Watch out! This post contains spoilers.
Just as “Only Murders in the Building” wrapped up the Ben Glenroy case in the season three finale, the series gave us a fourth murder victim, whose demise will likely be the focus of season four; Hulu renewed the series for season four on Oct. 2, the day season three wrapped up. At the end of the episode, Charles (Steve Martin), Oliver (Martin Short), and Mabel (Selena Gomez) are celebrating finding Ben’s killers, plus the premiere of “Death Rattle” the musical. At the party, they’re joined by Sazz (Jane Lynch). Sazz is Charles’s body double, and they look a lot alike from a distance or in the dark.
Charles tells the group he’s going to go to his apartment to get a special bottle of wine, but somehow Sazz ends up going in his place. As she walks through the dark apartment, someone attacks her. As she lies on the floor, bleeding out, she tries to use the blood to write something on the floor. It’s unclear if she’s dead by the time the credits roll.
So who killed Sazz? Before she’s attacked, she tells Charles she has something sensitive to talk to him about in private, and it’s not clear if they get the chance to chat before she dies. On the one hand, it’s possible the killer thought she was Charles and that’s why she was attacked, but since Sazz’s life is pretty mysterious to us right now, it’s also possible the killer did want to kill her specifically.
Nonetheless, let’s run down the possible killers right now and where their guilt or innocence currently lies. And we’re ruling out all of season three‘s flashy guest stars (that means you, Meryl Streep and Jesse Williams) because the finale basically sets up that they won’t be returning for more episodes.
Hulu / Patrick Harbron
Did Charles Kill Sazz?
As much as it pains us to say it, Charles is our number one suspect right now. Charles tells the group he’s going to his apartment, but Sazz is the one who ends up dead there. If Charles did it, perhaps they go together, Sazz tells him some upsetting news, and Charles kills her in a rage. He returns to the party at Oliver’s to solidify his alibi.
Now, would “Only Murders in the Building” really make Charles a killer? That’s doubtful, but you never know.
Our Verdict: Possibly guilty
Hulu / Patrick Harbron
Did Oliver Kill Sazz?
If Oliver did it, we are missing some major pieces of the puzzle, since he doesn’t have any motive. Plus, it seems he and Mabel were chatting the entire time the murder took place.
Our Verdict: Not guilty
Hulu / Patrick Harbron
Did Mabel Kill Sazz?
Like Oliver, it seems Mabel was at the party the entire time and wouldn’t have been able to kill Sazz. She also seemingly has no motive.
Our Verdict: Not guilty
Hulu / Patrick Harbron
Did Joy Kill Sazz?
Joy (Andrea Martin) started season two as Charles’s fiancée, but the two split after he accused her of killing Ben. Right before Sazz arrives at the party, Joy texts Charles about how she’s currently hanging out with actor Scott Bakula. But was the text a lie so Joy could pretend to have an alibi? Was she waiting in Charles’s apartment for him to return so she could kill him but mistakes Sazz for Charles and kills the wrong person? This seems like the most likely explanation for the murder (which probably means it’s wrong). But as Sazz dies, she starts to write a letter on the ground that could definitely be a J.
Our Verdict: Possibly guilty
Hulu / Patrick Harbron
Did Howard Kill Sazz?
Sweet Howard (Michael Cyril Creighton). He was an MVP of season three, but just when he thought he was going to get to go on stage and make his Broadway dreams finally come true, Oliver took his one chance. Is Howard wracked by rage that made him act out? Maybe!
Our Verdict: Possibly guilty
Hulu / Craig Blankenhorn
Did Lucy Kill Sazz?
Lucy (Zoe Colletti) is Charles’s ex-girlfriend’s daughter, whom he connects with in season two. She was not in season three at all, but we wonder if she’ll make an unexpected return in season four. Perhaps she’s mad Charles has ignored her for weeks? And Sazz’s bloody letter could be the start of an L.
Our Verdict: Possibly guilty
