
The cause of death and the precise circumstances must remain open or vague — otherwise round 4 loses its point.
Round 3: Flashback to the last encounter *(motive)*
Jump back in time to before the murder. The inspector takes a break — we see each suspect's last (non-murderous) encounter with the victim, again three scenes. In this round a possible motive becomes clear and unmistakable, and a conflict or argument breaks out. The aim is for each of the three to be as suspicious as possible — all three should have a murder motive.
It helps if the victim acts like a complete jerk and actively reinforces the (potential) motive.
The motivation has to come across credibly. The key is to build a feeling so strong in the suspect that the audience would believe them capable of murder. End the scene as quickly as possible at the emotional peak.
Round 4: The autopsy
The inspector picks an assistant from the audience. Three chairs are set up — better stools or a (beer-garden) bench — and the victim lies down on them. The inspector now examines the body and takes prompts from the audience assistant in a finish-the-sentence style. For example — Inspector: "Oh, this looks like a…", Audience: "Hole!" Or Inspector: "There's a bruise on the…", Audience: "Earlobe!"
In this lighter round, the murder weapon is also "determined" with help from the audience assistant. Example — Inspector (reflective): "This bruise might have been caused by…", Audience: "…a billiard ball."
Only one cause of death should emerge. So, for example, NOT both a shot to the brain and water-filled lungs (drowning).
Following the autopsy scene, the audience decides — or one audience member decides — which of the three suspects is the murderer.
Round 5: The murder
Now we see the murder scene as a flashback. The conflict topic from round 3 must be revived. Ideally there is one more twist — something new gets added to the original motive (e.g. a surprise phone call or letter).
Tips
- The player who plays the inspector should jot down names and important biographical details (especially from round 1). The pad they hold can be played as the pad on which the inspector "takes notes" during interrogations.
- Round 1: it's possible to have the inspector introduce themselves like the others — they should go first.
- Round 1: to leave room for laughter, at least one of the figures can be a "funny" one.
- Round 1: as a rule, leave age out of the introduction — it unnecessarily restricts where the story can go.
- Round 2: it's possible to take a setting prompt from the audience for each of the three scenes.
- Round 2: as a rule the suspects have no alibi.
- Round 2: after the inspector has left, the scene may continue briefly — the suspect can mutter something to themselves or make a phone call and say, on the phone, "The police got here faster than I expected."
- Round 3: a setting prompt per scene works here too. Asking for an activity the potential perpetrator is currently doing tends to help.
- Round 3: to give the scene "vertical drop", begin it positively and/or with a routine.
- Round 3: the relevant strong feelings/motives are hate, jealousy/unrequited love, humiliation, revenge, liberation, fear. Greed sometimes — but because it relates to money it is awkward.
- Round 3: if the scene starts to drift after a while, it can be re-energised by a fresh provocative offer from the victim and ratcheted up. That is what builds the high-emotion conflict.
- Round 3: each potential perpetrator should have only one possible motive! Two or more motives per suspect feel "weaker".
- Between rounds 3 and 4 a further round is possible:
Encounter of the suspects *(relationship among themselves)*
All three suspects come together; we learn something about their relationship to each other and to the victim. They suspect each other and conflict erupts. Dramaturgically it is wise to let them arrive and leave in stages, similar to a wax-and-wane structure: first player A is on stage and may monologue; then B joins, A and B talk; then C arrives, the three interact; then one of them leaves the stage (could be A, doesn't have to be); the remaining two talk; then both leave together, or only one and the remaining player closes with a monologue. The advantage: focus is easier to manage, each player gets space, the scene tightens steadily and resolves itself.
The inspector might appear too — for example by secretly eavesdropping on the scene.
- Round 4: the audience assistant could also be a pathologist (technically a medical examiner).
- Round 5: two basic options exist. (1) The perpetrator meets the victim with intent to kill from the start. (2) The perpetrator comes — despite the conflict in round 3 — with peaceful intent, but is provoked into killing by what happens or by the victim's behaviour. Example: the conflict point is that the perpetrator's wife has left him because she is now with the (later) victim. In the perpetrator's presence, the (later) victim takes a phone call from the wife. That triggers the escalation up to the murder.
- The relationship and conflict should not generally be tied directly to money or debts.
See also: Crime film genre