It does get convoluted ... well, just imagine she meant to kill him.   So she shoots him, she's desparate to get out of there as she knows John could come up the stairs at any second, but he's not dead and she's worried that she hasn't actually managed to kill him, and deduces that he'd turn her in if he thought she meant to kill him, but wouldn't if he thought she'd aimed to spare him, so she phones an ambulance, believing that there will be a delay before John comes up  - enough of a delay to be significant enough for Sherlock to realise that it couldn't have been John's call that was responsible.  And she's got to be sure that John tells Sherlock that. 

I mean why not just put another bullet in his head?  It would be much quicker and more reliable. 

Yet again, if they want us to believe the above scenario, then I wouldn't be happy. 

The reason for counting what Amanda says, is that the original post was about what Amanda said!  I just put it in context (because on it's own it looked like a semi-spoiler for S4). 

As for Karachi, both scenarios are possible, as part of the game they play.  Steven Moffat's scenario makes it clearer that Sherlock fell for her (if that isn't clear already!), and we already know she fell for him - she continues to use him as protection, but we don't know what happened that night when he got out of that situation.   I prefer to think that their relationship would be intellectual gameplaying, but there's nothing to rule out sex altogether.   We know that the "night in Karachi" was Benedict's head canon, rather than anything in the script (or probably anything Steven said - he said at one point that it was left open), but it does fit with Steven thinking Sherlock fancied Irene.  

I'm sure there are other things the team say that will be at odds (although I can't think of any), but I don't think this is particularly contradictory.    And what Amanda says isn't really at odds with anything the rest of the team have said, I don't think - or at odds with what we've seen in the show.  Amanda saying that Mary "knows" that she didn't kill Sherlock doesn't have to mean that she had insider knowledge about what happened to him, only that as far as she was aware, her shot was "surgery", she called an ambulance in time, and she expected him to survive.    It's just the way people speak, isn't it?   It could still be at odds with what Moftiss intend, but I don't think Amanda is telling us that Mary knew something she couldn't possibly have known - it would be an odd way to say that.

Last edited by Liberty (August 18, 2016 8:49 pm)

If we believe Mary then her primary motive is to keep her secret from John. Would Mary expect Sherlock to not tell John or otherwise reveal her secret if he survived?
Screenshots do seem to show Magnussen reaching for the phone behind Marys back and before Sherlock was shot . I wonder who he would have called considering he probably expected to be shot himself. Maybe for help , maybe for revenge.
Sherlock has a very bad record deducing Mary. I think he has made a deadly mistake.She has shown she will kill and claimed so in her own words twice . Maybe John can trust her , but how can anyone else?

Sherlock was facing CAM when he reached for the phone, so could have seen if he phoned.  Then it looks like he's just coming round when John finds Sherlock, and it seems that Mary knocked him out.    As it's a crucial clue, and Sherlock accepting Mary and trying to reconcile her with John may well hinge on it, I think Sherlock would have thought about it and realised there were two people who could have phoned.   He has reason to believe it was Mary (because she knocked out CAM, and because Sherlock could see that he didn't phone, I presume.  In other words, Sherlock knows Mary phoned because he knows CAM didn't).  Yes, he could be lying and we may find out that he was, but at the moment (before S4), that doesn't really fit with what he does.   If he's lying, we've got to believe that he thinks Mary meant to kill him, but still wants her to be back with John and is happy to leave them together. 

Nakahara, Mary thinks that she would lose John if he found out about her.   I don't think she could believe that he would give her a pass if she called an ambulance and left Sherlock dying.   And she had no way of knowing when he could appear  - if he'd come up the stairs just then, then all calling the ambulance would have done was increase her risk of getting caught.   Also how are the audience supposed to work that out, when it doesn't really make sense for Mary to do it?   (To be honest, I think Sherlock lying about it fits better - but we haven't been given a reason for him to do that, not yet anyway). 

And as for what Amanda said, perhaps she should more correctly have said "Mary believes that she knows that she didn't kill him".  But she's not writing an essay!  It's an interview, and is the way people talk.   And it does make sense - the knowledge that Mary has is that she shot to incapacitate, not kill.  She might not know at that point about Sherlock flatlining.  (In fact, John might not know either, but that's a separate issue).   There are some possible problems with the timing, but I don't know if that's supposed to be a clue or just the way it was filmed.   (The extended mind palace theory would take care of all those things, of course!).

Last edited by Liberty (August 19, 2016 6:46 am)

It might be a good idea to have a thread to put the pieces together, one way or another.  TAB has set up the possibility for it, although I think in TAB the clues were much more obvious (anachronisms, etc.), and the mind palace was revealed within the episode rather than years later. 

"General Sherlock Discussion" would be a good place. I am unable to post proper links from my smartphone, so it would be great if somebody else could open it. *gives Susi a smile*

Thank you. :-D

"All those wet jobs for the CIA.  She's gone a bit freelance now".

I was wondering about the present tense here (or present perfect, or whatever it is, I wasn't taught this in school!), because as far as we know Mary changed her identity five years ago and "retired".  So either she's still secretly working (quite possible), or, I wondered, is Magnussen referring to her coming to kill him?  Is that the "freelance" job, one not commissioned by the CIA, but by herself because she was being blackmailed?  Just wondering. 

And I also thought, that may be one of the reasons Sherlock is sympathetic towards Mary: because she's being blackmailed by somebody he hates so much.  Whatever he thinks about her attack on him himself, he doesn't disapprove of her coming to kill Magnussen, and kind of agrees that that's why there are people like her.  That's maybe reinforced by Lord Smallwood's death.

Yes, that's what I've always taken it to mean, but I wondered if there was another interpretation.  I'm really interested in whether the identity change as the point of leaving the CIA (and she was still working), or whether it was after "going freelance" and then going "straight". 

Schmiezi wrote:

Liberty wrote:

"All those wet jobs for the CIA.  She's gone a bit freelance now".

I was wondering about the present tense here (or present perfect, or whatever it is, I wasn't taught this in school!), because as far as we know Mary changed her identity five years ago and "retired".  So either she's still secretly working (quite possible), or, I wondered, is Magnussen referring to her coming to kill him?  Is that the "freelance" job, one not commissioned by the CIA, but by herself because she was being blackmailed?  Just wondering. 

And I also thought, that may be one of the reasons Sherlock is sympathetic towards Mary: because she's being blackmailed by somebody he hates so much.  Whatever he thinks about her attack on him himself, he doesn't disapprove of her coming to kill Magnussen, and kind of agrees that that's why there are people like her.  That's maybe reinforced by Lord Smallwood's death.

About the present perfect: according to grammar files, it can be used to describe something that started in the past and is not finished yet.

So, the reason why she still owns a complete assassin outfit? She is still freelancing. Bit not good, that.

 
What happens when John realizes that Mary is still killing?

Schmiezi wrote:

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:

Schmiezi wrote:

About the present perfect: according to grammar files, it can be used to describe something that started in the past and is not finished yet.

So, the reason why she still owns a complete assassin outfit? She is still freelancing. Bit not good, that.

 
What happens when John realizes that Mary is still killing?

Well, good question. Let's assume shooting Sherlock WAS surgery and Mary IS the love of his life. Would her still killing people for money change something?

And if we assume that it wasn't surgery but John has forgiven her anyway, what then? If killing Sherlock can be forgiven (and he did flatline, he WAS dead) would her killing other people bother him at all?

Sure. It changes John's characterization. He's now someone who Sherlock certainly cannot call a friend, and cannot trust. Unless he decides that enough is enough and turns her in. If he doesn't, and Sherlock's shooting is *truly*  "okay" with him-- then he doesn't deserve to have Sherlock as a friend, much less a lover as per Johnlock.