Jean,+Kelsey,+Nina



Perry Winkle was an everyday suburban citizen who lived with his wife, Ruth and stepson, Josh. Perry never bothered to lock the doors to his home because they lived in a gated community in a relatively crime free town in Montana.

On December 6th, Mr. Winkle was hanging christmas lights all over the exterior of the house. When Josh came home from school, he found his father laying on the ground dead.

When Josh was interviewed by cops he stated that he assumed his dad had fallen off the ladder while trying to put lights on the upstairs window.

“Did anyone have motive to kill your father?” the cop asked. He replied that their next door neighbors sometimes got angry at Perry for one of his trees that hung slightly into the neighbors yard and deposited leaves there every autumn. The detectives found this fact to be true but did not agree that a few leaves gave warrant to murder.

Capt. Barra:  Here is a compelling case of the death of an unfortunate man. The real question is: was it an accident, or a cold-blooded murder? The evidence shows only one clear resolution. It is without a doubt that Mr. Perry Winkle was murdered. Those who had legitimate motives for such a crime, Josh Winkle, Perry Winkle’s neighbors, and his wife should be brought in for further questioning.  Take the situation of the fallen ladder. Winkle’s stepson, Josh, claims that he believed his stepfather had merely fallen off the ladder, and fell to his death. A person who falls off a ladder is likely to leave the ladder standing, because there is not enough leverage to tip the ladder over. However, the ladder is on the ground, which suggests that Mr. Winkle did not fall off the ladder by himself, for the reasons above. A person who did not fall off a ladder by their own misstep is likely to have fallen due to another person moving the ladder. Additionally, if Josh’s story does not make logical sense, then he could be hiding something, because a person who claims a false story about the crime scene is likely to be hiding something.  Similarly, we should take another look at the footprints in the snow that lead up to the ladder. Because there is only one pair of footprints, Mr. Winkle’s death would be an accident, because a person who falls to their death by accident should only display one set of footprints - their own. However, if we take a closer look, the marks on the bottom of Mr. Winkle’s shoe are striped, whereas the marks imprinted in the snow have two dots. If the prints don’t match up, then there must have been another person by the ladder who did not want to be found. Why? Because a person who is trying to erase evidence of them being near the scene of the crime is likely to walk in Mr. Winkle’s footprints, so as to give the illusion of only one person walking towards the ladder.  Clearly, Mr. Perry Winkle could not have fallen to his death from the ladder on his own. The case should be considered as a murder, rather, and Mr. Winkle’s immediate family and next door neighbors should be held as possible suspects and considered for further questioning. Further inquiry into the state of the ladder and footprints in the snow is recommended, as well. Thank you for your attention, Dets. Ray, Coulter, and Thompson
 * //It is now up to you to investigate Mr. Winkle's sudden fall to his death. Use the evidence to create your most logical claim.//**