BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » Go on then...what are your theories?

BrandoMan13 · March 2, 2012 7:31 am

kazza474 wrote:
Very appropriate.

I think with keeping Moriarty locked up, there would be no point. And there would be a legal battle anyway whether they won or lost, it would make the media and make things 'messy'. Better to 'give him some rope' and see if he slipped up. Meantime Mycroft as usual hopes his little brother might get somewhere. I do think Mycroft & Sherlock probably discussed possible ways of making Moriarty 'sing' as it were.

Not a bad idea. What if Sherlock told Mycroft to feed Moriarity information. He might have known the endgame quite early on. It is hard to imagine that Mycroft would just spill the beans about Sherlock's entire life without some reason behind it, and just getting Moriarity to talk a few bits and pieces here and there doesn't seem like enough incentive.

kazza474 · March 2, 2012 7:40 am

Brando, that is what my whole theory is based on. It was a complete plan set up by Sherlock and Mycroft. Mycroft is not stupid enough to feed Moriarty any thing and then say "oops".

And I have asked people before without any real answer :" What exact information would Mycroft have told Moriarty that could have been so bad?"
I mean it was about his background. Did he say "Sherlock used to pull one wing off flies and watch them spin around helplessly"?
I mean really, the newspaper story (while we don't know what was in it) dealt with Sherlock faking crimes. Hardly a need for childhood memories there huh?

kazza474 · March 2, 2012 7:41 am

Davina wrote:
I think you are right there. Testing the idea of keeping him locked up shows it would not have told them anything so it would be pointless. Also it would have made for a rubbish storyline as well! Lol

I am suspicious of the whole Sherlock courting publicity thing too.

I knew if I kept saying it, people would start thinking it. hehehe

BrandoMan13 · March 2, 2012 7:42 am

One last thing for now. I just read the quote from Moffat it is as follows: "I've been online and looked at all the theories and there's one clue that everyone's missed. It's something that Sherlock did that was very out of character, but which nobody has picked up on."

So the clue is something Sherlock did that was very out of character.

Working from that, we have to come up with a list of things he did out of character and work from one of them to solve the mystery of the episode.

A few ideas: Being kind to Molly, saying "I need you" saying "you always mattered" and things of that nature.

Crying and showing emotion while on the phone with John.

Not to mention the storyline in which he has allowed himself to become some sort of celebrity.

I'm also wondering if perhaps the solution we can come up with is simply that Sherlock was one step ahead the whole time and planned everything. Perhaps there is no clue to exactly how he did so, but just knowing that he did is the solution?

I haven't read anything that says we can actually figure out how he faked his death, but only more ambiguous wording.

kazza474 · March 2, 2012 7:50 am

That is why I said read my theory.

The thing Sherlock did that is out of character is : he allowed himself to become a hero.
Think back to the Great Game : he said John heroes don't exist and if they did I would not be one.

So the thing he did that was out of character was right at the start of this episode. But people are so tied up with the action in the story, they have accepted his ''hero tag' and they think the different thing is in the action. It happened way before that though & all the things in the show have been planned out.
Read my signature, it is what Moffat did. He wrapped up the lie of Sherlock being a hero in a fancy story of truth because all those other things did happen and people missed the twist at the start.

Sherlock is a good actor, the things he said and the tears and everything else were all acted, and all for good reason.

I am now collating all I have ever posted on theories and will come up with a step by step explanation so that I can get it clear in my mind and sit through teh show again and get it all in sequence.
Really it is just an excuse to while away hours watching it again!

Last edited by kazza474 (March 2, 2012 7:59 am)

BrandoMan13 · March 2, 2012 7:55 am

kazza474 wrote:
That is why I said read my theory.

The thing Sherlock did that is out of character is : he allowed himself to become a hero.
Think back to the Great Game : he said John heroes don't exist and if they did I would not be one.

So the thing he did that was out of character was right at the start of this episode. But people are so tied up with the action in the story, they have accepted his ''hero tag' and they think the different thing is in the action. It happened way before that though & all the things in the show have been planned out.
Read my signature, it is what Moffat did. He wrapped up the lie of Sherlock being a hero in a fancy story of truth because all those other things did happen and people missed the twist at the start.

Sherlock is a good actor, the things he said and the tears and everything else were all acted, and all for good reason.

So going with this post as a starting point.

Does this mean that we have solved the mystery? That we have figured out that the whole episode is essentially all Holmes toying with Moriarity.

Or can we actually figure out how Holmes faked his death?

The best I can come up with is that we know Holmes had more time than just a few hours to plan the jump, and we know this because we know that Holmes was always a few steps ahead of Moriarity, he was running the game, not the other way around.

kazza474 · March 2, 2012 8:04 am

The trick is, IF the theory is even close (and in a year's time we may be laughing at how wrong we were, lol) there will be a LOT of red herrings and trivial things that we have blown out of proportion. That's how these dudes think, they have twisted devious minds and are laughing at every post we make on this subject!
The actual fall, i think i posted parts of how it was done. I do have a few grey areas on it however. I'm going to gather everything I think on this together and pop it in one post later on.

I also posted about it in the first part of this thread.

Do not ever think that you have the answer, because you will somehow be wrong.
I don't ever want to know if I am right or wrong, I am happy to wait and discover it for myself when Series 3 comes out. By which time, I shall be in a straight jacket for trying to jump off a hospital or something! lol

BrandoMan13 · March 2, 2012 8:16 am

I know I'll never have the right answer and like you I am very excited to see what they have in store for us when series 3 airs.

In the meantime, I have some time to kill, why not discuss, debate, and detect.

Everyone seems to think that Sherlock just jumped into the truck, but that can't possibly be the answer. Besides being able to say what I think didn't happen, I can't even begin to come up with what I think DID happen.

kazza474 · March 2, 2012 8:19 am

Oh hell yes, I love all this solving stuff! The debate will last 12 months easy and some fool will claim to have knowledge of the answer and people will start rumours to put others off etc etc.
Welcome to teh internet lol!
He didn't jump into a truck, no way he could have jumped so far out. I believe he landed in a safety net held by the homeless network people who stood around the chalk marked area you can see on the ground.

Again, read the whole of this thread to see what I said or wait till I put it into one post.

Last edited by kazza474 (March 2, 2012 8:20 am)

Sherlock Holmes · March 2, 2012 11:20 am

Wow you guys have been busy whilst I've been in bed!

Little girl...I think the mercury idea works well and fits in with a similar idea planted in Hounds - remember the little boy associated the killer's T-shirt with picture of a dog to an actual dog, similar thing happened to the little girl, especially if the kidnapper was hiding their face with a balaclava or something anyway, then she was shown a picture of Sherlock, her mind would make the associations and would explain her behaviour...which was of course set up on purpose by Moriarty to plant seeds of doubt with members of the police force.

I think Sherlock knew that Richard Brook was Moriarty when they first saw the newspaper article in the alley - because he would have worked out it was "Reichenbach" and only Moriarty could come up with something like that, so he wasn't really surprised when he found him at Kitty's flat. And after Jim ran away and the two of them were back outside that's when he made the decision to go and see Molly, and I think it was that moment he knew he would have to "die". He didn't know about Moriarty's trick with the assasins, but he must have known Jim would have some kind of trick up his sleeve to force Sherlock to "kill himself".

If the assassin on John was outside the hospital - how did Moriarty know that John would go there? That's something I can't work out. Sherlock chose the location of their showdown but Jim got there very quickly, which meant he must already have been in the area - did Jim know they would meet on the roof too? I have no idea!

Things Sherlock did that were out of character: (some of these will probably be insignificant)

1. Ask for help - he asked Molly, and most people believe Mycroft had a hand in it, which must have been pretty hard for Sherlock considering their relationship
2. Allow himself to be made a hero
3. Get into a taxi without John - normally he likes John to talk to when he's thinking
4. Showing emotion/tears whilst on phone to John
5. Calling instead of texting
6. Dropping his phone before he jumped - why not just put it back in his pocket?

I've always been a bit suspicious about the Mycroft telling Moriarty secrets about Sherlock storyline - Moriarty never actually used any information like that, the whole premise of his story in the newspapers was that Sherlock was a fake who made up the crimes so he could "solve" them and get the glory from it, nothing to do with any secrets or past history. I don't know why John would think that, unless there was some other info in the article that John read but that the audience weren't privy too.

I think the computer code was real but not as dramatic as Moriarty initially made it out to be - like it probably didn't help him break into the crown jewels or anything, I believe his explanation on the roof that he had people on the inside. He has people everywhere. But it must have been something of some importance for Mycroft to have questioned him, or Moriarty must have been up to something that concerned the government, Mycroft is highly intelligent and wouldn't question him unless he knew he was up to something.

Sherlock has such a rubbish relationship with his brother though, it's hard to imagine them like talking on the phone and planning to dupe Moriarty together so... I dunno. Lost again, lol.

Sherlock Holmes · March 2, 2012 11:38 am

Before I forget, I just wanted to add a few things about the actual jump...

It was definitely Sherlock jumping off that roof - dead bodies don't fall like that. And I don't believe the theory that a dead body was used after the fall and somehow swapped for Sherlock (eg. Rolled out of the dumpster truck). It would be too much effort to prepare a corpse to look like Sherlock - even with a bloodied face it would still have to have all the same clothes on - you can't get those coats from just anywhere you know! Also, a dead body would be stone cold and even John in his confused state would notice that, or he'd remember it afterwards and start to get suspicious, something would stick out as being "not right" even if he didn't put his finger on it immediately.

I think I'll probably go with the rubber ball theory for now - that Sherlock put the rubber ball under his armpit and squeezed it to temporarily hold off his pulse whilst John took it. John only held his hand for a split second before being gently pushed away (by one of Sherlock's homeless network who were helping out), so it wouldn't have been a big deal. I don't think we would have seen him playing with the ball if it wasn't going to be utilised later on - we are rarely shown things unless they're of some significance (well, unless they're red herrings).

I think the pavement was too wide and the trajectory of the fall too straight for Sherlock to have landed in the truck, I think that's just a red herring, and also too big a gamble for Sherlock to have taken - he likes to be certain of things and I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have taken a risk like that - what if he had missed?! A landing net seems more appropriate, although I must admit a little more "dull".

kazza474 · March 2, 2012 12:19 pm

I think I have already posted similar to all the things below that I agree on, so I won't go over them again.

Sherlock Holmes wrote:
Little girl... the mercury idea

Agreed

I think Sherlock knew that Richard Brook was Moriarty

agreed

If the assassin on John was outside the hospital - how did Moriarty know that John would go there? That's something I can't work out. Sherlock chose the location of their showdown but Jim got there very quickly, which meant he must already have been in the area - did Jim know they would meet on the roof too? I have no idea!

Jim didn't really get there quickly. Remember Sherlock texted him and then the next part is john waking up to take the call about Mrs H so there was some time between that where John went to sleep on the desk etc.

1. Ask for help - he asked Molly, and most people believe Mycroft had a hand in it, which must have been pretty hard for Sherlock considering their relationship

Sherlock has asked for help in the past eg graffitti artist; alsoMycroft & Sherlock ARE close remember the scene in the morgue after identifying Irene's body and a few others as well. They portray their relationship as a testy one to others, but alone they are fine.

2. Allow himself to be made a hero

AGREED

3. Get into a taxi without John - normally he likes John to talk to when he's thinking

Sherlock is at his most vulnerable when not with John. He also needed to lure Moriarty into his next step. Best he was alone to do that.

4. Showing emotion/tears whilst on phone to John

He cried at will in the great game when talking to the dead man's wife. He was acting, he had to convince John this was real

5. Calling instead of texting

He's called people several times eg Mycroft in HOUND when he needed to get back into the lab. He said he prefers to text earlier in the series, those times were to criminals, not associates/friends.

6. Dropping his phone before he jumped - why not just put it back in his pocket?

Why be neat and tidy? He was going to die, you don't need a Blackberry after that!

I've always been a bit suspicious about the Mycroft telling Moriarty secrets about Sherlock storyline - Moriarty never actually used any information like that, ....... unless there was some other info in the article that John read but that the audience weren't privy too.

Agreed on the information thing. As for the article not showing what John read etc, we know that Moffat said all the information we need was seen in this episode. So we don't need to speculate on what we don't see, it wasn't of any relevance.

I think the computer code was real but not as dramatic as Moriarty initially made it out to be

Agreed

Sherlock has such a rubbish relationship with his brother though, it's hard to imagine them like talking on the phone and planning to dupe Moriarty together so... I dunno. Lost again, lol.

Again, don't be fooled by the 'show' of a deep set resentment or anything. These 2 guys are involved with each other in some dangerous business; if either brother didn't trust the other implicitly it wouldn't happen that way. No honestly, do not be fooled by the sibling rivalry, they are brothers & they are 'close' on a different level. Just because it's not an emotional level, doesn't make it any less a relationship built on understanding and trust.

kazza474 · March 2, 2012 12:26 pm

Sherlock Holmes wrote:
I think I'll probably go with the rubber ball theory for now - that Sherlock put the rubber ball under his armpit and squeezed it to temporarily hold off his pulse whilst John took it.

alternatively, Rhododendron Ponticum contains a poison that , when used slows the pulse right down and can cause signs that mimic death. Rubber ball is an option but I don't see it being hidden anywhere really. I'm thinking red herring but the jury in my head is still out on that one.

I think the pavement was too wide and the trajectory of the fall too straight for Sherlock to have landed in the truck,

Exactly right on that.

A landing net seems more appropriate, although I must admit a little more "dull".

What's dull about that? Homeless network people were sitting in those buses waiting for the cue, they got out & stretched the landing net to cover the rectangle marked in chalk on the pavement. Catch Sherlock, throw net in truck and off it goes.

Sherlock Holmes · March 2, 2012 2:17 pm

D'you think Sherlock knew that Moriarty was driving the cab then?

Also, I take your point about Sherlock and Mycroft - I forgot about that scene in the morgue...and we already know that Mycroft does care a lot about his brother which is why he always gets John to look out for him.

kazza474 · March 2, 2012 5:58 pm

Sherlock Holmes wrote:
D'you think Sherlock knew that Moriarty was driving the cab then?

No, that was just luck/chance really. But that chance was created by Sherlock ensuring he was alone. Had John been there, I doubt Moriarty would have shown the video or made himself known to them.

BrandoMan13 · March 2, 2012 8:06 pm

The ball in the armpit theory is a good one, in fact a few episodes back on The Mentalist, Patrick Jane used that exact trick to fool people into thinking someone was dead.

And agreed about the chalk outlined area. I think it is safe to assume that Sherlock had a plan to jump, he didn't just figure something out last minute.

kazza474 · March 2, 2012 10:06 pm

BrandoMan13 wrote:
However I did notice there are cars parked and the cars block out some letters on the pavement, but some letters are visible, along with a few smaller letters below them, the letters AWSI, if I recall correctly. I just wonder if somehow this is some type of clue to the viewer?

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Giltspur+Street,+City+of+London+EC1A,+United+Kingdom&hl=en&ll=51.517792,-0.101119&spn=0.000431,0.001155&sll=39.811124,-83.89273&sspn=0.012461,0.027122&oq=Giltspur+Street+EC1A.&hnear=Giltspur+St,+London+EC1A,+United+Kingdom&t=h&layer=c&cbll=51.517842,-0.1012&panoid=uD1P2iWAuP87lgHuSel9dA&cbp=12,250.6,,0,-10.19&z=20

That is a link to the Google Map page of the hospital. If the link doesn't work for you the address is Giltspur Street, City of London EC1A, United Kingdom.

the wording is "Ambulances only' no great mystery at all.

Although that map view just blew part of my theory out of the water .. maybe.

Well no it doesn't, I assumed there were chalk marks, but they turned out to be brickwork in the pavement, lol. Handy!

Last edited by kazza474 (March 2, 2012 11:39 pm)

BrandoMan13 · March 4, 2012 11:01 pm

kazza474 wrote:
Although that map view just blew part of my theory out of the water .. maybe.

Well no it doesn't, I assumed there were chalk marks, but they turned out to be brickwork in the pavement, lol. Handy!

That picture blows most people's theories out of the water. Everyone has been operating under the impression that those bricks are a chalked out area. This picture ruins all that.

Back to the drawing board it would seem.

kazza474 · March 5, 2012 4:29 am

BrandoMan13 wrote:
kazza474 wrote:
Although that map view just blew part of my theory out of the water .. maybe.

Well no it doesn't, I assumed there were chalk marks, but they turned out to be brickwork in the pavement, lol. Handy!
That picture blows most people's theories out of the water. Everyone has been operating under the impression that those bricks are a chalked out area. This picture ruins all that.

Back to the drawing board it would seem.

Why? So there are bricks there, good reference points if you wanted to tell someone exactly where to stand or exactly where to put something. By using the surrounding features as reference points rather than marking them out yourself certainly makes it even less detectable to any sceptics around.
doesn't change my mind at all. Makes things more plausible, no-one had to sneak out in the night & mark it out.

Last edited by kazza474 (March 5, 2012 4:30 am)

Irene Adler · March 6, 2012 10:52 pm

kazza474 wrote:
I found this quote from Steven Moffat just now, it's from January.

Steven Moffat, who wrote the series with Mark Gatiss and Steve Thompson, has said all the clues pointing to how Sherlock survived were in the episode. ‘It’s all set up,’ he said.
In an interview yesterday, he teased fans further by saying: ‘There is a clue everybody’s missed. So many people theorising about Sherlock’s death online – and they missed it!
‘We’ve worked out how Sherlock survives and actually shot part of what really happened. It all makes sense.’

That makes me happy, as it's the premise that I have been working on all along, everything we need to know is in THAT episode.
We must learn to observe better to get our answers.

It's great to read that. I was worried about them trying to make a resolution that nobody has guessed... something like what happened with Lost's ending. But if it's all filmed already, I think the explanation to Sherlock's survival will be simple and greatly done.

Anyway, each day I'm more convinced that Mycroft is somehow involved in all this. He is truly concerned about his brother and maybe thinks that only Sherlock's death would end Moriarty and he helps him set everything up. I mean, at the end of Baskerville, we see how obsessed Moriarty is about Sherlock and Mycroft knows. So I'm pretty sure he is behind a lot of the stuff regarding the fake suicide.

About the out of character thing... I don't know. I need to watch the episode again. There are a lot of things that can be considered out of character for Sherlock, based on how we see him act in A study in pink and how we see him act in Reichenbach. Most of them have already been pointed out, so I'm not going to repeat them. I'll tell you if I see something new after I rewatch it again