FULL BREAKDOWN AND SOLUTION (Aify's version, in a sort of story mode)
You are not the murderer, so rule yourself out of both cases.
B's Murder
Ruling out G:
G can't be the murderer of B, as he only had one chance in the first 15 minutes of the night.
Reason 1:
- Because E and F did not scream until 30 minutes later, after their third trip back, G doesn't make the time slot (Assuming equal length trips since they went to the same bush area each time to pick berries (See hints) - 15 mins per trip).
Time line: 15 mins [G leaves to piss], (E F 1st Round to camp) || 30 mins (E F second round to Camp) || 45 mins (E F 3rd round to camp) {Scream is heard}
By the above time line, you can see that if G killed B, E and F would have discovered the body much sooner.
Reason 2:
- G got lost with you going back to camp. He would never have been able to make a 2.5 minute trip there and back, AND take a piss. (You know he actually did take a piss because he offers to show you where he went).
Ruling out A, E and F:
E and F lack the strength to enact the murder of B - even if they mustered enough strength to strike down B, it's highly improbable they could knock out C and D at the same time. Since A and B work better individually, it stands to reason that they split up to collect wood. A got back from his first round sometime before B did, proof being the OCD and the neat pile of firewood. A can't have killed B due to them being besties - furthermore, if A killed B, he would have put the piece of wood back on the pile due to his OCD. Assuming equal trip lengths for E and F, each trip they took lasted 15 minutes. Since tent is finished and E/F didn't scream on the second trip back, the time period of B's murder is between the second trip and the third trip.
How B died:
While A was gone, C took the firewood from the top of the pile and snuck up behind B and struck him with one mighty blow, the blood from the blow splashed onto C's hands, which C masked with the raspberry juice - D, being in love with C, helps to cover up and they come up with the plan of C feeding D (to explain C's hands). C and D, being geniuses, used raspberry juice on the back of their heads and pretended that they were knocked out. E and F, returning from their trip, screamed upon sight of a bloody body. B was the one who said "I'm gonna kill you, I swear it!" The motive of C and D lies in the preemptive prevention of that aggression.
C and D are the killers of B
A's Murder
Ruling people out:
G can't be the murderer of A - G doesn't have stained hands, so if G killed A, G must have drowned him, which would result in him being wet somewhere, either from standing in the water, or from holding A's head in the water. Also, 5 minutes is very little time to go and kill someone, piss, and come back. The fact that G offered to show you where he pissed indicates that it was nowhere near A's murder spot, since it would only cast suspicion on himself if it was near. Here, his honesty is his saving grace.
C and D were together at the campsite - the tent was finished, so they can't have left in the first section of time since they need time to put up the tent. C and D were not wet - meaning they did not drown A. A still had his EpiPen on him at the river - unless C and D left the camp to put it back on him, it would be impossible for C and D to make A get an allergic reaction. It's a severe reaction, it would likely have happened on the spot and A would've instantly used his EpiPen at the camp.
Ruling out B:
Main reason: B and A are besties. B would never harm A.
Sub reason: A also had the opportunity to drop off wood at the campsite before leaving to get more; B was only just returning from his first trip before he was killed. That means that B would not have been able to kill A before A dropped off wood (which was anytime before the second return of E/F, but unlikely to be before the first trip of E/F). If B killed A, B would not have had ample time to get wood and go back to camp. B killing A also doesn't make sense because his hands were not stained, and his clothing was not wet - if he killed A, he would either have to get wet drowning A, or force berries down A's throat, resulting in stained hands.
How A died:
Any reason to use A drowning as a cause of death can be instantly discounted because nobody had wet clothing. If anyone were to drown A, they wouldve had to get wet. A wasn't particularly weak OR strong, and would have put up a fight - splashing will ensue.
E and F were extremely scared of A and B, and when they saw A, they knew they had to do something before A helped B kill them. Not having enough physical strength to (literally) take down A without getting themselves harmed seriously, they opted for the option of giving A raspberries (Knowing that he is severely allergic).
You can imagine something like "Close your eyes, A, we found something really tasty in the woods. Can you guess what it is?" Proceed to feed A, stealing his EpiPen, the putting him face down in the water
They take the EpiPen from him while his eyes are closed, and when he dies they put him face down in the river and replace the EpiPen to make it look like a drowning. This makes it look like they can't be the murderers, since they're too weak - but remember they're nerds, and they're smart. To pull this off, they took advantage of A's friendship. "E and F's hands are stained with red liquid" - this is the raspberry juice from their berry picking endeavors, and the key clue to connect A's allergy to E and F's berry picking.
E and F are also the only people who had access to A while he was in the woods within the time line.
E and F killed A
Main List of Red Herrings:
G's personality
Campfire not lit (this was placed to confuse people)
Crushed berries (They came from E and F dropping them when they found B, but it's irrelevant unless you use it as a reason to discount E and F from the murder of B; eg: surprise caused them to drop/squash anything they were holding).
