I haven't studied all this, may do so if I get time, but let me point out 2 main things to keep in consideration here.

1.

Jim's 'Richard Brook' resume has a photograph allegedly taken in 2010- this would be before Watson had met Holmes, giving credence to the tale that everything was manufactured before 'A Study in Pink'.

Not too much credibility can be held in that picture considering it was taken by Arwel Jones unless of course he branched out!


2. It's fiction. The show is fiction and sometimes when writing fiction, whilst they try to make it all believable some 'obstacles' get in the way and have to be rolled over. Yes, by all means let's look at the sequence of events, but let's also stick to something everyone now seems to hold very dear to them: it's exactly in the same style as the canon. It wasn't written 'in sequence' , names mysteriously changed from one story to the other , etc etc.



My main point is #1, but #2 needs to be said quite often with this shows dissections.


Oh and the part about the series being shot in the order of Reichenbach, Hound & then Scandal? That's been well documented before but has no bearing on continuity that I can see. Except that Ben's hair and style went 'backwards'. lmao

Last edited by kazza474 (March 27, 2012 3:12 am)

Nice idea!

Wouldn't worry too much about what year the Richard Brook photo was supposedly taken. Seeing as he's a liar anyway he could have said it was taken in any year.

When did Hounds actually take place then? Presumably sometime between 12th and 16th March.

What date was the Richard Brook expose article released?

The Moriarty story line most definitely started before John met Sherlock. It was Moriarty who was sponsoring the cabbie in Study in Pink and 3 of those murders took place prior to their meeting. He was a 'fan' of Sherlock, remember? It's conceivable he had been planning it for some time. Though I do support the "don't put too much stock in the posted dates in the show"

Thanks for this timeline, M0riarty! I love it. I agree with the points raised (that the episodes were filmed out of sequence etc...) but I still like to have a global view of how the events were meant to unfold for the characters. Somehow, it anchors my thought processes as I'm hopelessly still trying to figure this out! :D

Merci!
S

Sherlock Holmes : yes that's true... but I can't imagine if there's real Moriarty wandering out there.. XDD

it seems this thread has not been active in quite some time. But, i found it and wanted to add/ask:

is it possible that the hound of baskerville took place after Moriarty's heists and while he was in jail but before he was found not guilty and released?

i ask because: 1) Mycroft was interrogating him at the end of hounds. why would he have reason to bring him in and keep him but for the heists? 2) in TRF SH tells Watson "if he wanted the jewels he would have them, if he wanted the money he would have that too. he is in jail because he wants to be there." SH even tells JW that being in jail is all part of his plan. I think this goes a long way toward SH figuring out M and being a few steps ahead enough to plan his fake suicide.

so, if being in jail is all part of the plan, then the timeline would look like this:

Moriarty sets up the reichenbach fall theft and all the other crimes that SH solves to bring him to over the top famous.

Moriarty conducts the heists and gets captured and is in lock up awaiting trial. i assume in England a criminal trial won't happen in short order just like in America.

SH gets brought in because it says "get sherlock"

While reviewing the investigation, SH says to JW that M wants to be in jail and that it is all part of M's plan.

M stays in lock up awaiting trial for a month or more. Mycroft goes in to find out why he "wants to be there." this is when mycroft "divulges" SH's personal details.

while M is in lock up nothing is happening. there are zero interesting cases for SH. this is why Hound opens with SH going mad needing a case (and cigs). he is bored and there is nothing happening. M is in lock up. After all, EVERY single interesting case SH has had since we met him had M behind it.

then along comes the Hound case as a distraction. and this is why Hound ends with a shot of Mycroft interrogating M.

the newspapers that flip through on the screen during the first part of TRF says things like the government is asking hard questions about how this could happen, etc. Mycroft then sends him off to stand trial.

when JW confronts Mycroft about spilling the beans to M in TRF, Mycroft says, "James Moriarity is the most dangerous criminal mind the world has ever seen and in his pocket is a key..." that means that Mycroft questioned him after "the key" made an appearance.

JW asks Mycroft, "you abducted him to find out about the key?" Mycroft does not say yes or no, he just says i interrogated him for weeks. but, there was no mention of the key at any time BEFORE M's three heists. No one seems to have known about the key until such a time. and, of course, the key DOES NOT EXIST. we know this in hind sight. the deduction can then be made that Mycroft interrogated him AFTER M pulled the heists and while he was in lock up and after SH deduced that being locked up is part of M's plan.   

as an outside meta note, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle killed off SH and the fans wanted him back. So, SACD wrote the Hounds and it was written in a timeline that occurred before Holme's fake death. Then, the next story brought SH back to life. I think this is a way for the writer's to pay homage to this timeline.

AND, i think this is some more evidence that Mycroft was in on the plan.

Last edited by izatty (October 3, 2012 8:44 am)

izatty wrote:

it seems this thread has not been active in quite some time. But, i found it and wanted to add/ask:

is it possible that the hound of baskerville took place after Moriarty's heists and while he was in jail but before he was found not guilty and released?

i ask because: 1) Mycroft was interrogating him at the end of hounds. why would he have reason to bring him in and keep him but for the heists? 2) in TRF SH tells Watson "if he wanted the jewels he would have them, if he wanted the money he would have that too. he is in jail because he wants to be there." SH even tells JW that being in jail is all part of his plan. I think this goes a long way toward SH figuring out M and being a few steps ahead enough to plan his fake suicide.

so, if being in jail is all part of the plan, then the timeline would look like this:

Moriarty sets up the reichenbach fall theft and all the other crimes that SH solves to bring him to over the top famous.

Moriarty conducts the heists and gets captured and is in lock up awaiting trial. i assume in England a criminal trial won't happen in short order just like in America.

SH gets brought in because it says "get sherlock"

While reviewing the investigation, SH says to JW that M wants to be in jail and that it is all part of M's plan.

M stays in lock up awaiting trial for a month or more. Mycroft goes in to find out why he "wants to be there." this is when mycroft "divulges" SH's personal details.

while M is in lock up nothing is happening. there are zero interesting cases for SH. this is why Hound opens with SH going mad needing a case (and cigs). he is bored and there is nothing happening. M is in lock up. After all, EVERY single interesting case SH has had since we met him had M behind it.

then along comes the Hound case as a distraction. and this is why Hound ends with a shot of Mycroft interrogating M.

the newspapers that flip through on the screen during the first part of TRF says things like the government is asking hard questions about how this could happen, etc. Mycroft then sends him off to stand trial.

when JW confronts Mycroft about spilling the beans to M in TRF, Mycroft says, "James Moriarity is the most dangerous criminal mind the world has ever seen and in his pocket is a key..." that means that Mycroft questioned him after "the key" made an appearance.

JW asks Mycroft, "you abducted him to find out about the key?" Mycroft does not say yes or no, he just says i interrogated him for weeks. but, there was no mention of the key at any time BEFORE M's three heists. No one seems to have known about the key until such a time. and, of course, the key DOES NOT EXIST. we know this in hind sight. the deduction can then be made that Mycroft interrogated him AFTER M pulled the heists and while he was in lock up and after SH deduced that being locked up is part of M's plan.   

as an outside meta note, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle killed off SH and the fans wanted him back. So, SACD wrote the Hounds and it was written in a timeline that occurred before Holme's fake death. Then, the next story brought SH back to life. I think this is a way for the writer's to pay homage to this timeline.

AND, i think this is some more evidence that Mycroft was in on the plan.

Interesting point, especially your little note about the canon...but to be honest, I think that would be way too confusing and complicated for the audience. It would basically mean that the episodes were out of order...so that the first part of Reichenbach Fall happened, then all of Hounds, then the second part of Reichenbach Fall...

The reason Moriarty was interrogated at the end of Hounds is due to that line at the end of Scandal where Mycroft says Moriarty has been desperate for his attention and "that can be arranged".

A reference to the Olympics would be pretty cool yes.

And of course, we know the date Sherlock "died" because it's on John's blog. If they're sticking to canon, it should in theory be three years later, but wouldn't that technically mean setting the programme in the future, which is unlikely to happen right? So they'll probably just operate on a real time basis, give or take a few months.

But, i found it and wanted to add/ask:

Building up the tension …