Directions: Fill in the blanks so that the sentences and the story make sense! You must use ALL of the words in the word bank and only use the words once!
WORD BANK:
Motive red herring sleuth breakthrough
Suspect witness alibi hunch
Deductive reasoning inductive reasoning
The Case of the Missing Cheeseburgers
Billy was an angry man. He was jealous that all of the other guys in town got to eat cheeseburgers for free. Every ___1____ in town knew this, so when they were assigned to the case of the missing cheeseburgers, their first _____2_____ was Billy! Billy would definitely have a ____3____ to steal cheeseburgers, since he was so bitter and angry about the situation.
Detective Sesame was at the crime scene, Mama’s Burger Joint, collecting clues. While collecting clues, he was very careful not to jump to any conclusions, as a ________4_________ had distracted and fooled him before! He questioned all of the employees, but nobody saw anyone leave with cheeseburgers: “Oh, no! No _____5_____!?” exclaimed Detective Sesame. “How am I supposed to catch this burger burglar if nobody saw him??”
Detective Sesame and his partner Detective Angus didn’t give up. They went straight to Billy’s house to see if he knew anything about this. They thought maybe they could catch him in a lie. They wrapped on his door.
“Billy, where were you two nights ago??” They knew he wasn’t going to have a good answer. They were wrong. Billy had an ______6____. He was at work and his boss could prove it.
Days went by and there wasn’t a ______7________ in the case. No new clues. The detectives used their logical thinking. They eliminated many possible suspects by ________8________. Then,
________9_________ reasoning helped them to make a ________10________. They found the real culprit! It was the janitor! He had been stealing the cheeseburgers all along!
The detectives had a _____9_____ and decided to interview all of the witnesses again. They asked if anyone had noticed anything suspicious or out of the ordinary. One witness, Mrs. Jenkins, mentioned seeing a man wearing a disguise near Mama's Burger Joint the night the cheeseburgers went missing. This clue seemed promising and Detective Sesame had a ______10_____.
He decided to follow this lead and investigate further. After some digging, he discovered that the man in disguise was actually an undercover officer investigating a separate case. The undercover officer had nothing to do with the missing cheeseburgers, making him a ____11____.
With this new information, the detectives refocused their investigation. They went back to the crime scene and reexamined the evidence. Using their deductive reasoning and logical thinking, they were able to identify a new suspect, a disgruntled employee named Remy. They found evidence that linked Remy to the crime and eventually, he confessed to stealing the cheeseburgers.
The detectives had solved the case using a combination of deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning, and following their hunches. The motive for the crime turned out to be Remy's dissatisfaction with his job at Mama's Burger Joint.
The detectives had a breakthrough in the case. They found a witness who saw someone sneaking around Mama's Burger Joint on the night of the cheeseburger theft. With this new information, they had a new suspect to investigate further.
They brought this new suspect in for questioning. The suspect denied any involvement in the cheeseburger theft and provided an alibi for the night in question. The detectives decided to use deductive reasoning to determine if the alibi was credible.
They analyzed the evidence and compared it with the alibi provided by the suspect. They looked for inconsistencies or any evidence that could prove the suspect's guilt or innocence. After careful examination, they realized that the alibi was solid and the suspect had a strong motive to lie.
With this new information, the detectives went back to Billy, the initial suspect. They realized that Billy's motive alone was not enough to convict him, especially since he had a valid alibi. They revisited their previous hunch that Billy could be the culprit.
Upon reviewing the evidence, they realized that they had been chasing a red herring. Their initial hunch and motive for Billy were distractions that had misled them. They realized that their deductive reasoning had been faulty.
The detectives combined their deductive reasoning with inductive reasoning to reconsider the evidence and witness testimony. They looked at the case from a different perspective. They noticed a pattern in the behavior of the witness they had found earlier. The witness seemed nervous and avoided eye contact.
They decided to dig deeper into the witness's background and discovered that the witness had a history of stealing food for personal gain. With this new information, the detectives had a renewed hunch that the witness could be the real cheeseburger thief.
They confronted the witness and presented their evidence. Under pressure, the witness eventually confessed to the crime. The detectives had solved the case of the missing cheeseburgers through a combination of deductive and inductive reasoning, a breakthrough in the investigation, and careful examination of suspects and witnesses.