BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 / D'you think Mycroft is involved?

**Posted by besleybean** October 7, 2012 4:12 pm

The more I hear and see, I think Mycroft, if not involved originally, must at least be drafted in.

**Posted by Schmiezi** October 10, 2012 12:36 pm

I believe in Mycroft Holmes!

And I absolutely don´t see him doing anything accidentally, especially not giving information on his brother to a dangerous criminal.

By the way, when he stated that he was forced to set Moriarty free at the end of Baskerville, I instantly wondered who could force him to do so...

**Posted by Davina** October 10, 2012 12:40 pm

You cannot hold someone indeterminently here without charging them.

**Posted by Schmiezi** October 10, 2012 12:57 pm

Davina wrote:
You cannot hold someone indeterminently here without charging them.

In real live: of course not, and quite reasonably so! Same here, by the way.

In Sherlockyland: Well, Mycroft has full control over the CCTV, is called by the Queen in case of scandals and has at least some saying in the outcome of the Korean elections. I´m pretty sure he CAN hold someone without charging them.

(And am I the only one who wonders what he did to make Britain win all those Olympic medals? )

**Posted by Davina** October 10, 2012 1:03 pm

Mwahahah!

**Posted by Ivy** October 10, 2012 2:13 pm

Schmiezi wrote:
Davina wrote:
You cannot hold someone indeterminently here without charging them.

In real live: of course not, and quite reasonably so! Same here, by the way.

In Sherlockyland: Well, Mycroft has full control over the CCTV, is called by the Queen in case of scandals and has at least some saying in the outcome of the Korean elections. I´m pretty sure he CAN hold someone without charging them.

(And am I the only one who wonders what he did to make Britain win all those Olympic medals? )

You are absolutely right, never thought about it, he would have find a way to keep him in prison.

**Posted by NW16XE** October 11, 2012 12:47 pm

Agreed that Mycroft has performed far too clumsily for Mycroft over Moriarty, and his interview with John seems to serve the purposes of creating a Moriarity narrative for John to believe and act from, and giving him information to pass on to Sherlock. Which means John is being badly used by at least Mycroft if not both Holmes boys.
Now, I'll see your cheesecake and raise you my streudel: this is taking it far too far, but what if Sherlock taking a flatmate in the first place was part of a Holmesian plan all along because they realized they would need a patsy? Mycroft said they know about these people; Sherlock's job for his brother in ASiP then is to 1) get a name (for Moriarty, who could already have been on Mycroft's radar in a shadowy way) and 2) involve a third party who can be used to play out their game convincingly. Sherlock choses John, Mycroft vets him in the parking garage and agrees he'll do. Callous plan is then set in motion, for the greater good of the Commonwealth.

**Posted by besleybean** October 11, 2012 12:59 pm

You've read too much David Stuart Davies!

**Posted by SusiGo** October 11, 2012 1:02 pm

NW16XE wrote:
Agreed that Mycroft has performed far too clumsily for Mycroft over Moriarty, and his interview with John seems to serve the purposes of creating a Moriarity narrative for John to believe and act from, and giving him information to pass on to Sherlock. Which means John is being badly used by at least Mycroft if not both Holmes boys.
Now, I'll see your cheesecake and raise you my streudel: this is taking it far too far, but what if Sherlock taking a flatmate in the first place was part of a Holmesian plan all along because they realized they would need a patsy? Mycroft said they know about these people; Sherlock's job for his brother in ASiP then is to 1) get a name (for Moriarty, who could already have been on Mycroft's radar in a shadowy way) and 2) involve a third party who can be used to play out their game convincingly. Sherlock choses John, Mycroft vets him in the parking garage and agrees he'll do. Callous plan is then set in motion, for the greater good of the Commonwealth.

I don't think that John came in as part of a Holmesian plan. When the cabbie mentions Moriarty for the first time Sherlock's surprise and wonder seem genuine. And I think using John in this manner from the very beginning would be very much against the spirit of the canon. I can't imagine Moftiss doing this.

**Posted by besleybean** October 11, 2012 1:05 pm

I hope not.
This is what David Stuart Davies does in: The Veiled Detective.

**Posted by NW16XE** October 11, 2012 1:12 pm

Actually, I hope not too. Also, I'm not saying that Sherlock and John's relationship is all pretense on Sherlock's part, only that it might have started that way. The thing I dislike the most about that scenario is if the whole thing were revealed to John it would be a real friendship killer, I think (he might run off and marry Mary Morstan ). I haven't read DSD, I'll take a look.

**Posted by besleybean** October 11, 2012 1:14 pm

He's a good writer and it's a clever book...plus the ending almost makes up for the rest of the Canon sabotage!

**Posted by SusiGo** October 11, 2012 1:21 pm

besleybean wrote:
He's a good writer and it's a clever book...plus the ending almost makes up for the rest of the Canon sabotage!

A pity you can't get it on Kindle. Sounds interesting although I've become a bit cautious after the shock of Michael Dibdin's Last Sherlock Holmes Story.