Steam Community :: Guide :: Part 1: The Insurgent

Store Page

The Darkest Files

All Discussions Screenshots Artwork Broadcasts Videos News Guides Reviews

The Darkest Files > Guides > Laika's Guides

38 ratings

Part 1: The Insurgent | 100% Guide

By Laika

This guide provides all theories and documents you will need to fully complete the first trial. All answers are behind spoiler warnings.

Award

Created by

Laika
Offline

Category: Achievements, Walkthroughs

Languages: English

Posted

Updated

26 Mar @ 9:24am

30 Mar @ 3:42am

1,954	Unique Visitors
12	Current Favorites

Guide Index

Overview

Introduction

Witness Testimonies

Who ordered the execution?

Who went to the cell?

Who resisted the order?

Who threatened with the Gestapo?

Who shot Mr Naumann?

Did Mr Schwarz know that the victim was innocent?

Thanks

Comments

Introduction

In order to complete the case 100% you need to aquire additional documents. You do this by asking all available questions during the questioning of the witnesses. This will unlock clues which then allow you to ask Paula for those documents. Some documents need to be clicked on in the file to unlock the option to get other documents, so I suggest looking at every document.

This guide provides you with the solutions to the blueprint sections, followed by the documents you need to provide to prove your claims. I separated the file you need to check, the document you need to select and the paragraph you need to choose and put them behind spoiler bars individually so you can get hints in case you're stuck and want to figure the rest out for yourself. I also provided the important keywords that matter for the specific claim to understand why a parapgraph needs to be selected.

Witness Testimonies

Ludmilla Naumann

First Document

File: Background
Document: Uniforms of the NSDAP
Paragraph: 4th row
Keyword: "Local Gr. Leader"

Second Decoument

File: Old Case
Document: Report of the Block Warden
Paragraph: 5th paragraph
Keyword: "Jan Naumann"

Karl Schickert

First Document

File: Old Case
Document: Report of the Block Warden
Paragraph: 3rd paragraph
Keyword: "climbing up the [...] flagpole"

Training with Peters

First Document

File: Old Case
Document: Prosecutor's letter to Ludmilla Naumann
Paragraph: 5th paragraph
Keyword: "execution ordered by the District Leader"

First Conclusion

File: Old Case
Document: Prosecutor's letter to Ludmilla Naumann
Paragraph: 5th paragraph
Keyword: "execution ordered by the District Leader"

Second Conclusion

File: Transcripts
Document: Testimony of Kiebitz
Paragraph: 1st paragraph
Keyword: "district leader gave the order"

Third Conclusion

File: Old Case
Document: Protocol of Conversation with Schwarz
Paragraph: 2nd Paragraph
Keyword: "I always give the [...] order to execute"
Note: You can also use Schickert's Testimony instead.

Alfred Faltmann

First Document

File: Transcripts
Document: Testimony by Ludmilla Naumann
Paragraph: 2nd paragraph
Keyword: "two golden stripes"

Who ordered the execution?

Locations

Faltmann: Hallway
Kiebitz: Hallway
Schickert: Hallway
Schwarz: Hallway

The order was given by

Schwarz

Conclusions

For this step, conclusions are not necessary since the defense agrees on this matter.

Who went to the cell?

Locations

Faltmann: Cell
Kiebitz: Office
Schickert: Cell
Schwarz: Office

Conclusions

First Conclusion

File: Old Case
Document: Protocol of Conversation with Schwarz
Paragraph: 3rd paragraph
Keyword: "my driver"

Second Conclusion

File: Transcripts
Document: Testimony by Schickert
Paragraph: 2nd paragraph
Keyword: "together with Mr Kiebitz"

Third Conclusion

File: Suspects
Document: NS file of Kiebitz
Paragraph: 3rd paragraph
Keyword: "Worked as driver"

Who resisted the order?

Locations

Faltmann: Cell
Kiebitz: Office
Schickert: Cell
Schwarz: Office

The order was resisted by

Schickert

Conclusions

First Conclusion

File: Old Case
Document: Protocol of Conversation with Schwarz
Paragraph: 1st paragraph
Keyword: "28th of April 1945"

Second Conclusion

File: Old Case
Document: Official Order
Paragraph: 5th paragraph
Keyword: "insubordination must be met with [...] expulsion from the Party"

Third Conclusion

File: Suspects
Document: NS file of Schickert
Paragraph: 2nd paragraph
Keyword: "Member [...] until"

Who threatened with the Gestapo?

Locations

Faltmann: Cell
Kiebitz: Office
Schickert: Cell
Schwarz: Office

The threat was voiced by

Faltmann

Conclusions

First Conclusion

File: Transcripts
Document: Testimony by Schickert
Paragraph: 4th paragraph
Keyword: "Faltmann theatened me"

Second Conclusion

File: Suspects
Document: Gestapo letter to Schwarz
Paragraph: 5th paragraph
Keyword: "denunciation by his direct superior"

Third Conclusion

File: Suspects
Document: NS file of Faltmann
Paragraph: 2nd paragraph
Keyword: "Local group leader"
Explanation: In the Gestapo letter, Steeg's rank is named as "Base Manager". In the "Background" file we learn the Local Group Leader is the direct superior of the Base Manager. Since Faltmann is the Local Group Leader we can conclude that Faltmann denounced Steeg to the Gestapo.

Who shot Mr Naumann?

Locations

Faltmann: Cell
Kiebitz: Office
Schickert: Cell
Schwarz: Office

Mr Naumann was shot by

Schickert

Conclusions

First Conclusion

File: Old Case
Document: Police Report
Paragraph: 2nd paragraph
Keyword: "7.65 mm Browning calibre"

Second Conclusion

File: Suspects
Document: Weapons List
Paragraph: 8th paragraph
Keyword: "Member No. 5186332"

Third Conclusion

File: Suspects
Document: Members List
Paragraph: 8th paragraph
Keyword: "Schickert, Karl"

Did Mr Schwarz know that the victim was innocent?

After proving who shot Mr. Naumann the judge will ask you if you have anything else to say. You need to select "Yes." in order to provide the following evidence.

Conclusions

First Conclusion

File: Old Case
Document: Protocol of Conversation with Schwarz
Paragraph: 1st paragraph
Keyword: "He told me"

Second Conclusion

File: Suspects
Document: In the name of the German People
Paragraph: 1st paragraph
Keyword: "First [...] name: Jan"

Third Conclusion

File: Suspects
Document: Detention Report
Paragraph: 3rd paragraph
Keyword: "First name: Jan"

Thanks

I want to give my warm-hearted thanks to the developers of this amazing game. I am truly blown-away by this project and want to express my sincere respect and my deep gratitude for tackling a tough subject like this and turning it into such an accessible form of media. And also: thank you for letting us pet the cat! 💜

18 Comments

< >

coraxcor 29 Jun @ 2:46am

I solved my problem, this guide is not wrong for "Gestapo was not right", I had a bug I could fix.
I loaded and tried several things.

I had a previous conclusion which failed and I had to fix a document every time.
In one run, I fixed it before the trial so I had not to try it again and fix it "in court".
That fixed also my conclusion for "Gestapo was not right". What remains is the misleading game tip that I should show the NSDAP party hierarchy.

coraxcor 29 Jun @ 1:48am

Proofing who threatened with the Gestapo was not right.
I had the conclusions the same way but the judge declined and got more chances.
I got the tip that I should show the NSDAP hierarchy. So I replaced the testimony with the picture of the NSDAP ranks from the "background" category. It does not work. Next I chose the flat text document right besides the ranks page. It does not work. Switched backed to the testimony after I read this guide and it does not work. Failed.

It seems for me that this guide is in one point not correct "Who threatened with the gestapo" Conclusion 1, because the game hints point to anything else and that I am missing a document or my game is bugged. Or maybe the game hints are wrong, this guide is correct and something is bugging?

Slikashi 18 Jun @ 9:06pm

Why would Schickert not mention he was fired for the disobeying the order, proving it via the dates is a stretch. The testimony counts as evidence in one conclusion and not the next, and I assumed Kiebitz did the shooting, as there is a 2nd 7.65mm Browning, that belonged to a deserter, so Kiebitz could have used a 2nd gun not recorded as his.

Laika [author] 8 Jun @ 1:43pm

@BioStats Two pieces of evidence are necessary because in the Old Case Schwarz testifies he went to the office with his driver without naming that person. To proof Kiebitz was the driver his NS file is needed which states he worked as a driver.

BioStats 8 Jun @ 9:07am

Who went to the cell?
I don't understand the 3rd piece of evidence here. You have 4 potential pieces: 2 that say 3 people went (transcripts of AF + HK) and 2 that say HK went into office (transcript of KS + HS interview doc) and just AF + KS went into cell.

I don't understand why HS saying "I asked my driver to remain", is somehow 2 different pieces of evidence for the same thing...

dubesor 30 Mar @ 3:09pm

Same issue as Szaggy, I am also missing the Gestapo letter to Schwarz . No idea why it's missing, I gathered all clues during testimonies.

Laika [author] 30 Mar @ 3:43am

@Yakinrossa I'm glad you like the guide! Thanks fir pointing out the error, I fixed it.

Yakinrossa 30 Mar @ 1:09am

Hi, Laika. The guide is very helpful and I am really grateful about it.

I'd like to mention a small error in the guide. In the "Witness Testimonies" part, Karl Schickert appears twice and I think the second one (after the "Training with Peters" section) should be Alfred Faltmann.

Szaggy 28 Mar @ 2:20pm

Please help me, how do I get Gestapo letter to Schwartz ?
It's the only document I'm missing, I don't exactly know why.

Laika [author] 27 Mar @ 3:55pm

@PossiblePsycho It's definitely planned, not sure if/when I'll be able to write it, but I'll try.

< >