The man who works with the lawyer who knew he was involved toin a lot of wrongdoings, pretended asto be the handyman and killed a person as his client's need and. He then made the killed person hold a flayer that handyman send to his target everytime, to try to smoke himthe handyman out. The man who works with the lawyer who knew he was involved in a lot of wrongdoings, pretended to be the handyman and killed a person as his client's need. He then made the killed person hold a flyer that handyman send to his target everytime, to try to smoke the handyman out.

This sentence is a bit too long, it would be better to split it into 2. For the second sentence, it would be even better to phrase it as: "He then put the handyman's flyer into the victim's hand, to try and smoke the handyman out." Beware that "flayer" sounds like a medieval torture tool. I am assuming you mean "flyer" here. It would be even better to rephrase this so it doesn't start so abruptly. As in: "The third man, who works with the lawyer who knew he was involved in a lot of wrongdoings, knew he needed to find the handyman. So, he decided to try to smoke him out. To do this, he killed a person and placed the handyman's trademark flyer into their hand. He knew this was force the handyman to act." I think the benefit of this kind of phrasing is that you are stepping your reader through the thought process and motivations of the character, as well as their actions. It may seem like it is over-explaining, but I think that is a good thing here as your readers don't know anything about the story and need all the details explained.

He had awas confident that handyman wouldn't ignore this declaration of war, because the handyman hasdn't killed anyone andbut he would be worry if he wouldied that he was going to be caught by the police even he didn't do it. He was confident that handyman wouldn't ignore this declaration of war, because the handyman hadn't killed anyone but he would be worried that he was going to be caught by the police even he didn't do it.

Wouldn't, as this is a guess. Everything else was changed to match with the past tense.

Actually, there were figurealready some mentions of the handyman in someprevious murders, but the police officers was thinkinghad thought that he iwas just a helper. Actually, there were already some mentions of the handyman in previous murders, but the police had thought that he was just a helper.

I have changed everything to match the past tense.

In progress thatWhile he was doing ithis, he was also trying to get a new handelper from the police station. While he was doing this, he was also trying to get a new helper from the police station.

He thought thatof the police chief, a great person known for his work is inn the highest position in the city and has, but who was also plagued by bad rumors. He thought of the police chief, a great person known for his work in the highest position in the city, but who was also plagued by bad rumors.

It would be good to give each character a nickname, to avoid confusion. Even if it was "the handyman", "the detective", "the criminal", "the lawyer", "the police chief", etc. It is a bit confusing to keep track of who is who if you only use "this man", "that man", "that person", etc. Those identifiers are too generic. If they are not actually the police chief, just change this nickname to their actual job. You can be "plagued by" something, ie. rumours, guilt, health issues, etc.

The person who came asolice chief, who held the highest position in the city, had a weak point. The police chief, who held the highest position in the city, had a weak point.

So he tried to gecontact this person. So he tried to contact this person.

When he visited the person's house, he finally got that personem on his side. When he visited the person's house, he finally got them on his side.

In this instance it would be a singular them, as you haven't specified the gender of this person. If you are talking about a single person and you don't know THEIR gender, you can use "they" and "them", even though it is not plural. As you can see, I just did it in that previous sentence. However, it's always better to be precise unless you really don't know or are deliberately obscuring the information (ie. to reveal the gender as a plot twist later on).

From that day, it became their habit thato sharinge information in that person's house. From that day, it became their habit to share information in that person's house.

It would be way better to use the nickname here, eg. "...to share information in the police chief's house."

Because they thinkought that it iswould be the safest place to discuss these things. Because they thought that it would be the safest place to discuss these things.

I have changed this to match to past tense. You are mixing both present and past a bit in this text, but it's better to just pick one and stick to it.

Some days later, the handyman triesd to get back at him by sending a flayer about his private detective business to a person who could be a his client. Some days later, the handyman tried to get back at him by sending a flyer about his private detective business to a person who could be a his client.

After he knew that the handyman sent his athe fake flyer, he was very shocked and frustrated. After he knew that the handyman sent the fake flyer, he was very shocked and frustrated.

In the time that he was shocked, the people in high positions of the police station in the city center, were doingworking on a project. In the time that he was shocked, the people in high positions of the police station in the city center, were working on a project.

It's better you say you are "working on" a project than "doing" one.

As onepart of the project, the man who works with the lawyer attracted their attention. As part of the project, the man who works with the lawyer attracted their attention.

As the on of that reasonBecause of that, they bugged the person that in the highest position and has some bad rumors' house. Because of that, they bugged the person that in the highest position and has some bad rumors' house.

"The person that in the highest position and has some bad rumors" --> technically this IS a nickname, so I can't fault you here, but it is a bit long. "The boss"/"the police chief"/"the mayor" or something similar may be a bit better and a bit less wordy.

ItThe story will continue tomorrow. The story will continue tomorrow.

More precision is always better.