Episode 3.3, "His Last Vow"

[BLS_Pro]

Now for something completely different.

AGRA

Does anyone know if these initials correspond to any person in the Sherlock canon?

[Ally.C]

Someone brought up an interesting point on Tumblr about the Treasure of AGRA. It was empty.  I wonder if this is nicely represented by John burning it away (as Watson in ACD is thrilled the treasure is absent, for it gives him a chance with Mary) or if this means possibly the flashdrive might have had nothing on it?

 

*tents fingers* It's going to be a good hiatus.

[Karie]

It's been claimed that Mary should be condemned as a murderer (or attempted murderer) because she went to kill CAM.  The (HIGHLY debatable) claim has been made that she did not fear for her life and so her action was unjust and unjustified.  It was plain morally wrong.

 

Strangely, however, the same condemnation - of Sherlock and his actual (rather than simply attempted) 'murder' of CAM - has been nearly completely absent.  In fact, many have cheered at Sherlock killing CAM.  Yet Sherlock acted no differently than Mary was about to act.   Interestingly, some have excused/applauded Sherlock because he is a socipath/psychopath/fill-in-clinical-term-here.  And the complaint against Mary has been made there simply shouldn't be more of that type in the series (certainly not loved by John). 

 

What I haven't really seen is a view that Sherlock's action was an act of justice - ie was morally "right".  The show goes out of its way to demonstrate that CAM engages in what he explicitly describes as "ownership" of people.  There is a term for such "ownership": subjugation - or more plainly, slavery.  One can easily make the argument that force used in defense against it is an act of justice, not a violation of justice.  In fact one can point out that is the very reason blackmail is against the law.  IT is the initiation of force against individuals.  And it is recognized that the government properly acts to defend against this initiation of force.  As such, both Mary and Sherlock were simply defending themselves against CAM's attempt to subjugate them.

 

I suspect many reacted quite negatively to the visceral depiction of CAM's injustice (ie the display of his ownership of John and Sherlock) - and cheered at Sherlock's subsequent killing (not murder) of CAM because, at some level, they 'get' the justice of Sherlock's action.

 

I wouldn't have made a fuss if Mary had killed CAM. I had enough love for her character that, if she had blown his brains out, pointed the gun at Sherlock and said,"Don't tell John. Meet me in private later" and run off (he could have still had John listening to her confession in secret), I could probably have forgiven her for her lies more easily and been OK with her continued presence on the show. Like, OK, she has a sketchy past, but she's tried to put it behind her. And she cares for John, and it was really wrong to lie to him, but if he can forgive that, I can probably learn to let it go, too. And she killed Magnussen... well, he was threatening to destroy her life, and he was a truly awful person who was probably responsible for many deaths on his own (we saw later that Lord Smallwood took his own life because of those letters CAM was black mailing him with, he probably wasn't the first and wouldn't be the last to take their life or be murdered in anger because of a secret that came to light). I would have felt like Mary had a lot of explaining and making up to do for her past and her lies, but I could possibly have forgiven her in time.

 

But then she shot Sherlock. Fatally, in fact, except he literally kick started his own heart after the doctors in the OR had called ToD and walked away.  And then she went after him again, with a gun, to threaten him into silence. (And I fully believe she was prepared to kill him if he wouldn't agree to silence, and if her cover hadn't already been blown with John.) Sherlock had been like family to her.  He let her into his tight knit little circle without a second thought. He is someone who is routinely rude and oblivious to even those closest to him, and yet he was unbelievably kind to her. He gave her the highest compliment he was capable of giving, that she was deserving of the one person he holds above all others.  And she shot him without so much as flinching. She didn't even beg him,"Please, please, Sherlock, don't make me do this!" She just said,"If you move, I will kill you" and when he took half a step, BAM. Sherlock spent several minutes watching CAM humiliating his best friend, and coming to terms with the fact that there was only one way out, before he finally pulled the trigger on a man who disgusted him like no other. And Mary didn't spare a moment's deliberation before she shot someone she supposedly cared for. 

 

Also, if she really wanted to put him out of commission momentarily without killing him, trained assassin that she is, she should have gone for the shoulder. The area she aimed for, it would be a miracle if she didn't hit his liver or lung or something. 

 

 

 

Now for something completely different.

 

AGRA

 

Does anyone know if these initials correspond to any person in the Sherlock canon?

 

Amanda Abbington commented on her twitter after the episode that the initials were taken from a Sherlock Holmes story about lost treasure. Someone posted a few days ago, maybe on tumblr, about someone from the story with those initials. I think the first name was possibly Addison, but I can't remember the rest. I don't know if this is meant to be Mary's actual name, or if it's just a coincidence and a nod to ACD fans. 

 

 

I came back in here to post something I've noticed upon watching the episode again. I know I've ranted excessively over the last four days about a lot of problems I had with this episode, but I've failed to mention something that was utterly phenomenal about it... the soundtrack! It's fantastic, I may have to purchase it.  I particularly love the score that's playing as Sherlock shoots Magnussen and then prepares to be taken into custody, while Mycroft watches young Sherlock standing in his place. Beautiful! 

[T.o.b.y]

Someone brought up an interesting point on Tumblr about the Treasure of AGRA. It was empty.  I wonder if this is nicely represented by John burning it away (as Watson in ACD is thrilled the treasure is absent, for it gives him a chance with Mary) or if this means possibly the flashdrive might have had nothing on it?

 

Wow, that's a good observation. How did I not see this?

 

I wonder whether the writers considered this at all, but by making the name of the treasure Mary's initials, they made her the treasure. Which turned out not to exist - see Sherlock's analogy of the facade before the empty house. That's really a rather clever reference!

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

 

If wife #2 was never named or described, how do we know she's not the same person as wife #3? Did it ever mention unnamed wife #2 dying or leaving?

 

   A good point, and I thought about that too. So Watson married at least twice, because since Mary died during "The Great Hiatus" somewhere between 1891 and 1894,  she could not be the wife mentioned "The Adventure of the Illustrious Client" that took place in 1902.

[Carol the Dabbler]

... I cannot see Sherlock heading in anything but a soap direction ....

Must admit I'm a bit concerned about that myself. I love character development, and think they've done it very nicely in the past. But in this episode, it seems to overshadow the casework, which is really odd for a Sherlock Holmes story.     Maybe this was just something they had to get out of their system?

 

1-Charles threatened Mary to get to Mycroft, right? So when this actually started to happen? Before the wedding or after? .... Charles must threatened Mary a long time ago, but how does he knew the importance of Mary to Watson at that time? ....

 

2-What were the odds of Sherlock break into Charles office and Mary be there at the same time? Did I miss something?

 

1 - Mary had been dating John for six months before "The Empty Hearse." They had probably been friends even longer than that. Does that help your timeline?

 

2 - Maybe Sherlock doesn't believe in coincidences, but I think in this case we need to.

 

Okay. I knew it. I just knew it. After a second viewing, this episode already appeals to me a lot more than the first time and I predict that once I finally have those DVDs and the chance to sit down with them at leisure, I will come to actually love it.

Let's hear it for subtitles!!!

 

We see Moriarty, after the credits, walking, talking, clearly not just an image.

We don't see just a GIF-type image like the fakey looking one on the billboards, true, but it could still have been a film of him. Of course it actually was a film of him -- the whole episode was a film, but we accepted it for fact because it was presented as such. If people (meaning people in the show) see a film of Moriarty that they've never seen before, they would tend to think it was something new.

 

... John doesn't read the files on Mary. Neither do we. I am still prepared to believe that her "killing spree" was motivated by something greater than just a desire to kill. And, I think she was genuinely upset when she shot Sherlock. Her apology to me seemed sincere. She just seemed backed into a situation she saw no way out of and acted out of desperation.

She warned him to stay back. He apparently thought of her as sweet little Mary Watson and decided to call her bluff. But she wasn't bluffing. Not saying what she did was justified, but she didn't expect Sherlock to show up, and it's not like she had a lot of time to think about it.

 

Oh my gosh. Quote boxes. I don't understand thee.

I need to write up a how-to on dealing with the quirks of the current forum software, but in short, I find it easier to go into plain-vanilla editing mode by clicking the "light switch" at the upper left corner of the edit box.

 

Just bear in mind that everything inside [square brackets] is a formatting code and needs to be left intact. Also, formatting codes must come in pairs, beginning with one in plain [square brackets] and ending with a matching one in [/square brackets] with a slash mark.

 

As long as you stay away from the formatting codes (or alternatively, delete the pair of them and everything between), you can edit away to your heart's content, doing things like editing the quote down to the part that you're actually referring to. You can also move your cursor outside the quote box, which the rich-text editor often thinks we don't need to do. Then when you've done your pruning, just click that light switch again, and you can use the rich-text editor to finish your post.

 

If that's too much like gobblety-gook, just say so and I'll do a better write-up with visual aids.

 

I so wanted another good strong female character in the show. Not one who was strong because she kills people for a living. (or spanks them, whatever.)

 

Sorry, but that does seem to be Moffat's idea of a good strong female character. 

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

Thank to Ariane DeVere and all the hard work she puts in ....

 

Yes, bless her heart!  She's got the first part of her "Last Vow" transcript posted already, with the rest to follow (fairly) shortly.  Here's the index to all her transcripts.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

I love that she puts in the theatrical direction, that does help, a lot.

[sherlockandjohn]

 

... I cannot see Sherlock heading in anything but a soap direction ....

Must admit I'm a bit concerned about that myself. I love character development, and think they've done it very nicely in the past. But in this episode, it seems to overshadow the casework, which is really odd for a Sherlock Holmes story.     Maybe this was just something they had to get out of their system?

 

... John doesn't read the files on Mary. Neither do we. I am still prepared to believe that her "killing spree" was motivated by something greater than just a desire to kill. And, I think she was genuinely upset when she shot Sherlock. Her apology to me seemed sincere. She just seemed backed into a situation she saw no way out of and acted out of desperation.

She warned him to stay back. He apparently thought of her as sweet little Mary Watson and decided to call her bluff. But she wasn't bluffing. Not saying what she did was justified, but she didn't expect Sherlock to show up, and it's not like she had a lot of time to think about it.

 

 

This episode must have been very exciting for the writers; very different, challenging, with enormous possibilities. It was probably somewhat self-indulgent. One can hardly blame them; it's their job, they want it to be fun. It really does reach almost epic proportions. It's incredibly dramatic, emotional, dark, and it's got these larger-than-life themes of love, sacrifice, forgiveness, death, blame, good v. evil, right v. wrong. Standing on its' own, I'd say it's fantastic. Seen as part of this tv-show, it's not what I personally want. I also fear that it's going too much in the direction of soap drama, but let's hold our horses. We cannot predict what the writers will do next; they made some big changes from series 2 to series 3. Who's to say it couldn't go the other way again?

 

I hadn't thought of it, but yes, Mary might have reacted differently if she'd had time to think things through. Her instincts took over, and they were definitely bad instincts, but I find it a slightly redeeming factor that she was under pressure.

 

[Charles Augustus Magnussen]

Definitely MY favourite episode.

[Slithytove]

Her instincts must be a bit off if she didn't go for a kill shot. Sherlock says she incapacitated him to give her time to negotiate. How would that work? How did she know he wouldn't say "Mary did it!" as soon as he woke up? Also, as a trained assassin and crack shot, why aim for the abdomen? Why not go for a shot less likely to hit major organs? Unless, of course, being a psychopath, she did not want to kill instantly but to inflict a slower, more painful death......Just a suggestion.

 

People have tried to equate John's shooting of the cabbie and Sherlock's killing of CAM with Mary's actions, and also to suggest she is being judged more harshly because of her gender, but this only works if you believe all killing is wrong, regardless of circumstances. (A clear moral position held by Quakers, Jains, etc.). Otherwise, you have to consider motivation.

 

John shot the cabbie because he knew the latter was a serial killer about to claim another life. He killed to protect Sherlock. That much is clear.

 

The murder of CAM is more problematic, as no-one's life was immediately under threat. However, he had just revealed that he holds information which could threaten Mary's life. Up to this point, Sherlock has tried to negotiate, presumably to save Mary from jail. He kills CAM to remove a threat to Mary's life. (Mary might have been going to kill CAM or she might have been trying to negotiate with him, but her motivation was to save herself from prosecution, as far as we know. She does not mention any threat to her life.)

 

We do not know much about Mary's past. It could be that some of her killings were done for the greater good, and I suspect the writers will follow this route. However, we know that she thinks John, despite his pragmatic attitude to killing, will not love her if he knows the truth. This suggests that at least some of her actions were morally indefensible.

 

However, it is the shooting of Sherlock which really puts them on the opposite side of the moral divide. John and Sherlock both kill someone morally corrupt, to protect the life of someone they care about. Mary shoots an innocent man, who trusts her not to hurt him, when he is not threatening her or anyone else but offering to help her. She is not defending het own or anyone else's life. Her motivation is simply to silence him. Even if every killing in her past can be justified, the shooting of Sherlock is morally indefensible.

 

I hope that Series 4 does not gloss over these events and give us John and Mary in a lighthearted, jokey relationship, solving crimes with their old pal Sherlock. I hope it is more complicated than that. Knowing how Mofftiss like to twist us around and shock us, I have high hopes for the future.... Just hope we do not have to wait so long this time!

[sherlockandjohn]

Hm, one might wonder why I didn't think about this before... but Mary had one more concern. The baby, of course. She's not just protecting herself, but her unborn child. Worth considering!

[Earendil]

 

 

 

I came back in here to post something I've noticed upon watching the episode again. I know I've ranted excessively over the last four days about a lot of problems I had with this episode, but I've failed to mention something that was utterly phenomenal about it... the soundtrack! It's fantastic, I may have to purchase it.  I particularly love the score that's playing as Sherlock shoots Magnussen and then prepares to be taken into custody, while Mycroft watches young Sherlock standing in his place. Beautiful! 

 

 

I absolutely agree. I loved the music of series 1 and 2, but series 3 soundtrack is a masterpiece, especially of HLV. It adds so much to the scenes, I cannot even describe it.

I've seen this episode for the 3rd time yesterday evening, and I must say if Benedict won't get a BAFTA for his perfomance, then there is no justice in this world! 

[sherlockandjohn]

 

I've seen this episode for the 3rd time yesterday evening, and I must say if Benedict won't get a BAFTA for his perfomance, then there is no justice in this world! 

 

My thoughts precisely! For me, he is the best part of this episode. He really pushes it to a higher level.

[wildwoodflower]

 

Fox, you know a lot more about the original than I do - where do we actually learn that Watson got married a second time? I have read all the stories, but I never spotted another marriage than that to Mary Morstan.

 

 

Okay, Watson met and married Mary Morstan between "The Sign of Four" and "The Final Problem" and died during "The Great Hiatus".  A second wife in mentioned in "The Adventure of the Illustrious Client" and "The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier."  Never named, never described. The same goes for a third wife mentioned after "The Adventure of the Illustrious Client" in Oct. 1902.

 

 

This has become the job of the fans - to figure out how to make all the pieces fit of stories written by a guy who was sick of the character, tryied to kill him off, only to be persuaded to bring him back (for a lot of money) and couldn't be arsed to remember the names of Watson's wives or perhaps even to bother naming them. 

 

[BLS_Pro]

 

I wouldn't have made a fuss if Mary had killed CAM.

...

 

Also, if she really wanted to put him out of commission momentarily without killing him, trained assassin that she is, she should have gone for the shoulder. The area she aimed for, it would be a miracle if she didn't hit his liver or lung or something. 

 

Of course, because Sherlock and John were on the scene she couldn't.  Nor could Mary simply "wing" Sherlock.  She needed him to be unable to speak.  Simply hitting him in the shoulder would have been as useless as not shooting at all.  And she had to shoot.  Otherwise Sherlock still would have been able to speak and as such would have been the weapon by which CAM broke John.

 

 

 

But then she shot Sherlock. Fatally, in fact, except he literally kick started his own heart after the doctors in the OR had called ToD and walked away.  And then she went after him again, with a gun, to threaten him into silence. (And I fully believe she was prepared to kill him if he wouldn't agree to silence, and if her cover hadn't already been blown with John.)

She had to shoot him.  So the only question open is does she take the "kill shot" or take a shot which incapacitates him.  She did not take the kill shot.  Thus she indeed left him alive to fight for his survival - which he did.

 

As to the second instance, she explicitly stated she would do anything to protect John.  This is what is admired about Sherlock - and is proof of his love.  Interesting that is what is not admired about Mary - and is rejected as proof of her love.

 

 

And she shot him without so much as flinching. She didn't even beg him,"Please, please, Sherlock, don't make me do this!" She just said,"If you move, I will kill you" and when he took half a step, BAM.

She is as cool under pressure as Sherlock.  She knew she had no time to discuss anything with Sherlock - to "beg" him.  John could come around the corner any second.  She had to act. 

 

You seem to be of the mind that Mary intended to kill Sherlock here.  So then why did she not take the head shot?  She was certainly capable.

 

No.  She acted in the only way she could in a horrendous situation which required immediate action.

 

 

 

Sherlock spent several minutes watching CAM humiliating his best friend, and coming to terms with the fact that there was only one way out, before he finally pulled the trigger on a man who disgusted him like no other.

Sherlock stood there with deliberate intent.  He was simply waiting for Mycroft to arrive so there were witnesses to the fact that Sherlock was acting completely alone and that John was not complicit in the killing of CAM.  He had made the decision far earlier.  In fact, the need to kill CAM occurred to Sherlock when he discovered CAM's mental powers - in the cafe months earlier.  Unlike Mary's dilemma, Sherlock's was not one which was unexpected - and so, unlike Mary, Sherlock's choice and action was not made on the spot in a split second (ie without time for planning and reflection, as Mary's choice had to be made).

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

 

This has become the job of the fans - to figure out how to make all the pieces fit of stories written by a guy who was sick of the character, tryied to kill him off, only to be persuaded to bring him back (for a lot of money) and couldn't be arsed to remember the names of Watson's wives or perhaps even to bother naming them.

 

 

 

Sir Arthur may have said he was sick of Holmes and said he had killed him off in "The Final Problem" but, it would seem subconsciously, that

Sir Arthur left Holmes a gigantic out that a Blue Whale could have swum through.

 

  Just for the fun of it, read Holmes's letter at the end of "The Final Problem with the last few minutes of "TRF" firmly in your mind's eye and see if there arn't few things in that letter that strike you.

[T.o.b.y]

This has become the job of the fans - to figure out how to make all the pieces fit of stories written by a guy who was sick of the character, tryied to kill him off, only to be persuaded to bring him back (for a lot of money) and couldn't be arsed to remember the names of Watson's wives or perhaps even to bother naming them.

 

Precisely!

 

And I am getting the feeling that the writers of "Sherlock" increasingly think it our job as well to make sense of the sequences of dramatic moments they are pleased to call stories.

 

Sorry. That was maybe a bit too harsh. But I do wish they didn't load their episodes with so much material at once and rather deal with fewer issues more thoroughly.

 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

 

But I do wish they didn't load their episodes with so much material at once and rather deal with fewer issues more thoroughly.

 

 

  But it does get us to thinking. And what better way to get people scurrying into the canon. Sure gives my mind something to do, I'm never bored at work now.

[BLS_Pro]

Sherlock says she incapacitated him to give her time to negotiate. How would that work? How did she know he wouldn't say "Mary did it!" as soon as he woke up? Also, as a trained assassin and crack shot, why aim for the abdomen? Why not go for a shot less likely to hit major organs?

It bought her the time she simply did not have in CAM's office.  And doing more than 'winging' Sherlock was required by the situation. 

 

 

it is the shooting of Sherlock which really puts them on the opposite side of the moral divide. John and Sherlock both kill someone morally corrupt, to protect the life of someone they care about. Mary shoots an innocent man, who trusts her not to hurt him, when he is not threatening her or anyone else but offering to help her. She is not defending het own or anyone else's life. Her motivation is simply to silence him.

But Sherlock IS threatening someone else: John.  Mary believes the truth will break John.  So indeed she must keep CAM and now Sherlock silent - to prevent them from destroying John.  And she must do it right then and right there.

 

So the threat is immediate and it is to John.

 

As to the notion that Mary simply wants to "silence" Sherlock then, as Sherlock himself points out, the kill shots would have done the job without question.  But, also as Sherlock points out, Mary let "sentiment" get in the way - ie she values John (and Sherlock).  And so, in that split second, she did the only thing she could to save John.

 

Thus not only is Mary's action defensible - Sherlock himself indeed defends it. 

 

 

Up to this point, Sherlock has tried to negotiate, presumably to save Mary from jail.

No.  Once Sherlock learned of CAM's mental powers in the cafe, Sherlock recognized the 'final solution' likely would have to be the killing of CAM.  That's why he demanded to see the vault - as opposed to simply demanding CAM's files on Mary.  Sherlock needed to confirm his suspicion - as well as give him the time and opportunity to plan on killing CAM.

 

In this case, the "deal with the devil" was literal - it was not a deal with CAM.  It was a deal Sherlock made with the devil himself - trading his own life for John's life.  And it was a deal he made far before "this point".

 

[T.o.b.y]

 

 But it does get us to thinking. And what better way to get people scurrying into the canon. Sure gives my mind something to do, I'm never bored at work now.

 

Well, you have got a good point there. I certainly don't want everything explained. But I do need to feel that there is something definite to be found out by following carefully planted clues. Which used to be the case. This series, I often got the impression that the writers simply had no idea for certain things (like what drives Mary or what her past life was really like - or the IOU business in The Reichenbach Fall) and leave it to us to fill the gaps. I like to speculate, but I don't like to just mess around in the dark, knowing perfectly well that there probably is no answer because nobody bothered to make it up.

 

[Slithytove]

/>

 

 

 

I wouldn't have made a fuss if Mary had killed CAM.

...

 

 

Also, if she really wanted to put him out of commission momentarily without killing him, trained assassin that she is, she should have gone for the shoulder. The area she aimed for, it would be a miracle if she didn't hit his liver or lung or something.

Of course, because Sherlock and John were on the scene she couldn't. Nor could Mary simply "wing" Sherlock. She needed him to be unable to speak. Simply hitting him in the shoulder would have been as useless as not shooting at all. And she had to shoot. Otherwise Sherlock still would have been able to speak and as such would have been the weapon by which CAM broke John.

/>

 

But then she shot Sherlock. Fatally, in fact, except he literally kick started his own heart after the doctors in the OR had called ToD and walked away. And then she went after him again, with a gun, to threaten him into silence. (And I fully believe she was prepared to kill him if he wouldn't agree to silence, and if her cover hadn't already been blown with John.)

She had to shoot him. So the only question open is does she take the "kill shot" or take a shot which incapacitates him. She did not take the kill shot. Thus she indeed left him alive to fight for his survival - which he did.

 

As to the second instance, she explicitly stated she would do anything to protect John. This is what is admired about Sherlock - and is proof of his love. Interesting that is what is not admired about Mary - and is rejected as proof of her love.

/>And she shot him without so much as flinching. She didn't even beg him,"Please, please, Sherlock, don't make me do this!" She just said,"If you move, I will kill you" and when he took half a step, BAM.

She is as cool under pressure as Sherlock. She knew she had no time to discuss anything with Sherlock - to "beg" him. John could come around the corner any second. She had to act.

 

You seem to be of the mind that Mary intended to kill Sherlock here. So then why did she not take the head shot? She was certainly capable.

 

No. She acted in the only way she could in a horrendous situation which required immediate action.

 

/>

Sherlock spent several minutes watching CAM humiliating his best friend, and coming to terms with the fact that there was only one way out, before he finally pulled the trigger on a man who disgusted him like no other.

Sherlock stood there with deliberate intent. He was simply waiting for Mycroft to arrive so there were witnesses to the fact that Sherlock was acting completely alone and that John was not complicit in the killing of CAM. He had made the decision far earlier. In fact, the need to kill CAM occurred to Sherlock when he discovered CAM's mental powers - in the cafe months earlier. Unlike Mary's dilemma, Sherlock's was not one which was unexpected - and so, unlike Mary, Sherlock's choice and action was not made on the spot in a split second (ie without time for planning and reflection, as Mary's choice had to be made).

Shooting Sherlock to give herself time to negotiate is pretty ridiculous. How did she know that the first words out of his mouth, when he woke up, wouldn't be "Mary did it"? How did she know she would be allowed access to him before he was interviewed by the police as a victim of attempted murder? And, as John was at the scene and stayed with him in hospital, how could she be confident that Sherlock would not tell him the truth immediately? Surely she would simply have risked adding a charge of attempted murder to her list.

 

We do not know, until CAM tells them moments before his death, that he can contact people who want to kill Mary. If she knew, why did she not tell John? It is a better reason than the one she gives, i.e. that CAM could put her in prison for life. There is no reason to assume Sherlock intends to kill CAM after the cafe scene. Regardless of the latter's remarkable memory, all Sherlock knows is that CAM has incriminating evidence against Mary. However much he loves her, maybe Sherlock has no intention of committing murder to keep her out of jail. What he attempts is negotiation, and a plot to get CAM arrested for buying state secrets. It is not until CAM suddenly ups the stakes that Sherlock is driven to kill to save her life.

 

My personal opinion is that it is nobler to throw your own future away in a terrible act to protect someone else than it is to do the same thing to protect your own happiness, whether you are trying to keep yourself out of prison, stay with the man you love or both. But maybe that is just me.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

 

This series, I often got the impression that the writers simply had no idea for certain things (like what drives Mary or what her past life was really like

 

   This part of the story is far from over yet. We certainly have the opportunity to find out more about that in the upcoming Season.

[T.o.b.y]

 

Shooting Sherlock to give herself time to negotiate is pretty ridiculous. How did she know that the first words out of his mouth, when he woke up, wouldn't be "Mary did it"?

 

They probably were! At least John says the first word was "Mary", maybe he just couldn't understand the rest because Sherlock was still only half conscious and mumbling...

[BLS_Pro]

 

How did she know that the first words out of his mouth, when he woke up, wouldn't be "Mary did it"?

She didn't.  Shooting Sherlock bought her time she simply didn't have in the office.  Even that statement could be walked back by Sherlock if necessary.  That is far different than John catching her in the act.  At that point, CAM's damage is done to him.

 

 

 

There is no reason to assume Sherlock intends to kill CAM after the cafe scene.

Not true.  Sherlock asking to see CAM's vault rather than being given Mary's files is the reason. 

 

 

However much he loves her, maybe Sherlock has no intention of committing murder to keep her out of jail.

It is his love of John, not her, that leads him to kill (not murder) CAM. 

 

 

 

What he attempts is negotiation, and a plot to get CAM arrested for buying state secrets.

No.  That was the bait he used to get to see the vault - ie to confirm no vault actually existed and thus no freedom could be obtained for Mary or John by a simple handing over of files.

 

 

It is not until CAM suddenly ups the stakes that Sherlock is driven to kill to save her life.

 

Sherlock's purpose is to obtain their freedom from subjugation by CAM.  The moment he suspects there are no physical files to hand over - and thus no way to obtain their freedom from enslavement to CAM, is the moment he realizes he may likely have to kill CAM to gain their freedom.  That moment is far, far before CAM is flicking John's face.