Who is the smartest detective of them all?

Sherlock Holmes

Hercule Poirot

Miss Marple

Monk

Psych

Mentalist

Columbo

others?

Is any of them smarter than Red John and James Moriarty?

And who would be the champion who will solve the case as fast as possible?

My opinions about Moriarty:

Hercule Poirot vs. James Moriarty: I don't think Poirot can handle a criminal mastermind. I think Poirot is more of an expert in regular criminals, or regular people who commit one-time crimes for personal gain. Poirot has made mistakes oh but lots of times... if you have read the story The Chocolate Box, or The Lost Mine. Indeed in "The Mysterious Affair at Styles" it takes him the better part of 3 months to solve the case.

Mycroft Holmes vs. James Moriarty : I think Mycroft is as smart and possibly even smarter than Moriarty, but he is not motivated. He collects and collates information, as opposed to investigating or countering someone else's moves. In a duel of some sort with Moriarty, if he weren't ready at the outset, he'd spend the rest of his time playing catch-up.

Miss Marple vs. James Moriarty : This would be fun to see, as long as violence did not somehow enter the picture. I can picture her meeting Moriarty in some situation where he was on his best behavior and she being the only person at the dinner table to be immediately aware that he was up to something, kind of like Sandra Bullock's immediately being on to Ryan Gosling in Murder By Numbers.

Liutenant Columbo vs. James Moriarty : Columbo has the advantage of the 6th sense that tells him exactly who the guilty party is at the outset. His mode of operandi is to find the one piece of their alibi that doesn't fit and then pester them endlessly until he figures out what that one missing piece reveals or until they crack under the pressure. Moriarty would be tough for him because he wouldn't leave any clues or out of place bits of evidence, and even if he did, he would disappear as soon as he realized Columbo was onto him. Most of Columbo's cases were about people who only committed the one crime because they felt they had to. A career criminal like Moriarty would probably make his murders look like accidents and Columbo would never even be called to the scene.

Nero Wolfe vs. Moriarty : I think of Nero as a more proactive Mycroft, focused more on deduction than collection/collation and he has Archie Goodwin doing his legwork for him. The problem is that Nero works for hire to support himself, so if a case was brought to him involving some crime of Moriarty's, Moriarty would already have had the head start. It would be up to Archie to fight his way across Moriarty's local crew until he got information, pointing to Moriarty, and by then Moriarty could be in the wind.... except that he wouldn't. He would take the opportunity to break into Wolfe's townhouse and confront him directly. This would lead to Wolfe having to get up and fight, or to have to shoot Moriarty if he had a pistol at hand. Let's hope Archie gets back in time.

Moriarty vs. Horatio Caine : There is something in the Miami air that 1) turns it orange and 2) lowers people's IQ's and makes them take crazy risks and bluffs. Moriarty might fly into Miami as the cold, calculating methodical conductor of crime we all know him to be, but after a few hours of the swishy camera work and techno drums, he would be as reckless as a tweaker trying to beat a red light. In no time at all he would be trading quips with Horatio Caine and be wondering why they weren't snappier, as Caine gave him one whispery non-sequitur retort after another. In the end, Moriarty is going to end up standing in front of his car, dropping his weapon, and putting his hands up before Callie Duquesne puts a round in him.

Do you ever read Kim Newman? He's done some superb Moriarty stories, like this one! http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/sherlock/shamblesinbelgravia1.shtml

Mycroft Holmes vs. Sherlock Holmes-what if Mycroft Holmes becomes the greatest mastermind ever and Sherlock need to figure it outthat Mycroft really is a criminal, and needs to be stopped could Sherlock stop Mycroft? Mycroft Holmes, his box of toys includes espionage, so there certainly is some overlay with his brothers world of crime. According to Sherlock Holmes himself, Mycroft is smarter than him and possesses the same observational and analytical skills, but given his physical condition (being obese), he is far too lazy to run around as detective like Sherlock does. How much he understands of actual criminology is open to debate, but given his genius and his position in her Majesties Secret Service, I would be more scared of getting on Mycrofts bad side, than Sherlocks. Even a Moriaty would think twice of messing with that guy, assuming, he knew of his existence.

It would be different if Mycroft was just an algebra teacher (ironically Moriarty's cover), a doctor or philosopher. Mycroft's big backdraw is primary his laziness. He is a general, not a foot-soldier, who gets his hands dirty, like his brother usually does.

Sherlock.

Ahem.

@Goldfinch:

Top 3 :

Sherlock, Jane, Psych...

Best! :

Always Sherlock...when you heard of the word "Detective"...Sherlock Holmes is the 1st one to come to your mind, am I right?

And I really like what you comment on MyCroft vs Sherlock there, it triggered my curiosity... Cuz I never thought of it before XD

And 1 more, I would like to know how you comment on Sherlock Holmes vs Red John...what if Sherlock traveled to California to replace Jane and investigate Red John 's case.

@JonSmith said:

Ahem.

Definitely this

@Nefarious said:

Sherlock.

Batman.

@The_Roman said:

Batman.

Like I said, Batman has too many high-tech on his disposal, that's why I cannot consider him to seriously, when you have little or no high-tech, than this shows how actually smart detective you really are.

@Goldfinch: He's very intelligent though.

@JonSmith: You beat me to it!!! haha

@The_Roman said:

@Goldfinch: He's very intelligent though.

That I agree fully, just look at Batman's successful solvings of the Joker's and Riddler's puzzles, you have to be extremely intelligent for doing this, this why I would like to see Batman vs. Holmes and other characters to see how would he be doing in the battle of wits/smarts!

I'm still not sure, though, where to put Batman in these categories.

@Goldfinch: You put him in the winning part.

@The_Roman said:

Batman.

Same here

@StMichalofWilson said:

@The_Roman said:

Batman.

Same here

Batman.

Ahem...

Tim Drake takes it or Velma solos

Batman wins even if he isn't in this thread.

@Goldfinch said:

@The_Roman said:

@Goldfinch: He's very intelligent though.

That I agree fully, just look at Batman's successful solvings of the Joker's and Riddler's puzzles, you have to be extremely intelligent for doing this, this why I would like to see Batman vs. Holmes and other characters to see how would he be doing in the battle of wits/smarts!

I'm still not sure, though, where to put Batman in these categories.

It isn't just characters like Riddler. Batman deduces and figures out how to beat characters like Starbreaker and Doctor Destiny, high level cosmics and reality warpers. On top of that he was able to figure out that Martian Manhunter was a telepath just by looking at him, and that Amazo was repairing himself with nanites, even Superman was baffled how he knew that without Xray vision. I've read the majority of the origina Holmes novels and he doesn't have reasoning or deductive abilities anywhere near that.

As far as this list goes, Sherlock would probably be the best assuming he isn't that crappy Robert Downey Jr version.

Well if you want the realistic truth, it would be in this order.

Monk

Poirot

Sherlock

Although monk is half sherlock and half poirot. lol Monk is better than batman in detective skills

@Nefarious said:

Sherlock.

You could also include Ellery Queen.

I would take the Nero Wolfe/Archie combo over the others, then Monk/Sherlock/Psych/Columbo (Columbo just knows)/Mentalist

@not2baad said:

Tim Drake takes it or Velma solos

LOL

Psych had some kind of natural "sixth sense" that would help him deduce and connect things that to the normal people would look unimportant he can do this is such a way that he can actually pose as having supernatural powers.

Sherlock Holmes tough a bit excentric also had amazing deductions skills(and in combat he would wim beacuse of his armor),more than that he was very smart and could manipulate people to make mistakes and reveal themselves.

Monk could solve cases that made entire detective teams spin in circles,like it was nothing,it has been sometime but IIRC The only case he was actually struggling to solve was his's wife's murder,The only thing that would delay him normally was his COD.

Don't know about the others but Batman,apart from his inttelect gets lots of help from his high-tech and connections(LOL friend with X-Ray vision,and another who can read minds).

PS:Can't people like Ghost Rider and Spectre solve a case by "tracking" the person's sins?

PS2:I would wait for the new Sherlock Holmes series with Lucy Liu, guy looks very samrt too.

him by far... I think it because he figured out the identity of a mass murderer who was immensely smart and had the ability to kill almost anyone without any physical contact even from the other side of the planet...

well, James Moriarty pwned SH who is also very smart so I don't know wins the Moriarty vs Lawliet match

Batman is world's greatest detective. So he wins.

^^ he was quite clever to nail down his location (The local TV stuff) and other estratagems,but failed to capture him or stay alive.And from what I remeber Light had the help from a Shinigami.

@Eightworldwarriors said:

@Goldfinch said:

@The_Roman said:

@Goldfinch: He's very intelligent though.

That I agree fully, just look at Batman's successful solvings of the Joker's and Riddler's puzzles, you have to be extremely intelligent for doing this, this why I would like to see Batman vs. Holmes and other characters to see how would he be doing in the battle of wits/smarts!

I'm still not sure, though, where to put Batman in these categories.

It isn't just characters like Riddler. Batman deduces and figures out how to beat characters like Starbreaker and Doctor Destiny, high level cosmics and reality warpers. On top of that he was able to figure out that Martian Manhunter was a telepath just by looking at him, and that Amazo was repairing himself with nanites, even Superman was baffled how he knew that without Xray vision. I've read the majority of the origina Holmes novels and he doesn't have reasoning or deductive abilities anywhere near that.

As far as this list goes, Sherlock would probably be the best assuming he isn't that crappy Robert Downey Jr version.

Actually, sherlock is more than enough for his world. If the above mentioned things were in his world, he would have deduced them much faster than anyone else. Well, maybe it's just me, but batman seems to be more of a action-techology figure, but in step-wise deduction and logical reasoning, holmes is more than a match for him.

Yup, anyway, robert downey's version wasn't the sherlock we know. It's not sherlock the detective, but sherlock the entertainer... Though the fight prediction and final, "discovered check, and incidentally, mate.." were cool.. if you forget what Holmes actually is, that is..

@indifferentmrh said:

him by far... I think it because he figured out the identity of a mass murderer who was immensely smart and had the ability to kill almost anyone without any physical contact even from the other side of the planet...

well, James Moriarty pwned SH who is also very smart so I don't know wins the Moriarty vs Lawliet match

Read again. James Moriarty didn't pwn Sherlock. He barely escaped arrest, lost his organization, and tackled him like maniac, killing himself, and still, Holmes survived, and finally took his right hand man down.

@PrinceAragorn1 said:

@Eightworldwarriors said:

@Goldfinch said:

@The_Roman said:

@Goldfinch: He's very intelligent though.

That I agree fully, just look at Batman's successful solvings of the Joker's and Riddler's puzzles, you have to be extremely intelligent for doing this, this why I would like to see Batman vs. Holmes and other characters to see how would he be doing in the battle of wits/smarts!

I'm still not sure, though, where to put Batman in these categories.

It isn't just characters like Riddler. Batman deduces and figures out how to beat characters like Starbreaker and Doctor Destiny, high level cosmics and reality warpers. On top of that he was able to figure out that Martian Manhunter was a telepath just by looking at him, and that Amazo was repairing himself with nanites, even Superman was baffled how he knew that without Xray vision. I've read the majority of the origina Holmes novels and he doesn't have reasoning or deductive abilities anywhere near that.

As far as this list goes, Sherlock would probably be the best assuming he isn't that crappy Robert Downey Jr version.

Actually, sherlock is more than enough for his world. If the above mentioned things were in his world, he would have deduced them much faster than anyone else. Well, maybe it's just me, but batman seems to be more of a action-techology figure, but in step-wise deduction and logical reasoning, holmes is more than a match for him.

Yup, anyway, robert downey's version wasn't the sherlock we know. It's not sherlock the detective, but sherlock the entertainer... Though the fight prediction and final, "discovered check, and incidentally, mate.." were cool.. if you forget what Holmes actually is, that is..

For his world, unfortunately Sherlock's world has much lower standards than Batman's world does. If you threw Sherlock into the same situations that Bruce has been in [situations where Bruce used no tech] such as Riddler's puzzles or even deducing characters power set simply by looking at them for 10 seconds. Sherlock would be left baffled and clueless. He's definitely the best on this list but when it comes to logical reasoning and deductive abilities he's severely outclassed by Bruce and the Question.

You need to look at things objectively. I've the majority of the Doyle novels and stories and most of the cases Sherlock figures out, Bruce and the Question would figure out much faster even without the use of tech.

@Shotgun: Can';t believe no one included him, he's closer to Bruce than anyone on this list is

Batman

@PrinceAragorn1:

Read again. James Moriarty didn't pwn Sherlock. He barely escaped arrest, lost his organization, and tackled him like maniac, killing himself, and still, Holmes survived, and finally took his right hand man down.

well it's debatable since there are several SH movies/series and several versions of Moriarty ...the bbc version actually totally humiliated SH and made him a criminal responsible for all the crimes he ever committed and SH could do nothing about it... although it was a softer SH than the original novel version but it's still a rapestomp

@Eightworldwarriors said:

@PrinceAragorn1 said:

@Eightworldwarriors said:

@Goldfinch said:

@The_Roman said:

@Goldfinch: He's very intelligent though.

That I agree fully, just look at Batman's successful solvings of the Joker's and Riddler's puzzles, you have to be extremely intelligent for doing this, this why I would like to see Batman vs. Holmes and other characters to see how would he be doing in the battle of wits/smarts!

I'm still not sure, though, where to put Batman in these categories.

It isn't just characters like Riddler. Batman deduces and figures out how to beat characters like Starbreaker and Doctor Destiny, high level cosmics and reality warpers. On top of that he was able to figure out that Martian Manhunter was a telepath just by looking at him, and that Amazo was repairing himself with nanites, even Superman was baffled how he knew that without Xray vision. I've read the majority of the origina Holmes novels and he doesn't have reasoning or deductive abilities anywhere near that.

As far as this list goes, Sherlock would probably be the best assuming he isn't that crappy Robert Downey Jr version.

Actually, sherlock is more than enough for his world. If the above mentioned things were in his world, he would have deduced them much faster than anyone else. Well, maybe it's just me, but batman seems to be more of a action-techology figure, but in step-wise deduction and logical reasoning, holmes is more than a match for him.

Yup, anyway, robert downey's version wasn't the sherlock we know. It's not sherlock the detective, but sherlock the entertainer... Though the fight prediction and final, "discovered check, and incidentally, mate.." were cool.. if you forget what Holmes actually is, that is..

For his world, unfortunately Sherlock's world has much lower standards than Batman's world does. If you threw Sherlock into the same situations that Bruce has been in [situations where Bruce used no tech] such as Riddler's puzzles or even deducing characters power set simply by looking at them for 10 seconds. Sherlock would be left baffled and clueless. He's definitely the best on this list but when it comes to logical reasoning and deductive abilities he's severely outclassed by Bruce and the Question.

You need to look at things objectively. I've the majority of the Doyle novels and stories and most of the cases Sherlock figures out, Bruce and the Question would figure out much faster even without the use of tech.

@Shotgun: Can';t believe no one included him, he's closer to Bruce than anyone on this list is

Nah.. Riddler's puzzles would be a joke for him. I agree that batman is better at fighting and creating amazing gadgets, but he never showed a good enough case to match sherlock's first one, even.. There are generally weird villians who use either some weirder gadget or are insane or stronger than superhumans.. not criminal masterminds.. (When I am not comparing to Holmes, I am a Huge fan of batman.) But what makes him cool is his bike, and cloak, and you know.. being Batman. Not the extraordinary reasoning skills that holmes has.

Question, on the other hand seems more the detective type, and has good cases at hand but I still prefer Holmes (This, of course is a personal opinion.)

The problem is, Holmes doesn't have to go against cosmic entities and all that in his world. Otherwise, he would have much more impressive feats. He has gathered about all the knowledge required for his work (come on, who studies how many cigars are in existance?) and does almost all of his work legally. It's not his fault he was born in the wrong times :)

@indifferentmrh said:

@PrinceAragorn1:

Read again. James Moriarty didn't pwn Sherlock. He barely escaped arrest, lost his organization, and tackled him like maniac, killing himself, and still, Holmes survived, and finally took his right hand man down.

well it's debatable since there are several SH movies/series and several versions of Moriarty ...the bbc version actually totally humiliated SH and made him a criminal responsible for all the crimes he ever committed and SH could do nothing about it... although it was a softer SH than the original novel version but it's still a rapestomp

I am talking about the original one, of course..

Monk

@PrinceAragorn1 said:

@Eightworldwarriors said:

@PrinceAragorn1 said:

@Eightworldwarriors said:

@Goldfinch said:

@The_Roman said:

@Goldfinch: He's very intelligent though.

That I agree fully, just look at Batman's successful solvings of the Joker's and Riddler's puzzles, you have to be extremely intelligent for doing this, this why I would like to see Batman vs. Holmes and other characters to see how would he be doing in the battle of wits/smarts!

I'm still not sure, though, where to put Batman in these categories.

It isn't just characters like Riddler. Batman deduces and figures out how to beat characters like Starbreaker and Doctor Destiny, high level cosmics and reality warpers. On top of that he was able to figure out that Martian Manhunter was a telepath just by looking at him, and that Amazo was repairing himself with nanites, even Superman was baffled how he knew that without Xray vision. I've read the majority of the origina Holmes novels and he doesn't have reasoning or deductive abilities anywhere near that.

As far as this list goes, Sherlock would probably be the best assuming he isn't that crappy Robert Downey Jr version.

Actually, sherlock is more than enough for his world. If the above mentioned things were in his world, he would have deduced them much faster than anyone else. Well, maybe it's just me, but batman seems to be more of a action-techology figure, but in step-wise deduction and logical reasoning, holmes is more than a match for him.

Yup, anyway, robert downey's version wasn't the sherlock we know. It's not sherlock the detective, but sherlock the entertainer... Though the fight prediction and final, "discovered check, and incidentally, mate.." were cool.. if you forget what Holmes actually is, that is..

For his world, unfortunately Sherlock's world has much lower standards than Batman's world does. If you threw Sherlock into the same situations that Bruce has been in [situations where Bruce used no tech] such as Riddler's puzzles or even deducing characters power set simply by looking at them for 10 seconds. Sherlock would be left baffled and clueless. He's definitely the best on this list but when it comes to logical reasoning and deductive abilities he's severely outclassed by Bruce and the Question.

You need to look at things objectively. I've the majority of the Doyle novels and stories and most of the cases Sherlock figures out, Bruce and the Question would figure out much faster even without the use of tech.

@Shotgun: Can';t believe no one included him, he's closer to Bruce than anyone on this list is

Nah.. Riddler's puzzles would be a joke for him. I agree that batman is better at fighting and creating amazing gadgets, but he never showed a good enough case to match sherlock's first one, even.. There are generally weird villians who use either some weirder gadget or are insane or stronger than superhumans.. not criminal masterminds.. (When I am not comparing to Holmes, I am a Huge fan of batman.) But what makes him cool is his bike, and cloak, and you know.. being Batman. Not the extraordinary reasoning skills that holmes has.

Question, on the other hand seems more the detective type, and has good cases at hand but I still prefer Holmes (This, of course is a personal opinion.)

The problem is, Holmes doesn't have to go against cosmic entities and all that in his world. Otherwise, he would have much more impressive feats. He has gathered about all the knowledge required for his work (come on, who studies how many cigars are in existance?) and does almost all of his work legally. It's not his fault he was born in the wrong times :)

Yeah, sorry but its true.

If you threw Holmes into Riddlers puzzles, Holmes would be absolutely helpless. He doesn't have the expertise, wit or reasoning abilities at that level. If you actually read Batman RIP you would know that from one number and one sentence Batman uncovered an entire conspiracy with the Black Glove covering the Zodiac, Relgion, the Alphabet and Mythology. So much information garnered from one incredibly small detail. Sherlock is out of his league.

What you think makes Batman cool is irrelevant, the fact is that he's shown intuition, and logical reasoning skills that would leave Holmes the equivalent of a child with down syndrome.

No shame in it though, Holmes is still good, but he's just severely outclassed against characters of Batman and the Questions aptitude.

Right, you can speculate on how well Holmes would do if cosmic entities existed in his universe but that's all it is, speculation. I'm using actual facts. And for the record the feats I've mentioned have been with no tech, and with characters that are based on Earth so you can't really use that excuse

Truth is, even Nightwing has shown much better logic and reasoning ability than Holmes has

Nightwing isn't even on the same level as Batman and Question, and just by watching TV in one morning can solve several cases on America's most Wanted, just by watch the show. No tech, no superpowers. Just pure intuition, reasoning and logic.

Characters like Holmes and the rest of the detectives on this list aren't in the same league. No shame in that, they're still very good, but Bruce, Vic, and Dick are objectively better :)

Sherlock and Monk ARE the worlds greatest detectives

@Eightworldwarriors said:

@Goldfinch said:

@The_Roman said:

@Goldfinch: He's very intelligent though.

That I agree fully, just look at Batman's successful solvings of the Joker's and Riddler's puzzles, you have to be extremely intelligent for doing this, this why I would like to see Batman vs. Holmes and other characters to see how would he be doing in the battle of wits/smarts!

I'm still not sure, though, where to put Batman in these categories.

It isn't just characters like Riddler. Batman deduces and figures out how to beat characters like Starbreaker and Doctor Destiny, high level cosmics and reality warpers. On top of that he was able to figure out that Martian Manhunter was a telepath just by looking at him, and that Amazo was repairing himself with nanites, even Superman was baffled how he knew that without Xray vision. I've read the majority of the origina Holmes novels and he doesn't have reasoning or deductive abilities anywhere near that.

As far as this list goes, Sherlock would probably be the best assuming he isn't that crappy Robert Downey Jr version.

Yes, you're right about this.

@hudyman said:

Well if you want the realistic truth, it would be in this order.

Monk

Poirot

Sherlock

Although monk is half sherlock and half poirot. lol Monk is better than batman in detective skills

What makes you think Monk is smarter than both Poirot and Holmes? I'm not here to debate this, I already gave my opinion above, so I'd like to hear your opinions.

@Goldfinch said:

@hudyman said:

Well if you want the realistic truth, it would be in this order.

Monk

Poirot

Sherlock

Although monk is half sherlock and half poirot. lol Monk is better than batman in detective skills

What makes you think Monk is smarter than both Poirot and Holmes? I'm not here to debate this, I already gave my opinion above, so I'd like to hear your opinions.

Lol plainly because monk is half of both of them, If you Tell the three of them to solve a murder case. Monk Will solve it faster than any of them. I mean Monk was blinded by acid and still managed to solve a case. its like Taking batmans Intelligence and supermans powers and putting them into one person. It Creates the ultimate Hero. Monk IS The Ultimate Detective

@hudyman said:

@Goldfinch said:

@hudyman said:

Well if you want the realistic truth, it would be in this order.

Monk

Poirot

Sherlock

Although monk is half sherlock and half poirot. lol Monk is better than batman in detective skills

What makes you think Monk is smarter than both Poirot and Holmes? I'm not here to debate this, I already gave my opinion above, so I'd like to hear your opinions.

Lol plainly because monk is half of both of them, If you Tell the three of them to solve a murder case. Monk Will solve it faster than any of them. I mean Monk was blinded by acid and still managed to solve a case. its like Taking batmans Intelligence and supermans powers and putting them into one person. It Creates the ultimate Hero. Monk IS The Ultimate Detective

That's very interesting because I watch Monk series on dvd every night.

Question is the greatest detective.

@Goldfinch: Thats good for you, I have seen every episode of Monk,Poirot and read Quite alot on sherlock

@hudyman said:

@Goldfinch: Thats good for you, I have seen every episode of Monk,Poirot and read Quite alot on sherlock

Than I guess I can take your word since you've read them all? But I just wonder how will Monk or Sherlock deal with the case of the murderer that is not murderer, but subtly and psychologically he had manipulated others to kill for him? That happened in the last Poirot's story (Curtain). How would Monk, Sherlock or any other detective deal with this, since none of them could not prove that the guy is a "murderer"?

@Goldfinch said:

@hudyman said:

@Goldfinch: Thats good for you, I have seen every episode of Monk,Poirot and read Quite alot on sherlock

Than I guess I can take your word since you've read them all? But I just wonder how will Monk or Sherlock deal with the case of the murderer that is not murderer, but subtly and psychologically he had manipulated others to kill for him? That happened in the last Poirot's story (Curtain). How would Monk, Sherlock or any other detective deal with this, since none of them could not prove that the guy is a "murderer"?

I cant believe you are actually asking me about this. Monk Will find out. I mean he eventually found out who killed his wife. It was someone who manipulated others to do it for him

@hudyman said:

@Goldfinch said:

@hudyman said:

@Goldfinch: Thats good for you, I have seen every episode of Monk,Poirot and read Quite alot on sherlock

Than I guess I can take your word since you've read them all? But I just wonder how will Monk or Sherlock deal with the case of the murderer that is not murderer, but subtly and psychologically he had manipulated others to kill for him? That happened in the last Poirot's story (Curtain). How would Monk, Sherlock or any other detective deal with this, since none of them could not prove that the guy is a "murderer"?

I cant believe you are actually asking me about this. Monk Will find out. I mean he eventually found out who killed his wife. It was someone who manipulated others to do it for him

Yes, but Dale the Wale told him the first name, could Monk figure it out all by himself? Poirot figured it out all by himself! Could Sherlock do it? And what about Mentalist? What do you think about Sherlock or Monk or Poirot vs. the Mentalist, that would be awesome?

@Goldfinch said:

@hudyman said:

@Goldfinch said:

@hudyman said:

@Goldfinch: Thats good for you, I have seen every episode of Monk,Poirot and read Quite alot on sherlock

Than I guess I can take your word since you've read them all? But I just wonder how will Monk or Sherlock deal with the case of the murderer that is not murderer, but subtly and psychologically he had manipulated others to kill for him? That happened in the last Poirot's story (Curtain). How would Monk, Sherlock or any other detective deal with this, since none of them could not prove that the guy is a "murderer"?

I cant believe you are actually asking me about this. Monk Will find out. I mean he eventually found out who killed his wife. It was someone who manipulated others to do it for him

Yes, but Dale the Wale told him the first name, could Monk figure it out all by himself? Poirot figured it out all by himself! Could Sherlock do it? And what about Mentalist? What do you think about Sherlock or Monk or Poirot vs. the Mentalist, that would be awesome?

xD yeah!. Actually there is something i forgot to mention. Monks C.O.D was the thing that was stopping him from solving his wife's murder