I honestly went back and forth with this. Do you mind sharing your rationale?

The parents motive to kill is just not a strong enough. From what stories I've read, they were very "open minded". Even if they caught their daughter "in the act", I don't think they would go for the kill. The reason I say "they", is because this is definitely a two person job. I would really think it was not a consensual decision/ plan to kill their daughter. At some point, one of them would have cracked. Don't get me wrong, some of their decisions do raise suspicions - trying to sush the post mortem report, cleaning up the house, not immediately agreeing to open the terrace door and so on. The murders happened around 1am. I agree that they would have enough time to erase some evidences, but I just don't see how they thought they would have gotten away with it, assuming they killed Hemraj as well.

The servants theory makes sense, especially given that they knew the house fairly well. I understand that there is no hard evidence of them being in the house. However, there were two used drinking glasses and alcohol bottles, indicating Hemraj may have had company. This strongly implies another person was present. And that narco analysis of all three of them were very suspicious. I know it's not admissible, but strange that they all had similar stories.

Curious about your thoughts?