Erh....? What water?

Willow wrote:

Ormond Sacker wrote:

Erh....? What water?

Good question; I don't recall any water, but the OP is thinking outside the box. I have never met someone who does their thinking inside a box, but presumably they do exist
 

 
Actually there's Sherlock fan comic where the detective thinks inside a box . Here: http://www.deviantart.com/?q=the+cardboard+box+sherlock#/art/The-Adventure-of-the-Cardboard-Box-pg-1-377628567?_sid=42a57469

Your welcome .

I think he did not tell the whole truth to Sherlock, the other victims had one bottle with 3 Pills but as he played with Sherlock there were two bottles with one pill per bottle. Like you noticed we never saw the taxi driver taking a pill before. So I think he played the game with the other victims a bit different: He gave them a 3:1 chance to survive and he did not take one. Therefore I think he wanted to stay alive until he got Sherlock who was actually the aim. Maybe all the pills were venomed and it was simply a trick to made this case interesting enough for Sherlock: A serial suicide is more special then a serial murderer.

I wondered why Sherlock did not take the pill to the lap to check it.
 

Last edited by Danielle80 (April 8, 2016 9:15 pm)

I know that some people think that the cab driver had antidote, or maybe had already taken antidote before he took the pill so that he was safe either way. I don't know, it doesn't feel right to me. The cab driver, like Sherlock, liked the idea of being more clever than anyone else. He wouldn't need antidote to beat the other victims, he would beat them by his deductive skills.

So, yeah, if John hadn't intervened, I think either the cab driver or Sherlock would've died because one of the pills was poisonous. Not sure which one, though.

There is something what bother me about the “Challenge Theory”: If the taxi driver made this because he took delight in surviging people and need the money for his children, why did he play not with the victims before (3 pills bottle)? Then he gets only money for Sherlock and not for the four victims. So I suppose he only wanted that Sherlock thinks that.

The Traces are all faked as in the episode TRF because if you see at the man after he took the poison he would never be able to make a clever plan (like the password – mobile phone story) or left messages on the floor. Also if the taxi driver is really as a genie as Sherlock he wouldn’t make so many mistakes.



So if the taxi driver lied with his story about getting money for surviving people and the main aim is Sherlock from the beginning what did he want from him? Or more precisely the organization he came from? They had chances to kill Sherlock so I suppose they want him alive. Perhaps it was planned as a kind of a job interview and the organization wanted Sherlock to change to their side. And the money the taxi driver would get after that was a bonus if he convinced Sherlock.
By the way, this really remind me a bit of a religious organization because it seems to me that they also tried to use Sherlocks loniless to bait him (we are genius like you, aren’t you bored of this normal life and so on :-). E.g. it is a procedure of sects to look after death notices in newspapers because they know that the survived spouse is lonely and prone for groups like this.
 

Last edited by Danielle80 (April 9, 2016 9:06 am)

Danielle80 wrote:

I thought over it: No one except Sherlock knows that the taxi driver might be the killer, right? So if the taxi driver died on the game it could looks like Sherlock is the killer to the police. I thought about the parallels to the kidnapping case, there were also faked traces with the result that the police suspect Sherlock. So it is not a coincidence that the taxi driver act like Sherlock. Maybe they (the organization or whatever) already tried at this point to discredit Sherlock, but it didn't work because John Watson shoot the taxi driver down and Lestrad trust Sherlock. So more must be done to get Sherlock.

But framing of Sherlock would not be this easy, IMHO. For example, during time when other people where poisoned by cabbie, Sherlock could be in Lestrade´s presence, helping him solve the cases. Ergo, he would have a very good alibi. The pills with which the cabbie poisoned the victims - the police would probably find some traces of the substance in the cab, in cabbie´s flat or on cabbie´s clothes, but none on the clothes of Sherlock. They would maybe discover the laboratory aimed at the production of the poisoned pills somewhere in the cabbie´s cellar etc. etc.

Framing somebody is not enough if the other clues do not corroborate the presumed facts...
 

Danielle80 wrote:

Thats right, but did the police in TRF had more facts? I mean the kids had been venomed too and I cant remember that they were searching a lab or asked Sherlock for alibi. The Problem was that he was an amateur detective and had access to all documents without the knowing of the chief inspector. As far as I remember was that enough to arrest him. The case in SoP was pretty similar: The police would find Sherlock with a dead body without knowing who the man is and what he told Sherlock. Furthermore we should not forget that Sherlock keep back evidences. Sally would probably act like in TRF and convinced Lestard to report this to the chief inspector. She thought from the beginning that Sherlock was a psychopath and that he is going to become an offender some day. I think the result would be the same: Sherlock would be arrested and could not work together with the police anymore.

Of course, it´s only a theory of mine, but I am convinced that even if Sherlock got arrested (in both cases), he would never have been convicted and he would be set loose very soon afterwards. Because the thourough investigation would probably uncover some clues pointing to the shady character of the cabbie. Maybe some of colleagues would mention that he operated in places from which the victims were kidnapped. The cabbie had Jennifer Wilson´s mobile phone on himself - it could be he had more things taken from her dead body in his pockets, who knows? The pink thread from Jennifer Wilson´s costume or something similar connected with other cabbie´s victims (hair, fingerprints) would almost surely be discovered in the taxi, if that was closely examined... once the policemen would know the identity of the true perpetrator, it would not be that hard to prove his guilt.

I believe that Sherlock and Mycroft could easily prove Sherlock´s inncence in TRF either - Mycroft spies on his brother, he certainly had photographs or scans from CCTV cameras proving that Sherlock was elsewhere at the time of the kidnap. But it was not in the interest of brothers to reveal that fact to the police. Sherlock had to fake his suicide to fight with Moriarty´s gang unseen and so it was necessary to pass him as a guilty party. Only at the time when Mycroft needed him in the UK did he leak the facts about his brothers innocence to the public. Police, on the other hand, probably hushed up the case after Sherlock "killed himself" and didn´t investigate it much, because the circumstances reflected badly on them (they believed they were played by the madman for a long time which would be a big scandal if it became a largely known fact....). 

Danielle80 wrote:

My "Problem" is that the cabbie lied to Sherlock with his story and I would like to find a explanation why he did that. There are signs which indicating that Sherlock is the main objective in this case and I dont want to believe that the sole aim is simply the need of challenging him. So in my opinion there must be a masterplan with a higher meaning :-)

I agree that the cabbie certainly didn´t go to Sherlock following his own whim... the way he tried to make Sherlock interested in Moriarty by speaking mysteriously about him was very suspicious...
Moriarty also tried very hard to destroy Sherlock´s reputation both in TRF and in ASIB...
So the theory of the "masterplan" seems very likely...