Preceja wrote:

There was no need to speak about Mary. But Lestrade knows something. 
Could it have been explained like self-defence or defence of John? But id does not correspond to te way John speaks with Lestrade.

Could for Lestrade  as principled cop work that Sherlock was not accused of any crime ie. not guilty ? 

​

Liberty wrote:

But supposedly what drives Sherlock to such extreme measures, is because Mary's life is threatened.    I don't know if he'd have done it to protect Lord Smallwood (or revenge for his death).   So would Lestrade just accept that Sherlock had a good reason for killing Magnussen, without knowing the truth?  

Maybe Lestrade really is part of their inner circle and does know what's going on - who Mary is/was, why Magnussen was shot, etc.

Preceja wrote:

Lola Red wrote:

nakahara wrote:

Wouldn´t that made him extremely hypocritical, even corrupt?
What moral right would he have to catch other criminals, if he turned a blind eye on his friends bumping people off?

While Lestrade is unsually seen as "the good copper", he is not exactly playing according to the rules. He did nothing when Sherlock told him that he was behind the CIA agents injuries in ASIB. Actually, there were only ever two police officers who actually did what police officers are supposed to do: follow protocol. And that are Donovan and (formerly) Anderson. So I would not be too surprised for Lestrade to turn a blind eye again when it comes to Sherlock.

And officially, Sherlock did not break any rule, he is not accused of anything, ie. everything was according to law. We cannot expect any good cop to go against law, can we ?  There was no need to infom him about Mary. 

I am sorry, I missed your posts before...

I believe, that's a point: where was no need to inform Lestrade about killing CAM, too.
And what for to do it? To concern his professional conscience? I believe, if someone said him, it was the matter of national security, he could "forget it" officially. But who was to say such things? Mycroft? Please...
And still, Lestrade knew Sherlock as the man, who fighted murderers, not was a murderer, ten years. It had to change his attitude towards Sherlock. But he looked unaffected.

It's funny though that at the beginning of TST Mycroft says "only those within this room, codenames Antarctic, Langdale, Porlock and love will ever know the whole truth" he should have added...and John....and maybe Greg 

After Magnussen death they might have revealed some awful things (either real or artificial) and inform public he was a bad guy and was eliminated during a police action. Then iit might be more acceptable for Lestrade that Sherlock killed him. 

But what bothers me is the tone John used. Like they both new it was cold blood shot . So no selfdefence story was told to Lestrade. 

I can imagine that something like this could work  "We were there, it was really messy situation, Magnussen was dangerous for the country, Sherlock killed him, shot him to head, He had no other option,please do not ask details it is security concern."  

Last edited by Preceja (January 12, 2017 7:16 pm)

Preceja wrote:

nakahara wrote:

My headscratchers:

- does Mary´s advice work at all? She mentioned that John would be brought back to Sherlock if he sees him miserable (in hell) and if he would be forced to save his life. But what we get is the very opposite? John does not rush to Sherlock´s rescue, in fact, he is disgusted with him when he sees him in drugged up, unkept state?

It works at the point John realizes Sherlock is really in danger - after DVD. 

Before there is no imminent danger - Sherlock is destroying himself with drugs but how can you help with it  to anybody who refuses help? And then he is in hospital, cop in front of the door, he has the best care,  seems to be saved at least for a while. You cannot expect secret door and murdering maniac in hospital even if you meet there such weird people like CS. 

IMO Sherlock pretended to set everything up before, and have things keept under control, but he was in real danger, and not sure, if anyone will (and can) help him. His IV drip was replaced, but he could be smothered, and was to weak to defend himself. He was afraid of dying, but he took the risk, and there was no other way out, as play until the end. 

Simple like that - to say, not to do.

Last edited by Naavy (January 12, 2017 11:12 pm)

Lis wrote:

It's funny though that at the beginning of TST Mycroft says "only those within this room, codenames Antarctic, Langdale, Porlock and love will ever know the whole truth" he should have added...and John....and maybe Greg 

No, only those four know that the video was changed to show somebody killing Magnussen accidentally so Sherlock is innocent. The rest still thinks that Sherlock killed Magnussen . 

Was this really the intention ? 

besleybean wrote:

Who thinks Sherlock killed CAM?
Surely nobody knows about it, that's the point.

Definitely Greg and then some people in the office when Mycroft was talking about his brother murderer

Last edited by Preceja (January 12, 2017 7:46 pm)

Preceja wrote:

Lis wrote:

It's funny though that at the beginning of TST Mycroft says "only those within this room, codenames Antarctic, Langdale, Porlock and love will ever know the whole truth" he should have added...and John....and maybe Greg 

No, only those four know that the video was changed to show somebody killing Magnussen accidentally so Sherlock is innocent. The rest still thinks that Sherlock killed Magnussen . 

Was this really the intention ? 

I thought he meant it as only those four knew what really happened (which doesn't make complete sense as again, John and Greg know) and everyone/anyone else would be given the lie that someone else shot CAM.

I guess the "whole truth" could be refering to the shooting and the cover up but if say John saw the video it wouldn't be difficult to work out who doctored it.
 

Last edited by Lis (January 12, 2017 7:53 pm)

And of course all of Mycrofts people who where there know. But its certainly not public knowledge.

And concerning Greg, in HoB and HLV it was heavily implied that he sort of works for Mycroft too

Lis wrote:

I thought he meant it as only those four knew what really happened (which doesn't make complete sense as again, John and Greg know) and everyone/anyone else would be given the lie that someone else shot CAM.

I guess the "whole truth" could be refering to the shooting and the cover up but if say John saw the video it wouldn't be difficult to work out who doctored it.
 

Perhaps "the four" was only about the government people - and the culprit, Sherlock? The man, who "doctored" the video, soldiers, and Vivian Norbury did not count? :/

But I suppose, there were next layers of this story. Just to say (admit), that powerful press magnate was killed by the undisciplined squaddie does not sound good. So maybe media did get yet another story?

 

Last edited by Naavy (January 12, 2017 8:12 pm)

I think they said they were going to say it was a disgruntled squaddie.  And I suppose he had upset a lot of people just by publishing nasty stuff so it could be plausible?

Really they should have had John and Greg in that room too, swearing secrecy.  And Mary.