I won't talk about motives, but here I will talk about the shortcomings that I personally think exist in the first case.

From the intention of the mastermind, he hoped that the deceased would come to his house at a specified time, put on his clothes and hat, and then let the murderer also come to his house at a later specified time and shoot to kill Hearing the deceased coming from the downstairs, thus accomplishing the two purposes of getting rid of the illegitimate child (dead) and framing the daughter's wife (murderer) to control the daughter.

As on-site evidence, the main ones that appear in the play are:

1. The damaged back door and the rain conditions inside and outside the door are different;

2. The floor heating that was turned on, and the different confessions of the host and hostess about whether to turn on the floor heating;

3. The video of only the deceased entering the back doorway was captured by the protection tower.

Next, the mastermind deliberately set up falsehoods as follows:

1. Fake the scene, take away the faceless man statue, deliberately cause two thieves to enter, and then divide the stolen goods unevenly and cause a conflict;

2. Remove the main entrance password records of daughters and wives, making people think that only daughters and sons-in-law can enter;

3. Remind the male protagonist that he can modify the password record of the main entrance by hacking, thereby expanding the scope of suspects beyond family members;

4. The administrator who framed the deceased's homeless home to take the blame

That is, the whole case can be divided into two parts:

1. Design to get rid of the illegitimate child, and at the same time put the blame on the daughter's wife;

2. Designed to mislead the police, to protect the daughter's wife and to control the daughter.

However, the problematic point is that there is actually a loophole in the part of the fake site.

The reason for faking the scene (kicking the back door, opening the floor heating, taking away the statue of the faceless man) is to make the police think that it was killed by a non-existent accomplice, and at the same time, it is convenient to use the faceless man to frame others later, so as to let the real man. The murderer (daughter's wife) escaped.

In fact, if the police always believed that it was an outsider, they would not check whether family members had guns and whether the guns matched the ballistics, or even carefully look at the background information of family members - which is actually the military of the youngest daughter in the beginning. The main reason why the background can always escape the pursuit.

In other words, in order to achieve this goal, we must admit that the incident was done by outsiders, and we must be able to construct the second person who does not exist—so, kick the door to create the illusion of intrusion, and open the floor heating to confuse the door. Time to destroy, take the statue to build a non-existent second person - the shortage comes out, does the time of confusion door destruction really work?

The mastermind broke away the pregnant wife, then took the key from the deceased, went to the back door and kicked the door from the outside (with a loud noise), and then found the problem of the rain, so he turned on the floor heating, and the floor heating was used in the back to explain why there was rain outside the door. There's nothing inside the door that shouldn't be the case if it's been open all the time.

But the problem is, if the floor heating is always on, you can know when the floor heating is really turned on by checking the electricity consumption.

After all, in such a big house, the floor heating must consume a lot of electricity (even if it is not electricity but coal, it must consume coal, right?), then this is the evidence that can be verified.

In other words, the mastermind said that he forgot to turn off the floor heating before he left. Even if his wife did not tell the truth afterwards, it is theoretically untenable - as long as the police suspect, they can find out that the floor heating is If you open it later, you will be exposed.

On the other hand, the actual situation that night was that the deceased opened the door to enter the house through the back door, and the murderer entered the house through the front door later. It was raining during these two periods, so the problem came - theoretically we should be able to open the door at the front door and enter the house. Two sets of traces were found at the back door, because even if the floor heating was turned on, the footprints and other traces could not completely disappear. However, the mastermind apparently didn't have time to clean up the traces on the ground.

The most critical point is the back door that was kicked open. It is very likely that there are no footprints left on the door (the rain stopped long ago when the mastermind kicked the door), or the footprints left are not the same as the footprints of the deceased—— This is in direct contradiction to the video captured by the protection tower where only the deceased entered the back door.

That is to say, in theory, the police can find footprints that are inconsistent with the deceased on the damaged back door, or they can't find footprints that should exist, and they should be able to find two sets of footprints up and down the house, one is from the front door in the rainy night. One group came in from the back door in the rainy night. If there are enough footprints and marks, the police should even be able to know that the back door is the dead person, and the front door is a woman (the size of the footprint reflects the height, and the pattern of the footprint reflects the style).

If combined with the deceased wearing the mastermind's clothes, the traces left in the house upstairs, and the scope of activities revealed by the traces left by the murderer who entered the main entrance, it is not difficult for the police to deduce the conclusion: the deceased came first, and then changed He took off the mastermind's clothes and hat, then went downstairs to meet the murderer and was killed.

This all points to one point: the two people who entered the room are not accomplices.

Therefore, since the mastermind began to plan, as long as he had seen the weather that night, he should have been able to predict that it would be OK to move towards the angle where two acquaintances who were acquainted broke into the house and stole the money unevenly and conflicted and one killed the other. No way.

In fact, combined with the above-mentioned turn-on time of the floor heating, the police will come to the conclusion that both people entered the house through regular channels, and no one broke in by force.

In this way, the mastermind encountered a problem - the murderer who came in at the front door could evade that he was a professional killer hired by a malicious third party, but how to explain the deceased who came in through the back door?

In this way, it becomes inevitable that a family member communicates with the deceased, and gives the deceased the key to enter through the back door - who is this person? Why do you want to do this? Does he also have any connection with the murderer who entered the main entrance?

Look, the purpose of taking all family members out of the circle of doubt is broken.

However, once a family member is suspected, it is natural to investigate the background of the family member in depth, so that the military background of the youngest daughter will be exposed, and the clue of the pistol will even contact her, her wife is the murderer. would be exposed and the whole plan would go bankrupt.

So, what should be done in a reasonable way?

As mentioned earlier, the mastermind has to do two things:

1. Get rid of illegitimate children

2. Control the little daughter

As for leaving the family business to the younger daughter, it is a relatively trivial matter. After all, this is a matter of his own words, as long as the second point can be achieved.

Therefore, the purpose is to let the daughter's wife kill her illegitimate child.

It's almost impossible to let a daughter's wife kill someone else directly for herself, but it's not difficult to let her kill herself - of course, this is also debatable, but we think it can be done.

Therefore, it is to make the daughter's wife think that the person she killed is herself, but it is actually an illegitimate child - this is the mastermind's plan.

To let the illegitimate child enter the house, he must only be allowed to enter through regular channels, otherwise normal people will be suspicious. The same is true for the daughter's wife who comes in to kill, she can only enter the house through regular channels and will not choose to break in.

So, here's the question: If a method, such as a time-delay device, could be constructed to disable the alarm system in a home for a specified period of time, then it would explain why an illegitimate child who is an "outsider" could reasonably be expected to not trigger an alarm. Entering the house, and how the killer as an "outsider" can reasonably enter the house.

The deceased and the murderer certainly couldn't enter at the same time, but the traces on the floor couldn't reveal much information, so the bastard and the daughter's wife could both enter through the main door - just tell them the door was open.

Therefore, paralyze the alarm system of your own house, make the doors and windows of the whole house freely open, and then let the illegitimate child and the daughter's wife enter through the front door, so that it is possible to reasonably construct the "accomplice" relationship - of course, not enough.

Disabling the alarm system can go hand-in-hand with sabotaging the power system, so that the daughter's wife can mistake the dead for the mastermind in the dark. Therefore, the clues that the police can get will be: two sets of footprints and traces entered through the main entrance, all alarm systems and electrical systems failed, the deceased was wearing the mastermind's clothes, and then was shot to death.

So, one more step - if the failure of the alarm system and the power system is known to a third party, that would explain why these two are here. Otherwise, there's a question: why so coincidentally that the dead and the murderer came when the alarm and power system failed?

If the police believe that a malicious third party sends professional killers to kill the mastermind, and ends up killing the deceased who happened to be stealing here, the problem becomes too coincidental, because it requires alarms and power systems to fail, the deceased to break into the empty door, and the professional killer to come. The three incidents of murder happen to happen together, which is easy to suspect.

But if the alarm and the failure of the power system are known to a third party in advance, then the murderer and the deceased have a reasonable reason to come, and even they can be two groups of people with the same purpose - both came to break through the empty door , but come at different times, meet by chance, and then one kills the other.

And such a plan is actually not difficult - use a delay device to actively paralyze the alarm system and power system, but if it causes an accident; then, pretend to be notified by the alarm system, and say it out loud in front of everyone, Created a situation that a lot of people knew. Next, I told my wife that the security company must have been notified (but in fact, of course not, this can be attributed to the lack of the security system, or that the notification system was the result of a mistake by installing it myself), so there is no need to go home in advance, Construct a sufficient time window for the homicide to occur.

In this way, the police are faced with two choices:

1. The mastermind accidentally told a lot of people about the failure of his alarm system and power system. Among them, there were a few people who had bad thoughts and told Bass's accomplices. These different groups of accomplices included the deceased and the murderer. They entered the mastermind's house with front and back feet, and the result was a conflict, the dead were killed and the murderer fled;

2. The mastermind himself set up the game, but there are too few clues, so he can only guess.

Obviously, this is much better than the current game - at least, there are not many clues that can point out doubts more directly.

Of course, the main point here is to say: the floor heating and footprints in the original script can directly constitute a situation that breaks the design of the mastermind, which can be said to be insufficient.