CASE NO. SW–001INTRODUCTORY INVESTIGATIONEST. 20–30 MIN
NEW ASSIGNMENT · EVIDENCE INTAKE
The Case of the Vanishing Meteorite.
A rare space rock has disappeared from the school science exhibit. Four people had access. Several clues survived. One late-breaking discovery may connect them.
No account required · Saves on this device
EXHIBIT SW–07 — IRON METEORITE
LAST SEEN: YESTERDAY · 7:30 PMSTATUS: MISSING
EVIDENCE / 001
INCIDENT REPORT
The situation
INCIDENT ID: SW–001–AUNCLASSIFIED
At 7:10 a.m., the science teacher discovered that a small iron meteorite was missing from its display case in the school's science wing. The case was open, but there was no sign of forced entry.
Investigators found a partial fingerprint on the inner latch, a damp sock print on the tile floor, white powder on the workbench, and a handwritten note near the radiator. Each could be connected to innocent activity or to the disappearance.
A timestamped exhibit photograph confirms the meteorite was still on display at 7:30 p.m. Four people had been in the science wing that evening. Your task is to compare the initial evidence, make a provisional hypothesis, and reconsider it when investigators release new records.
◎
Your responsibility Follow the evidence. Do not accuse someone based only on motive, a matching pattern, or one laboratory test.
STEP 02 · SCENE RECONSTRUCTION
Look closer.
Inspect the four numbered evidence markers. Four early clues were found. A new evidence packet will arrive after you examine the suspect files.
0 / 4EVIDENCE COLLECTED
SCIENCE WING · ROOM 114ILLUSTRATED RECONSTRUCTION · NOT TO SCALE
SELECT A NUMBERED MARKER TO INSPECTDIAGRAM FOR LEARNING · NOT ACTUAL FORENSIC DOCUMENTATION
STEP 03 · EVIDENCE ANALYSIS
The forensic lab.
Compare the recovered samples against reference evidence. Record what your data supports, and what it cannot establish.
04LAB STATIONS
LAB / 01
Fingerprint comparison
Pattern class + distinguishing ridge features
BIOLOGICAL PATTERNS
Recovered latch print
≋
Pattern: loop. Features in this classroom simulation: a ridge ending above a fork, with a small island to the left of the core.
Reference prints
AveryLoop · island on right
RowanArch · no matching central fork
JordanWhorl · circular ridges
CaseyLoop · ending above fork · island on left
A pattern class alone cannot identify one person. Even a classroom feature match cannot tell when a print was left or prove involvement.
LAB / 02
Footprint measurements
Compare length, measurement uncertainty, and overlap
MEASUREMENT
Recovered sock print
HEELTOE
24.8 cm recorded length. Estimated measurement uncertainty: ±0.3 cm.
A range of 24.5–25.1 cm is consistent with the measurement.
Reference foot lengths
Avery23.2 cm
Rowan26.1 cm
Jordan24.7 cm
Casey24.9 cm
Measurements that overlap within uncertainty are not enough to tell two people apart. A foot length is not an individual identifier.
LAB / 03
Powder reaction test
Compare observed reactions to vinegar
CHEMICAL REACTIONS
Recovered powder observation
Small sample mixed with vinegar: vigorous bubbling. The same test was applied to powders found in the four work areas.
Reference test observations
AveryNo bubbles; grains dissolved
RowanNo bubbles; cloudy suspension
JordanGentle, slow fizzing
CaseyVigorous bubbling
An acid reaction may suggest carbonate or bicarbonate, but bubbling alone does not identify a unique substance or its owner. Sample amount changes the apparent intensity.
LAB / 04
Ink chromatography
Compare relative dye travel distances (Rf)
SEPARATION SCIENCE
Recovered note chromatogram
Solvent front: 5.5 cmBand distances:1.4 · 3.1 · 4.4 cm
Reference ink results (Rf)
Avery0.20 / 0.55 / 0.80
Rowan0.25 / 0.48 / 0.78
Jordan0.25 / 0.56 / 0.80
Casey0.25 / 0.56 / 0.80
Rf = distance moved by dye ÷ distance moved by solvent front. Two pens can share a chromatogram. Matching bands support similarity, not unique ownership.
STEP 04 · PERSONS OF INTEREST
Four explanations.
Access is not guilt. Motive is not proof. Make a provisional hypothesis before opening the follow-up evidence.
04PERSONS OF INTEREST
POI / 01STAGE CREW
AQ
Avery Quinn
Student stage technician
Reason for being there
Helped take down the showcase lighting. Says they left just after 7:20 p.m.
Possible motive
Was frustrated that the exhibit occupied equipment needed for the theater production.
Statement
“I only went near the lights. I never opened the display.”
POI / 02ROBOTICS
RE
Rowan Ellis
Robotics team member
Reason for being there
Worked in a nearby classroom after school. Says they used the side hallway around 7:40 p.m.
Possible motive
Upset that the science showcase received funding while the robotics team did not.
Statement
“I complained about the budget, but I didn't touch the meteorite.”
POI / 03ART CLUB
JR
Jordan Reyes
Art club member
Reason for being there
Painted the exhibit signs. Says they stepped into the science wing at about 7:30 p.m. to retrieve markers.
Possible motive
Wanted the exhibit space for an art installation scheduled that week.
Statement
“That blue note might use my type of pen. Lots of us bought the same pack.”
POI / 04SCIENCE CLUB
CM
Casey Morgan
Science club exhibit assistant
Reason for being there
Prepared a bubbling chemistry demonstration at the bench. Says they left the school at 7:35 p.m.
Possible motive
Wanted to take the meteorite to a regional science event, but permission had not been granted.
Statement
“I helped set up the case earlier. I didn't take anything that night.”
?
Check your assumption
Which clues could have been left during ordinary exhibit setup? Which evidence connects a person to the disappearance itself, rather than simply to the room?
LATE-BREAKING EVIDENCE · CASE FILE ADDENDUM
A new lead has arrived.
Investigators just received an equipment checkout record and a recovery report. Before you open them, commit to your best preliminary explanation. You can change your mind afterward.
SEALED PACKET
ADDENDUM UNSEALED
Records received at 8:10 a.m.
Compare these independent records against the earlier forensic samples and the suspect statements.
E-05A · EQUIPMENT CHECKOUT / DIGITAL RECORD
Transport box C-14
7:30 p.m.Exhibit photograph shows meteorite still in display, including its distinctive crescent-shaped chip.
7:38 p.m.Casey Morgan signs out foam-lined transport box C-14 from the science-club supply cabinet.
7:47 p.m.Casey's personal badge is used to enter the locked science-club storage room.
The digital entry log records badge use, not the person's face. Consider whether someone else could have used the badge.
E-05B · RECOVERY / OBSERVATION
Missing exhibit recovered
C–14 / INVENTORY SW–07
ITEM RECOVERED · 7:15 A.M.
At 7:15 a.m., the science teacher and custodian opened box C-14 in the storage room and found a meteorite carrying the school's SW-07 inventory tag. Its crescent-shaped chip matches the pre-disappearance exhibit photograph.
Their jointly signed recovery form records the box number, tag, and photograph comparison.
Together, these records connect the missing object to a box checked out by one suspect, shortly after the last verified exhibit photograph. They are substantially stronger than matching shoe lengths or inks, but you should still test alternative explanations.
STEP 05 · SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENT
Your case report.
Identify who most likely removed the meteorite and defend your reasoning. A strong conclusion still acknowledges uncertainties.