How did the police know?

Question

One night, a man receives a call from the police. The police tell the man that his wife was robbed, murdered, and her body dumped in a remote location, and that he should reach the crime scene as soon as possible.

The man drops his phone in shock, and drives 20 minutes to the crime scene. Though the man does not have any evidence of committing the murder on his personal being (no blood or other signs of foul play on the car or any possessions) as soon as he reaches the crime scene, and before he can say or do anything, the police arrest him on suspicion of committing the murder (he will, of course be judged by a jury of his peers, etc.).

Without any sign of typical evidence, why do the police think that he committed the crime?

_{It should be noted that this takes place in the typical world, without aliens, super powers, or unlimited quantities of any material.}

I find it hard to believe he could be convicted without any hard evidence (if laws are similar to that of America/Canada)...Aliens, or unlimited amounts of rope must have been involved — Mark N, Jun 16 '15 at 14:46
Are the police officers psychic? [Could they secretly be aliens?] — Mark N, Jun 16 '15 at 14:51
@AggieKidd I think it's pretty good now...I can't think of another obscure scenario that fits....(Unless you are allowing quantum mechanics :p) — Mark N, Jun 16 '15 at 15:09
@BenAaronson Serious answer: because they found her body already. Not so serious answer: because his phone is glitchy and shocked him whenever he answers it. — Aggie Kidd, Jun 17 '15 at 14:01
@AggieKidd but if the police was not there yet then how did they know it was the mans wife? I doubt the person who found the body figured out who it was and who was married to the dead woman. — Jakob, Jun 18 '15 at 07:09
@Jakob I'm not saying the police weren't there, just that the husband was "shocked" that the police found the body so quickly. — Aggie Kidd, Jun 18 '15 at 13:44
@Emrakul Can you explain exactly where you see the issue with this so I can improve it? — Aggie Kidd, Aug 19 '16 at 20:00
@AggieKidd When evaluating questions for topicality, hints and addendums are generally excluded. The body of the question here still seems to be too broad, even though hints do somewhat limit the scope of answers. However, I do also think that the growing number of answers and responsive limiting hints suggests that the premise of finding the missing piece in a story may be intrinsically too broad. I'm honestly not sure what to recommend, but at a start, I might suggest editing the hints and addendums to be a part of the puzzle itself. — , Aug 19 '16 at 21:19
@Emrakul I have a slight issue with your statement of a "growing number of answers" as there has been little to no activity on this for almost a year, but I have worked to address your concerns. — Aggie Kidd, Aug 24 '16 at 12:11

score 86 · Accepted Answer · answered Jun 16 '15 at 14:44

86

I think

They didn't tell him where the murder scene was but he could find it.

answered Jun 16 '15 at 14:44

A.D.

4,341
1
20
38

2

UGH I was typing that as you posted it. :) – Bailey M Jun 16 '15 at 14:44
3

Beat me by 10 seconds! – Mark N Jun 16 '15 at 14:44
2

Yep. Three minutes, and three people. Sounds about right for this brilliant community. Well done. – Aggie Kidd Jun 16 '15 at 14:45
1

that was quick! – Alex Jun 16 '15 at 14:45
55

That's hardly proof that he killed her, though. He could have had a perfectly legitimate reason for knowing where she was going to be that night--like, maybe, she told him, being his wife* and all*--and he went there to see what had happened. – Mason Wheeler Jun 16 '15 at 15:07
1

@MasonWheeler It isn't a very good puzzle, but that's what you get when your source is outside of puzzling ;) [OP got it from his 'morning feed'] – Mark N Jun 16 '15 at 15:13
12

That evidence sucks. Besides the fact he probably knows where his wife was, a 21th century tech known as "Find my phone" ought to do it. – Joshua Jun 16 '15 at 19:44
7

Arrest and conviction are not the same. They might arrest him but they will have to set him free unless other kinds of evidence is also found. – vsz Jun 17 '15 at 06:20
I really dislike this solution, it assumes the police set and planned this trap, something they could only have done if they knew the husband was guilty in the first place. How did they know? Psychic powers? – Dorus Jun 18 '15 at 11:01
2

@Dorus Statistics... depending on the situation of the body you can deduct if it was a crime of passion and statistic says it is the husband in most cases. So a single phonecall to lay a trap to proof your 70% guess is a fine tactic to start a case. – Falco Jun 18 '15 at 13:43

score 57 · Answer 2 · answered Jun 16 '15 at 19:08

57

He was framed for the murder by popular musicians Sting, Andy Summers and Stewart Copeland.

You've stated that he was told about the murder by the Police (note the capitals), and was arrested as he arrived at the scene of the crime by the police.

Clearly they knew he would be coming somehow.

answered Jun 16 '15 at 19:08

Richard

5,320
2
17
28

44

Perhaps they knew he was coming because they were watching him, every step he took. – Jonathan Zhan Jun 18 '15 at 03:46

Richard · Answer 3 · 2015-06-16T19:00:32.043

33

From a lateral point of view, you've not actually stated that he was arrested for his wife's murder.

He could therefore have been arrested because:

There was an outstanding arrest warrant for him already

edited Jun 16 '15 at 19:00

answered Jun 16 '15 at 18:49

Richard

5,320
2
17
28

score 12 · Answer 4 · answered Jun 16 '15 at 20:33

12

Non-serious answers:

1. His wife, with her dying breath, told an bystander that her husband did it. The policemen had a phone number but not an address.
2. The police got a description of the car, and would have arrested anyone who pulled up to the crime scene in that model of car.

answered Jun 16 '15 at 20:33

user3757614

299
1
2

3
is actually pretty good: A witness might have spotted the car, including license-plate. When the husband pulled up, the police immediately recognized him as the murderer and arrested him.

Dorus

Jun 18 '15 at 10:56

Matthew0898 · Answer 5 · 2015-06-19T15:01:00.570

The obvious answer is that the police did not tell him where the wife was murdered.

After further consideration, I came up with a few alternative possibilities as to how he could have known where the crime scene was.

1. The husband had witnessed the crime. Perhaps he left the location to call for help. He may have been afraid to return to the scene of the crime before the police had arrived.

2. The husband tracked the phone. The wife likely had her cell phone with her, so he may have used the GPS in his wife's phone to locate her("Find my iPhone" or something of the sort). Maybe he traced the police phone call.

3. Someone told him where the crime occurred. While it never stated that the police told him where it occurred, it never said that they DIDN'T tell him where it occurred. Or maybe he happened to drive past it on his way to the police station. Maybe he happened to guess where it occurred, perhaps she was murdered at their home or, if she had a job, the wife's workplace.

4. The man heard or saw the sirens. He probably would have needed to live in a rural area for this to be plausible. Granted, it took him 20 minutes to get there, so perhaps he is a very slow driver, or his car broke down.

5. The man wasn't driving his own car. It never actually stated he was driving a car. Maybe, Death by Go-Kart

It took him 20 minutes to get there... that could easily be a rural small town thing. Takes him 15 minutes to reach town, and 5 minutes to drive up and down roads until he notices the flashing lights. If he got the call from the town's police instead of a state trooper/county sheriff, he would even know exactly which small town to go to — Taejang, Jun 25 '21 at 14:05

score 3 · Answer 6 · answered Jun 16 '15 at 18:08

The man was actually a government agent and when he got the call that his own wife was dead, he was shocked to hear it. The man called his agency and told him about what happened. The agency gave him a folder with info about everything about the crime scene, and he was off. He drove down the road, using his GPS to find the place where the folder said to go and finally found it, getting out of the car only to find that he was accused of murder.

Or if that's not enough creative thinking for you, then try this:

The man heard on the news that his wife was dead, and was about to go when the police called him. He didn't want to seem suspicious, as he knew the husband was normally accused of the murder in all those movies he watched, he waited patiently until the police told him to go. He waited for them to hang up and zoomed out the door, got in his car, and drove off. He was very hungry, and saw a Taco Bell, but knew he couldn't stop and had to get there quickly. He recalled where the crime scene was from the news, and used his GPS to find it. When he got there, he was surprised to see the police arresting him.

There, lateral thinking... Well... Creative thinking anyways. I'm starving. I'm gonna go get some Taco Bell.

score 2 · Answer 7 · answered Jun 17 '15 at 21:45

You'll have to bear with me on this one as we're heading past lateral into full-on obtuse. Buckle up.

The man's wife was beaten to death with a very distinctive, personalised golf club. She was found next to her husband's car.

and

You've stated the man "drives 20 minutes" to the crime scene. I put it to you that when he was called, he played a round of golf ("driving") to where he'd parked his car.

So

The police, recognising that the club he was holding was identical to the murder weapon (and noting his callous indifference), arrested him on his arrival.

I actually really like this answer – Xandawesome Apr 19 '18 at 05:42 — Xandawesome, Apr 19 '18 at 05:42

score 2 · Answer 8 · answered Oct 15 '15 at 19:57

Since we're throwing out alternative answers:

The clues stated that his car was not dented from hitting his wife. However...

He did in fact hit her, with enough force that the numbers and letters of his front-mounted license plate left an impression on the wife's body, but not enough to dent the car. When he arrived on scene, a clever detective recognized the impression as a mirror of the one on the husband's car.

score -2 · Answer 9 · answered Dec 27 '20 at 05:07

-2

Just found this question. I'm surprised nobody has pointed out an obvious solution.

The area was covered by CCTV. It caught a man of roughly the husband's description dumping the body out of a car matching the vehicle he showed up in.

answered Dec 27 '20 at 05:07

nzaman

153
4

There is no "typical" evidence, though, and I would consider CCTV typical evidence. – bobble Dec 27 '20 at 05:11
The OP clarifies this earlier "Though the man does not have any evidence of committing the murder on his personal being (no blood or other signs of foul play on the car or any possessions)". I would assume "typical" would refer only to this since the OP need not have stressed the lack of evidence on the husband's person otherwise. But fair enough. – nzaman Dec 27 '20 at 05:18

How did the police know?

9 Answers9

Linked

Related