BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » Avoiding a murder conviction

Sherlock Holmes · March 1, 2014 12:07 pm

So, Sherlock is being brought back from his four minute hiatus to deal with the threat of Moriarty's possible return. Regardless of this, he did still shoot Magnussen in the head, so how will Mycroft help him avoid a murder conviction?

Magnussen's death is bound to be reported in the papers and it could hardly be claimed that it was an accident. Someone is going to have to take the wrap for shooting him. Maybe they will make up some story that the swat team had to make the shot in self defence because he was about to kill either Sherlock or John.

lil · March 1, 2014 12:28 pm

Whats wrong with the truth?

Media mogul Magnusson attempted to obtain and publicate state secrets...in an operation to retrieve this vital information he was shot and died.
Further information is a matter of national security bleh...

In other news James Moriarty........!

dartmoordoggers · March 1, 2014 3:27 pm

Covered under national security. News organisations would be slapped with a D Notice. In addition the Home Secretary (who also oversees MI5) can halt any criminal proceedings on the grounds it is not in the public interest to do so.

Willow · March 1, 2014 5:30 pm

dartmoordoggers wrote:
Covered under national security. News organisations would be slapped with a D Notice. In addition the Home Secretary (who also oversees MI5) can halt any criminal proceedings on the grounds it is not in the public interest to do so.

No; the only person who could do that would be the DPP. They have cut the Home Secretary out of the chain, after a few embarrassing occasions.

On the other hand, it would be an open and shut prosecution; Sherlock would plead guilty. He has, after all, ensured that there were plenty of witnesses. About the only thing which might get him off would be some sort of insanity plea, based on his exceedingly traumatic experiences in Serbia etc., but we need Belis for that one

lil · March 1, 2014 5:42 pm

Interesting Willow....but if he is working for MI6...wouldn't it be a court martial secret trial type thing...like we see?
As a MI6 agent he destroyed a threat to this country.

dartmoordoggers · March 1, 2014 7:18 pm

Willow wrote:
dartmoordoggers wrote:
Covered under national security. News organisations would be slapped with a D Notice. In addition the Home Secretary (who also oversees MI5) can halt any criminal proceedings on the grounds it is not in the public interest to do so.
No; the only person who could do that would be the DPP. They have cut the Home Secretary out of the chain, after a few embarrassing occasions.

On the other hand, it would be an open and shut prosecution; Sherlock would plead guilty. He has, after all, ensured that there were plenty of witnesses. About the only thing which might get him off would be some sort of insanity plea, based on his exceedingly traumatic experiences in Serbia etc., but we need Belis for that one

The DPP can't prosecute in cases relating to national security without the consent of the Attorney General who superintends the DPP and CPS. But at the level Mycroft operates I am sure their are a few people who can make any possible charges 'go away'. I don't think we will see Sherlock in court during series 4,

Willow · March 1, 2014 8:16 pm

dartmoordoggers wrote:
Willow wrote:
dartmoordoggers wrote:
Covered under national security. News organisations would be slapped with a D Notice. In addition the Home Secretary (who also oversees MI5) can halt any criminal proceedings on the grounds it is not in the public interest to do so.
No; the only person who could do that would be the DPP. They have cut the Home Secretary out of the chain, after a few embarrassing occasions.

On the other hand, it would be an open and shut prosecution; Sherlock would plead guilty. He has, after all, ensured that there were plenty of witnesses. About the only thing which might get him off would be some sort of insanity plea, based on his exceedingly traumatic experiences in Serbia etc., but we need Belis for that one

The DPP can't prosecute in cases relating to national security without the consent of the Attorney General who superintends the DPP and CPS. But at the level Mycroft operates I am sure their are a few people who can make any possible charges 'go away'. I don't think we will see Sherlock in court during series 4,

I'm glad to agree with you on that one, though I think that Mycroft will use it as leverage on Sherlock; he is, in effect, on parole, and Mycroft worries about him...

RavenMorganLeigh · March 1, 2014 8:33 pm

dartmoordoggers wrote:
Willow wrote:
dartmoordoggers wrote:
Covered under national security. News organisations would be slapped with a D Notice. In addition the Home Secretary (who also oversees MI5) can halt any criminal proceedings on the grounds it is not in the public interest to do so.
No; the only person who could do that would be the DPP. They have cut the Home Secretary out of the chain, after a few embarrassing occasions.

On the other hand, it would be an open and shut prosecution; Sherlock would plead guilty. He has, after all, ensured that there were plenty of witnesses. About the only thing which might get him off would be some sort of insanity plea, based on his exceedingly traumatic experiences in Serbia etc., but we need Belis for that one

The DPP can't prosecute in cases relating to national security without the consent of the Attorney General who superintends the DPP and CPS. But at the level Mycroft operates I am sure their are a few people who can make any possible charges 'go away'. I don't think we will see Sherlock in court during series 4,

Errr... for us non-English folk, what is DPP and CPS?

nakahara · March 1, 2014 10:17 pm

I don′t think they will ever formally indict Sherlock and try him in court.

Mycroft′s friends from MI6 will arrange a false helicopter or car crash in which CAM apparently dies. The body will be disfigured and burned to such extent that no one will notice one little hole in his head. And only a handful of people from the government will be informed what has actually happened and decide Sherlock′s fate privately.

They do such things all the time – they sent a Boening full of dead bodies across the Atlantic in SiB, such machiavellistic dealings are their daily bread, no doubt about that.

dartmoordoggers · March 1, 2014 11:36 pm

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:
dartmoordoggers wrote:
Willow wrote:

No; the only person who could do that would be the DPP. They have cut the Home Secretary out of the chain, after a few embarrassing occasions.

On the other hand, it would be an open and shut prosecution; Sherlock would plead guilty. He has, after all, ensured that there were plenty of witnesses. About the only thing which might get him off would be some sort of insanity plea, based on his exceedingly traumatic experiences in Serbia etc., but we need Belis for that one

The DPP can't prosecute in cases relating to national security without the consent of the Attorney General who superintends the DPP and CPS. But at the level Mycroft operates I am sure their are a few people who can make any possible charges 'go away'. I don't think we will see Sherlock in court during series 4,

Errr... for us non-English folk, what is DPP and CPS?

The Director Of Public Prosecutions heads up the Crown Prosecution Service. It supplies legal advice to police and other agencies to decide whether to bring criminal charges against suspect(s) and presents the cases in court.

SherlocklivesinOH · April 6, 2014 1:41 am

I've said all along that I'm not sure why CAM's death is a crossing-of-a-line for Mycroft and his British government...they have people killed or tortured all the time, and you could make a case for CAM being guilty of treason or even terrorism, and thus a candidate for a targeted killing under some current US policy.

I hate to use such a tragic situation so lightly, but I actually think if Sherlock had been less "open" about the whole thing, he, or John, or someone under CAM's thumb, could have used a sort of George-Zimmerman-esque defense: "I thought he was going to hurt me so I struck in self-defense." Or "I wasn't sure what he might do so I kept my hand on the gun and it went off accidentally." Again, not saying Zimmerman was right, but CAM acted a lot more physically threatening than Treyvon Martin ever did.

Seriously, I think if a guy like that went around licking people and doing his business in other people's fireplaces either someone would deck him, or he would be in jail, or an asylum, or at least become a joke, a lot quicker due to those things than because he blackmailed people or printed dubious stories.

On another thread where there was argument about how Sherlock and John feel about each other, someone joked that they're basically robots, and I thought, "what if CAM was a robot and the reference to his mind being the data was literal." Which Sherlock knew in time to figure out he wouldn't be killing a real person.

But honestly, I also don't understand why Sherlock couldn't have timed things so that Mycroft and co could hear CAM admitting he had no documents and/or hear him trying to get Mycroft's laptop, and take him into custody over one of those things.

Last edited by SherlocklivesinOH (April 7, 2014 11:20 pm)

nakahara · April 8, 2014 1:59 pm

SherlocklivesinOH wrote:
I've said all along that I'm not sure why CAM's death is a crossing-of-a-line for Mycroft and his British government...they have people killed or tortured all the time, and you could make a case for CAM being guilty of treason or even terrorism, and thus a candidate for a targeted killing under some current US policy.

I hate to use such a tragic situation so lightly, but I actually think if Sherlock had been less "open" about the whole thing, he, or John, or someone under CAM's thumb, could have used a sort of George-Zimmerman-esque defense: "I thought he was going to hurt me so I struck in self-defense." Or "I wasn't sure what he might do so I kept my hand on the gun and it went off accidentally." Again, not saying Zimmerman was right, but CAM acted a lot more physically threatening than Treyvon Martin ever did.

Seriously, I think if a guy like that went around licking people and doing his business in other people's fireplaces either someone would deck him, or he would be in jail, or an asylum, or at least become a joke, a lot quicker due to those things than because he blackmailed people or printed dubious stories.

On another thread where there was argument about how Sherlock and John feel about each other, someone joked that they're basically robots, and I thought, "what if CAM was a robot and the reference to his mind being the data was literal." Which Sherlock knew in time to figure out he wouldn't be killing a real person.

But honestly, I also don't understand why Sherlock couldn't have timed things so that Mycroft and co could hear CAM admitting he had no documents and/or hear him trying to get Mycroft's laptop, and take him into custody over one of those things.

Now that you mentioned it – one hidden camera shooting CAM′s usual behaviour around people would suffice to have him institucionalised really quickly.... it probably wouldn′t make much of a drama but it would be an appropriate end for such an excentric blackmailer.

Sherli Bakerst · May 12, 2014 11:17 pm

I just watched HLV again last night and was thinking about this scene all day so I'm glad to find there's already a thread about it. (I've been away...from the board for a while...)

I was thinking along the lines of SherlocklivesinOH, though not connecting it to G. Zimmerman: Maybe Sherlock could claim self-defense, in the sense that CAM was threatening him by threatening someone close to him. Yeah, I know that is actually quite a stretch, but I wondered if perhaps Sherlock might try it. Although he wasn't under actual physical threat, perhaps he could say that he thought what CAM was doing to John was going to escalate and to prevent harm coming to John, he felt he had to take action.

I haven't quite decided if Sherlock would dissimulate like that, though. Oh the one hand, he has no compunction about leading people along and letting them think what he wants them to think, all the while knowing it's not true. (See: Janine.) But on the other hand, he does tend to speak his mind and say the truth, even when it's inconvenient.

The other little thing in the back of my mind is--how do we actually know that CAM is dead? I mean, sure Sherlock shot him at point blank range and CAM fell backwards to the ground (like Sherlock, who obviously didn't die), but we didn't see his dead body actually being buried in the ground. This is deja vu all over again! Who's to say that Mycroft isn't just spreading the story that CAM is dead, to all and sundry, so as to prepare Sherlock for some role we don't yet know about? Yeah, maybe that's really far-fetched, but who would've thought that Moriarty would be raised from the dead, too?!

Alternatively, I have no problem believing that Mycroft could persuade everyone who was there that what they thought they saw--Sherlock killing CAM--was not actually what happened.

maryagrawatson · May 13, 2014 1:08 am

The Crown would first have to decide to prosecute. They could decide not to for whatever reason they want. And then the media gets spun. Easy peasy with Mycroft "I Am the British Government" Holmes there to grease the wheel. Sherlock not getting prosecuted is one of the least ludicrous things I've seen on this show.

Mary

nakahara · May 13, 2014 6:55 am

maryagrawatson wrote:
The Crown would first have to decide to prosecute. They could decide not to for whatever reason they want. And then the media gets spun. Easy peasy with Mycroft "I Am the British Government" Holmes there to grease the wheel. Sherlock not getting prosecuted is one of the least ludicrous things I've seen on this show.

Mary

I have a feeling that CAM´s murder was never officially revealed to the public nor to the authorities, but it was quickly hushed up by the government to avoid international scandal. Sherlock was thus able to avoid being prosecuted by the means of official trial.

saturnR · May 13, 2014 11:26 am

What I wanna know is = since Mycroft is in on almost every crazy plan Sherlock has, how come he wasn't in on this one? Or at least, he appears to not be in on this one.

Also the conversation they had with CAM. Did either of them bother to tape it? CAM basically spelt out in megalomaniac terms that he would like to control the British government through Sherlock & the chain of pressure points he was referring to. The only two witnesses to what he said are both up for either murder or accessory to murder. Surely one of them would have taped the conversation!

OnlyinWestwood · May 13, 2014 11:48 am

Who knows? Maybe they'll have to call in a consulting criminal....

But seriously, I think Mycroft could easily have CAM's death covered up, at least for a while. I don't think the general public payed too much attention to him & he was shot in a secluded area. Everyone who was there could be paid off, right?

nakahara · May 13, 2014 11:49 am

saturnR wrote:
What I wanna know is = since Mycroft is in on almost every crazy plan Sherlock has, how come he wasn't in on this one? Or at least, he appears to not be in on this one.

Also the conversation they had with CAM. Did either of them bother to tape it? CAM basically spelt out in megalomaniac terms that he would like to control the British government through Sherlock & the chain of pressure points he was referring to. The only two witnesses to what he said are both up for either murder or accessory to murder. Surely one of them would have taped the conversation!

Maybe they didn´t want to make Mycroft too omnipotent?
Still, it´s a bit suspicious how he has his notebook containing state secrets conveniently placed in the kitchen, where Sherlock can easily steal it. In real life, such leniency with sensitive documents would surely cost you your place in the government.... so there can be some Mycroft´s plot behind it. I don´t think he is the right man for such beginner´s mistakes.

Taped conversations - I don´t know.... are such things accepted as proofs in front of the court in the UK? With technologies available today, those things are probably easily manufactured, if you really want to.

Last edited by nakahara (May 13, 2014 12:34 pm)

silverblaze · May 13, 2014 7:10 pm

I think Mycroft knew more. Taking the notebook is strange, being fooled by Sherlock is strange, not working out who shot him is strange. He was doing something in Poland when Sherlock escaped, what was that? Why did he say 'there's something in the punch'? Mycroft was up to something.

Sherli Bakerst · May 14, 2014 8:13 pm

But I'm still not entirely convinced that CAM is actually dead. Mycroft could certainly have covered up his non-death and spirited him away somewhere; persuaded everyone who was there that Sherlock did murder him; and then spirit Sherlock out of the country for some reason known to the both of them, with Sherlock going along with the deception; only to have to bring his brother back because something even more important/more dangerous has come up. I mean, it's not like none of that never happened before! (I'm only half playing devil's advocate--seriously, just because Mycroft says something, why should we believe it's the truth?)