Unusual Suspects
The police rounded up Jim, Bud and Sam yesterday, because one of them was suspected of having robbed the local bank. The three suspects made the following statements under intensive questioning.
- Jim: I’m innocent.
- Bud: I’m innocent.
- Sam: Bud is guilty.
If only one of these statements turns out to be true, who robbed the bank?
Communicated by G. Mejia.
Your answer, Isaac, is not quite right, but your email address wasn’t valid. email me at [email protected]
email me at sjm1 AT williams.edu
This is a tricky one
John: correct (email me at sjm1 AT williams.edu)
email me: sjm1 AT williams.edu
Jib: well done
gilly: email sjm1 AT williams.edu
Bud is saying the truth; both jim and sam are lying. Jim is the robber and sam is innocent. aince if only.one is saying the truth then both bud and sam together can’t be lying; and both bud and jim cant b lying neither since bud cant b both inocent and guilty.
there’s another soln (sjm1 AT williams.edu)
glad you’re enjoying — email at sjm1 AT williams.edu to chat more, can solve this indep of other problems
Jim robbed the bank
Hello again, steve. It’s a delight browsing through your riddles!
Mixing this with “How can you guess that?”
Suspects #1,2,3 : Jim, Bud, Sam. Is suspect #X guilty ? (X is your secret number).
Maybe you can use this riddle as a hint for the other one ?
ahh, but there is another answer — email me at sjm1 AT williams.edu
Jim
I think it might be harder than you think — email me at sjm1 AT williams.edu to chat.
Jiminy Crickets! This problem should be listed as “extremely easy”, why is it in this category?
ok, hints sent //s (sjm1 AT williams.edu)
i would like that you give me the answer step by step
ahh, but there can be another soln //sjm1 AT williams.edu
if Bud tells true then Sam is definitely guilty , because there are only one robber
There is another soln….
Bud because sams statement is true. If only one of these statements turns out to be true, who robbed the bank?
Alex Irby: I get two of your possibilities as happening
ah, but another interpretation is possible too!
Bud’s statment is true.
Jim robbed the bank
another interpretation gives another soln — email me at sjm1 AT williams.edu
ahh, but there can be another soln too
Firstly, i’l say sam is lying. If sam’s statement is false then buds statement is true. How did sam knw dat bud is guilty. OR.sam and bud comited d crime 2geda, jim’s statement is d only truth. I knw one out of my two hypotheses is true
but can there be another answer / interpretation to the problem
wasn’t my answer correct?
that Bud is telling the truth so JIM is guilty
ahh, but could there be another soln as well?
Jim
Ah, but is there another soln? //s
The one that said Bud is guilty robbed the bank. He never said he was innocent and Bud was with him therefore they both are responsible.
Just sent you a hint — let me know if that helps. (Actually, the email may’ve bounded — email me at sjm1 AT williams.edu for the hint) //s
what is the answer
ah, but is there another soln???
Both Jim and Bud robbed the bank, which leaves Sam’s statement true and the other statements false
Ah, but could there be another soln? //s
my answer is Jim robbed the bank.
Consider the case II
Assume Bud is truthful.
So
Bud’s Statement is correct.
Sam’s Statement is false since he assumes Bud as the robber.
Jim’s Statement is false as he claims him to be innocent.
Since Jim’s statement is false , so he cant be innocent.
Jim robbed the bank
There are two possible interpretations, two possible solns. ..s
Could it be that Jim and Bud were lying and Sam was telling the truth?
To Bones: There are TWO ways to look at the problem. You got one of the two interpretations (the one most people miss).
You’re getting closer, but I don’t think it can be all three…. Email me at [email protected] if you want to run a soln by me.
could it be all three of them? only the Bud is guilty statement is true and since Sam knows about the thing, he must be included too.
ah, but could there be another soln…..
Sam and Bud robbed the bank, Jim is innocent.
ah, but could there be another soln….
Jim.
If Bud’s is true, he is innocent. If Sam’s is false, Bud is innocent. If Jim’s is false, he is guilty. This is the only logical solution.
Other scenarios:
Sam’s being true? Bud is guilty. Bud: fasle, guilty. Jim: False, also guilty? But only one can be guilty.
Jim’s being true? Jim is innocent. Bud: false, guilty. Sam: false, Bud is innocent. That’s an endless contradiction.
ahh, but could there be another soln too?
Not sure if I am interpreting this correctly but I believe Jim robbed the bank.
The one person telling the truth is Bud:
This means Jim was lying (so he robbed the bank).
This means Bud was telling the truth (so he is innocent).
This means Sam was lying (so Bud isn’t really guilty, he’s innocent.)
Seems straightforward to me. 🙂
Ahh, but could there be another soln?
Jim is both a liar and the criminal. Bud told the truth and was innocent; Sam lied and was also innocent. (Or I suppose, technically, he could have also been guilty but was smoother and more cunning than Jim and wasn’t even suspected in the first place, and maybe that’s why he accused Bud rather than proclaim his own innocence).
could there be another solution? email me at [email protected] to discuss.
If Sam is true while Jim and Bud are lying, then both Jim and Bud will be guilty. (Not possible as there is only one suspect.)
If Jim is true while Bud and Sam are lying, then Bud is guilty according to himself while Bud is innocent according to Sam (Not possible due to contradiction)
If Bud is true while Jim and Sam are lying, then Jim is guilty while Bud will be innocent.
Hence Jim is the guilty party who robbed the bank.
Ah, but there is another solution as well!
Its simple Sam is telling the truth Bud is guilty
Could there be another solution?
it was sam because he is the only one trying to make himself look innocent, believing that his friends would frame him, he tried to look for a way out
I don’t believe it’s possible for all to be innocent, but you’re on the right track.
Is the previous one correct though?
Could it be possible that NONE of these men are involved? (possibly going too far outside of the box on this one)
depending on how you view the problem, there are TWO defensible solutions
Lane: Jim did it.
Kiana: I say that Jim did it either with or without Bud as a possible accomplice.
Are we both right?
it isn’t so clear — there is another solution! :]
it’s so clear: It’s JIM. it’s the only way those statements could work out!
there are TWO answers to this riddles. hint: maybe exactly 1 robbed, or maybe exactly 2 robbed!
I was about to say that Sam in telling the truth but then you wouldn’t know everyone who robbed the bank since then it would be unknown whether Sam robbed the bank or not.
correct, but there’s another solution too!
Jim, because if Bud statement is true, it would make Sams statement false which would make Bud innocent. And also Jims statement of innocence false.
Is there another solution?
Jim is lying, he robbed the bank. Sam is lying and Bud is saying truth.
There is another solution.
So if Sam’s statement is true, then Bud is lying (and is thus guilty). However, this would also mean that Jim was telling the truth thus invalidating the requirement that there be only one true statement. So that scenario is out. And if Jim is telling the truth then Bud is lying (and is thus guilty). This would mean that Sam’s statement is true once again invalidating our one truth requirement. Thus Bud’s statement of innocence must be the true statement, meaning that Jim and Sam lied. Thus Jim is the guilty one.
Glad you’re enjoing it.
Very thoroughly researched, impressive work.
this is one soln — could there be another?
Jim robbed the bank. Bud and Sam’s statements contradict one another so 1 gotta be true and the other is false. Assume Sam is truthful -> Bud and Jim are lying cos there’s only 1 truth -> both Bud and Jim robbed the bank (didnt say there can only be 1 person who robbed the bank. The problem only said that 1 was SUSPECTED).
If Bud was truthful then Sam lied and Jim lied so Jim robbed the bank.
Either case, Jim robbed the bank.
That’s one solution — is there another?
Baud stole the bank, and Jim knew that he did steal the bank and did not inform, so became a partner in robbing the bank, so he is not innocent.
To: ANT: Yes, your solution is valid. (Email me sjm1 AT williams.edu if you have a soln, as I prefer not to post a full soln as it can spoil the fun for some people).
To Jack (who just posted): correct!
This is one solution. There is another interpretation leading to another solution!
1st supposition:(Jim is true i.e. Bud and Sam are false).But,If Bud is false here,Sam turns out to be true or else if Sam is false here,Bud turns out to be true i.e.Both Bud and Sam can’t be false.So supposition fails.
2nd supposition:(Sam is true i.e. Bud and Jim are false).Ya obviously,Bud is false here but as Bud is guilty,Jim turns out to be innocent(true) here.So it fails again.
3rd supposition:(Bud is true i.e. Jim and Sam are false).Here,Sam turns out to be false and obviously Jim also must turns out to be false to satisfy main condition(only 1 speaks truth).So supposition must holds good.
Jim is speaking false,he must have robbed the bank.Is it correct?
There is another interpretation….
Sam robbed the bank ! cause hes telling the truth
Is there only one way to interpret this problem?
This is not true because bill lied
This is one way to look at it — is there another?
Jim robbed the bank. But Sam should also be hauled in for trying to frame an innocent man.