Detective: The robbery at the mall was carried out by a mall employee acting alone roughly one hour after the mall closed last Saturday night. The only employees present at the mall at the time of the robbery were security guards Evans and Clark. Since the mall’s surveillance system was disabled by the thief just before the robbery, the thief must be Evans
What is the question?
Sra
Clark does not know how to disable the surveillance system
Step 1: Review the given information
- The robbery occurred at the mall after it closed last Saturday night.
- The only employees present at that time were security guards Evans and Clark.
- The mall's surveillance system was disabled by the thief just before the robbery.
Step 2: Identify the possible suspect
Based on the information provided, we can conclude that the thief must be Evans. This is because the surveillance system was disabled by the thief, and the only employees present were Evans and Clark.
Step 3: Reasoning for the conclusion
Since there is no other information to support Clark's involvement, the only logical deduction is that Evans acted alone. The fact that the thief disabled the surveillance system indicates that they had knowledge of it, making it more likely to be an inside job. Since Evans was the only security guard present at the time of the robbery, it is reasonable to suspect their involvement.
Keep in mind that this conclusion is based on the information provided. Additional evidence could potentially change the outcome.
To determine that the thief must be Evans, let's examine the information provided:
1. The robbery was carried out by a mall employee acting alone: This implies that the thief is one of the mall employees.
2. The robbery occurred roughly one hour after the mall closed last Saturday night: This narrows down the time frame for when the robbery took place.
3. The only employees present at the mall at the time of the robbery were security guards Evans and Clark: This states that only Evans and Clark were present during the time of the robbery.
4. The mall's surveillance system was disabled by the thief just before the robbery: This suggests that the thief had knowledge of the surveillance system and purposely disabled it.
Based on this information, we can conclude that the thief must be Evans for the following reasons:
1. No other mall employee was mentioned apart from Evans and Clark, making them the primary suspects.
2. Since the surveillance system was disabled just before the robbery, it indicates that the thief had prior knowledge of the system. As a security guard, Evans would have had access to the necessary details to disable the surveillance system.
To further support this conclusion, we could explore additional evidence such as any suspicious activities or behavior exhibited by Evans, his proximity to the area of the robbery, or any eyewitness testimonies.
It's important to note that while these deductions point towards Evans as the likely thief, it's always necessary to gather more evidence and conduct a thorough investigation to confirm the perpetrator's identity.