(1) Assuming that B is telling the truth, then D is the hand of the criminal, then: ① C is telling a lie, and D is the criminal, not B; (2) What Ding said is also a lie. They have no hatred, that is, they have not wronged him, and he is a criminal; (3) What A said is a lie. If "A" was there, it might be the criminal. If d is a criminal, it is not established. So this assumption doesn't hold water.

(2) Assuming that Ding is telling the truth, then: ① B is lying, Ding is not a criminal, ② C is also lying, then B is not a criminal, ③ A is also lying, so A committed a crime at the scene; So, A is a criminal.

A: According to the above reasoning, what Ding said is true, and A is the murderer.