murder's --> murderer's

No. It's the weapon for the murder, not for the murderer...

And by the way, this sentence is the original, the related ones are but its translations...

Thanks. In that case it would be "the murder weapon" no "'s"

patgisher is right. In case you doubt it, here is the dictionary entry:
murder weapon n arme (f) du crime

'murder weapon' found in these entries
French:
l'arme du crime

@Dejo

so you mean patgfisher is wrong, don't you ?

you wrote : murder weapon n arme (f) du crime

And that's precisely what's written here...

There's no mention of a murderer here, whatsoever...It's about a murder. And I wrote this sentence...so whichever translation mentions a "murderer" is just plain wrong...

@sacredceltic. Look again at the sentence! It now says
"murder's weapon" It should say:
"murder weapon" ( without the apostophe s)

Dejo wrote :

Look again at the sentence! It now says
"murder's weapon" It should say:
"murder weapon" ( without the apostophe s)

It doesn't "now" says it. It always did...that is why I tagged it "@needs native check"...

But what patgfisher was suggesting was that it was about a "murderer". And it just doesn't...I know, because I wrote this sentence...

the use of "murder's" in the original sentence confused me. It is not proper English, hence my guess that it possibly should be "murderer's". I wasn't meaning to suggest the other language referred to "murderer" When we talk of a weapon used to kill someone, we refer to a "murder weapon".