Following our successful themed Murder Mystery Night meeting back in August, I have received several inquiries both within and outside our club about how we organized this meeting. In this article I will detail the process of how I planned this meeting, and a review of what went well, what didn’t go well. Hopefully these will be useful tips for any club member, or members of other toastmasters clubs, on how to pull off a successful Murder Mystery Night meeting.

A wealthy businessman has been murdered at his own dinner party in his West Vancouver mansion. The only people present were his guests, so one of them must’ve been the murderer. Who committed the crime? Meet our cast of shady characters who each have their secrets. Pick up clues from their speeches, and deduce who is the murderer!

This Thursday, Jason will host a special themed meeting—a Night Vision murder mystery night. Various suspects from the murder have been spotted in the club. They will be introducing themselves and revealing clues about the murder, while guests in the audience (and the cast themselves) will be guessing who committed the murder. It will be a night of mystery and entertainment for all.

Murder Mystery Night Introduction

Let’s start with our meeting agenda and the overall flow of the meeting. The first half of the meeting introduced the scenario and the characters in the murder mystery. The toastmaster began the evening by describing the setting of the meeting: all club members were dinner guests at the mansion of a wealthy businessman—Sir Talkalot. Sir Talkalot’s businesses included real estate, finance. In his pastime, he is also an avid collector of art. Just before dinner, he showed us his art collection on display in the gallery wing of his mansion. Afterwards he led us to the dining table, where we were seated and left to mingle between ourselves. A number of characters stood out in particular…

The Characters

Seven club members (due to time) were selected in advance to play seven different characters, each with a different back story of how they related to the victim. After the toastmaster introduced the setting, each character was asked to go on stage to introduce themselves in a 2-3 minute prepared speech. Each of these cast members was given a fabricated character profile in advance that somewhat related to their actual background, to make it easier to develop a speech from. None of the cast members knew who the murderer was to keep it entertaining for all.

As you can see, clues planted in the character profiles implicated some who were involved in the murder, and some who were not to act as diversion.

The Murder!

When the meeting resumed in the second half, the toastmaster returned to announce that our dinner host had been discovered dead in the gallery wing! The toastmaster then revealed the beginning of some clues in the murder mystery. A painting that the victim just acquired recently has been stolen. The victim was choked to death. It would have required quite a bit of strength to fight and strangle the victim (this clue was meant to suggest a male murderer).

Impromptu Speeches and Secret Clues

A toastmaster meeting would not be complete without impromptu speeches. I worked them into the murder mystery by asking each of the characters to return to the stage, and deliver an impromptu 2 minute speech incorporating a secret clue I had prepared (which I handed to them on a slip of paper as they came on to the stage). Each speaker was also asked to describe who he or she thought the murderer was.

For other club members who did not have a cast character (and guests—we had a couple that evening), when selected, they were also asked to deliver an impromptu speech about who they thought the murderer was given the clues that had been revealed up to that point.

It was important that each cast member incorporated the secret clue into his/her speech, because the clues together were designed to reveal the murderer.

The Chief Inspector’s Report

I tasked one of our advanced club members to be the “Table Topics Evaluator” and evaluate the impromptu speeches. He came up with the clever idea of delivering the evaluations in the style of a Chief Inspector’s Report. He commented on each speaker’s impromptu speech content delivery, and how it made the speaker seem more or less credible in the eyes of a detective. Shifty eyes? Pacing around? Definitely suspicious! His sharp-witted evaluation was the highlight of the evening.

The Reveal!

At the conclusion of the evening, the Toastmaster revealed the murderer. It was the Lawyer! Did you guess it? Don’t worry, nobody else did either 😉

So How Did It Go?

Given it was the first time we attempted a murder mystery meeting, I thought overall it went well. The prepared character introductory speeches were generally written and delivered nicely by the cast members. Some members put in alot of acting into their speech to fit the profile, some members less. Most speeches ended up quite short of the planned 2-3 minutes, however, so it should be stressed to the cast members to deliver a speech of sufficient length. During the introductory speeches, some of the cast members were also confused as to whether the victim had been murdered yet at this point (I intended the victim to only be murdered in the second half of the meeting) and came up with speeches that conflicted with the setting. This was likely due to me not explaining the meeting flow clearly to the cast members before hand, but can be easily corrected.

The impromptu speech session turned out to be more rigid than expected, as many cast members struggled to build a speech from the secret clue they were given. Many just read out the clue then tried to add some additional thoughts afterwards. Some unfortunately did not even mention the secret clue, so the logic behind the clues broke down. In hindsight it was likely a bit too complicated to require speakers to work in the secret clue, and to require all secret clues to work together to reveal the solution.

In the end, the missing clues did not seem to matter too much though, as accusations were flying everywhere—everybody accused everybody else, and that turned out to be great. How the clues were supposed to work together, or who the real intended murderer was, became secondary.

Conclusion

As a Toastmaster planning this type of meeting for the very first time, the meeting turned out quite differently than I expected, but not necessarily for the worse. We definitely had alot of fun, and it made for a very different and interesting meeting. Please feel free to take some notes and aspects from our planning, and add your own spin. I hope you have a successful Murder Mystery Night meeting as well!

Leave a Reply