There is no doubt in my mind that Tom didn’t commit suicide.
“epäillä” is a weird verb, because it can mean both “to doubt” and “to suspect”, depending on context and the rest of the sentence structure.
I commented on such a sentence before where I quoted wiktionary.
Now I came across this example, and I thought this one doesn’t match the English sentence either.
I had an interview with some natives and this is their feedback:
The Finnish sentence is understood as “I have no doubts that Tom killed himself”, which is the opposite meaning of the english sentence.
I asked: just to be sure on the first fact: “ei ole epäilystäkään” can only mean “there is no doubt”, right? No suspecting going on here.
Answer: yes, that much is correct
Also, the Finnish sentence sounds weird:
- the “olisi” makes it a bit weird.
- it makes it sound like a hypothetical, even tho the rest of the sentence describes something that already happened in no uncertain terms
- “I have no doubt that he would have killed himself if X had happened, but X didn’t happen, therefore he didn’t kill himself”
An improved version (still with opposite meaning) would be:
“Minun mielestäni ei ole epäilystäkään etteikö Tom olisi tehnyt itsemurhaa”
- the “etteikö” makes it clearer
- The main clause is semantically negative. The subordinate clause is grammatically negative but the etteikö makes it semantically positive.
- Here’s the ISK article on etteikö: VISK - § 1159 Kiellon kumoutuminen
A sentence that would match the meaning of the English one (i.e. he did not kill himself):
“Minun mielestäni ei ole epäilystäkään, että Tom ei tehnyt itsemurhaa”