Offline
In their secret meeting in which the footage of Magnussen's death was shown to have been doctored, Mycroft said that only those in that room would ever know the full truth. He seems to have forgotten one very important fact, however: John was there when Sherlock shot Magnussen. And of course Mary also knew; there's no way that John would not have told her when it was over. So those two also knew the full truth. If Mycroft really wanted what had actually happened to be kept secret, John, at least, should have been brought to that meeting and sworn to secrecy. And Mary, too, very likely.
Last edited by kgreen20 (September 29, 2017 11:02 pm)
Offline
Not to mention Mycroft's people who witnessed the shooting too!
Offline
Those people will all have signed the official secrets act and will darn well do as they are told.
I am sure John is completely reliable...though he obviously references this oversight in his convo with Mycroft about pulling strings for the family.
Offline
besleybean wrote:
...
I am sure John is completely reliable...though he obviously references this oversight in his convo with Mycroft about pulling strings for the family.
Not quite - it's John who tells Lestrade that Sherlock shot Magnussen.
And of course Mycroft completely overlooks Vivian Norbury, but that was the point of the episode (tip for real life: treat all secretaries/assistants/whatever with the utmost respect, they can make your life miserable if they dislike you).
But actually, upon re-watching, the meeting does not seem to have much sense at all (apart, obviously, from filling in the viewers): At first I thought Mycroft was informing his higher-ups of what happened, but in fact it's the guy behind the desk who explains that they manipulated the video. And Lady Smallwood sounds as if she had agreed to this method of getting Sherlock off the hook. The only one for whom it is news seems to be Sherlock (and us, of course) - and it's actually surprising that Mycroft gives up his hold over Sherlock so easily...
Offline
Greg is a close and trusted friend.
I think Mycroft is warning Sherlock to behave.
Offline
You don't tell "top secret" things to your close and trusted friends or even your families! Not if you value your job, your freedom and possibly your life...
As for Mycroft warning Sherlock: Maybe. But the meeting lets Sherlock off the hook for CAM's murder, and IMHO permanently - there's video "proof" that he didn't do the crime. (Incidentally, is video still allowed as proof? Michael Crichton based a novel on video manipulation back in the 90s...) Whereas without the meeting Mycroft could have told Sherlock "I'm hushing it up for you, so behave or else..." (put more elegantly and menacingly, of course).
Offline
But John was there when it happened, so he knows what really happened. If Mycroft really wanted the truth to be kept secret, John should have been let in on it.
Offline
Exactly! We are in complete agreement - my post #4 was my reaction to besleybean's #3 "John is completely riable", and in #6 I attempted to make clear that Greg being a close and trusted friend has nothing to do with it.
John probably would be reliable, if somebody told him what to do. Not knowing the real events were top secret, he told Lestrade, who also doesn't know that the event should be secret so who knows whom he will tell...
There's a reason for the saying: "Three men can keep a secret if two of them are dead!"
Offline
Maybe it doesn't matter too much if Lestrade tells anyone, as the "evidence" shows that Magnussen was killed by an unknown sniper.