Jump to content
lawrebea000

Question on the Moriarty's snipers...

Recommended Posts

So, we originally thought that Sherlock had to fake his own death because otherwise Moriarty's snipers would kill John and all of Sherlock's friends, correct?

 

 

 

Well, it turns out that Mycroft knew about the snipers the whole time, and killed john's sniper. But if he knew about about Moriarty's plan, why would he fake his death in the first place?

 

 

 

If you could give a short explanation how the whole "i'll kill your friends" sceneario, that would be awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a very good question and one that has been bugging me too, and if you think about it, even before yesterdays revelations Sherlock would have had to have known Moriarty's plan in order to pre-ordain his "death" in the first place. I guess we were all so fixated on the 'How' , we never really considered the 'Why'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




Well, it turns out that Mycroft knew about the snipers the whole time, and killed john's sniper. But if he knew about about Moriarty's plan, why would he fake his death in the first place?




Is it not possible that Mycroft didn't know? The only time Mycroft appears to 'know' about the snipers is in Sherlock's explanation to Anderson, Anderson who has clearly gone mental, Anderson who could possibly have been imagining that whole conversation. Also in that conversation sherlock mentions how Anderson could have distracted him from saving parliament from terrorists basically saying that he made it out the train before he actually got out of the situation on screen, I found this odd...

I don't think we know the full story about how Sherlock survived. He said there were 13 possibilities so I think he'll run through a few more... If it turns out that what he explained to Anderson was the way he did it then that's a shame and is patchy...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't truly buy the story Sherlock told Anderson. Some facts, at least. Like the fact that they anticipated the snipers.

But for the sake of it, let's assume it's all true.

 

 

I suppose Sherlock had to die so that everybody was safe, either way. Let's not forget that a lot of people believed him to know the mysterious "code" that Moriarty invented. Even if the media was to set things straight, there would be some who would try their luck. It's a possible threat, and I think it could have been a motivator to fake his death anyway.

 

Another option would be that they couldn't be sure that Moriarty had no safeguards. Some people who would take over, who would upon Moriarty's death and Sherlock's survival receive orders to take the original snipers' places.

 

In any case, there was merit in dismantling Moriarty's network. For both, Mycroft and Sherlock, even if their motivations were different.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe Sherlock's explanation to Anderson either. Why would he explain it all to Anderson and not to John? Doesn't make sense. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did Sherlock need to fake his death if Mycroft could just take care of the sniper situation? I assume it is to convince Moriarty's men as well, so that they were not alert to Sherlock, thereby making it easier for him to track them down. Sherlock said that he was afraid that John would 'let the cat out of the bag'.

 

Personally, I think Sherlock's explanation to the fall is the right one, because Moffat and Gatiss had said they would wrap up all the post-Reichenbach loose ends in the first episode of series 3. Besides, wouldn't it just make us all more frustrated after two years of waiting to not get the answer? I think it would be pretty stupid to leave us still guessing, so I'm buying it. It is also the only explanation that didn't seem like a joke.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys - i'm very weary of spoilers so I must admit to having only skimmed the episode thread as a few things were being discussed that might have taken away the joy of a couple of upcoming surprises ..

 

but anyhoo - two things have been bothering me about the explanation that was given to Anderson - one was the 'other snipers' as per this thread, taking care of all of them would have negated the need to fake Sherlock's death (a fake news report about both deaths would have sufficed !?)

 

Secondly - Holmes states that no-one predicted that Moriarty would kill himself !! How could the method shown have worked if Moriarty had been alive on the rooftop to oversee all the shenanigans below ?? That method and all it's elaborate parts was surely a waste of time to prepare if they thought that Moriarty would still be alive !? How elaborate were the other 13 (?) escape plans they had prepared ? All the smoke and mirrors appears to have focused on ensuring that Watson thought Holmes was dead ... surely only Moriarty had to think that Holmes was dead !?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My main problem with Sherlock's version is the following: In "The Reichenbach Fall", John's sniper packs away his weapon after Sherlock jumped. He still aims at John who is watching how the body is taken away. If I were to go with Sherlock's theory, Mycroft didn't strike the deal until Sherlock jumped. Why was there any need for a deal after the jump? Before, yes. After? Maybe the sniper observed something that proved the fake death. Wouldn't he have shot then? As soon as he saw it? There was no obstacle in his way. A bit paradox, imo. That's why I buy everything but the sniper solution. I think they planned to fake Sherlock's death but not in quite the dramatic way they had to. Moriarty forced their hand to a certain degree. I hope there will be some more discussion of that in the following episodes, as well as an answer to the "why."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, I don't think they will get back to the explanation anymore. If they didn't explain it in this episode I doubt they will do it in the next one. They will just move on... And the next episode is supposed to be John's wedding which, according to Mary, is supposed to take place in May. Why would they still want to discuss Sherlock's death after 6 months? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In The Empty Hearse, when Anderson asks, "but what about the snipers?" He responds with "Mycroft's men intervened before he could take the shot". This implies that the Sniper was going to shoot whether Sherlock died or not. That conflicts with the situation we originally had in the Reichenback fall ("you die, snipers are called off"). Can someone explain or at least try to make sense of this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just reviewed the particular scene; and thanks for pointing that out.

 

Seems to me like John's sniper was threatened by one of Mycroft's agents; I suppose his loyality to Moriarty lost against the prospect of living to see the next day. He was held at gunpoint himself. Or in Sherlock's words, "he was invited to reconsider".

That actually renders my previous point rather moot; the sniper would shoot anyway... more than likely because he saw Sherlock faking it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh so Lastrade and Mrs. Hudson were safe because their snipers thought Sherlock had died (they were far away from the scene). But John's sniper was near, and therefore could see Sherlock faking it, thus Anderson's question : What about John's sniper? Mycroft invited him to "reconsider". Thank you for clearing that up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, lawrebea000, TJP, and Ned -- welcome to Sherlock Forum!  :welcome:

 

Glad to see that y'all are trying to sort out the whole sniper thing.  I'm gonna need to watch "The Empty Hearse" a few more times before I can add anything to what I've already said in the "Reichenbach Fall" thread and various speculation threads.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evening all. This issue has also been causing me some dissatisfaction. I have however been re-reading 'The Empty House' and in it Holmes offers some explanations which i believe may also resolve the issues in the BBC series. So Holmes explains to Watson that he needed him to be convinced of his death in order to write about it in a convincing way that the world could be sure he was dead. In 'The Empty Hearse', John mentions that Sherlock's parents were not present at his funeral, and I can't help but think what a difficult task it would be for John to convincingly act as if Sherlock were dead and attend his funeral etc. etc. if he were actually in on 'it'. I therefore think it is vital for John, Sherlock's partner who is also somewhat in the public's consciousness, to be convinced of Sherlock's death in order for the world to be convinced of it. The world presuming Sherlock dead has two benefits that I can think of. Firstly, it seems important in restoring Sherlock's crushed reputation. The tragedy surely would make the public more receptive to the idea of his innocence. With Sherlock presumed dead, he can't defend himself from Moriarty's lies and so isn't left open to counter-accusations of constructing his defence. When it is suggested that he was in fact the victim of an evil plot by moriarty, the world is receptive to it because there is nobody as innocent as a victim other than a dead victim. Look, for example, at the guilt experienced by one of Sherlock's accusers Anderson in the wake of his death. The emotive nature of death seems to play an important role here. I am drawn to consider also the importance that Sherlock places on his reputation throughout the series. Secondly, there is a possibility that Sherlock wishes himself to be considered dead in order to aide him in his quest to deconstruct moriartys international network. In 'The Empty House' Holmes explains to Watson that following Moriarty's fall, there are other enemies/ partners of moriartys that he had to tackle next. He says it is important he is considered dead so that none of them suspect he is 'after them' so to speak and therefore have their defences down to an extent. I wonder if this can be interpreted in the BBC series as being equivalent to Moriartys network. I am considering here the over-arching plan of Sherlock's revealed in 'the empty hearse' that all along, dating back to moriartys interrogation and in partnership with mycroft, was to close this network down. Much like in the original writings, might it be of significance to this project of sherlocks for him to be presumed dead so as not to raise alarm or suspicion amongst these enemies? The project is after all, as it turns out, Sherlocks primary objective.

 

SO in conclusion for anyone who has stuck with me through this long maiden post (apologies), I am drawn to the conclusion that this may provide the rationale for Sherlock's death stunt in spite of the fact his friends are not in danger from the snipers. and that Sherlock's explanation to Anderson may be genuine. There is a scene in 'the empty hearse' that further draws me to think this, as when sherlock sits down with john and mary and john asks sherlock to explain 'why' rather than 'how', sherlock instinctively says it was to stop moriarty (as if this were obvious). not for example, to protect johns life. it was all related to helping him bring down moriarty and his extensions. 

 

anyway those are my thoughts for what they're worth!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good evening jameskirk and welcome to the forum! :wave: It's always good to see another Trekker here :).

 

Good to see you've jumped right into the discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anyway those are my thoughts for what they're worth!

 

Don't belittle yourself - they're worth quite a lot. You are right, in my opinion: Together, The Reichenbach Fall and The Empty Hearse actually are a very good adaptation of "The Final Problem" and "The Empty House." 

 

Originally, Holmes stated he was happy to give his life if that was what it took to eliminate Moriarty and destroy his network. Sherlock, it turns out, was willing to sacrifice something even more precious to him: His reputation for brilliance and the admiration of his friend. That's what he meant when he said he was "prepared to burn"!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to Sherlock Forum, jameskirk!  :llap:

 

I agree with T.o.b.y -- you've added a great deal to the discussion with just one post.  I especially like your point that Sherlock's primary objective was not to avoid dying, it was to wipe out Moriarty's influence -- so, like any good judo (or baritsu) student, he used his opponent's own energy against him.

 

I had assumed that Sherlock and Mycroft were well ahead of Moriarty and just playing along with him, and I assumed (from reading "The Empty House") that Sherlock spent his hiatus mopping up Moriarty's organization -- but it had somehow never occurred to me (any more than it did to Conan Doyle) that the Holmes brothers had steered Moriarty toward "killing" Sherlock with just this purpose in mind.  I do believe you're right.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had assumed that Sherlock and Mycroft were well ahead of Moriarty and just playing along with him

 

You know what? When I first saw The Empty Hearse, I thought: "damn, Carol was right!" I whole-heartedly admit it makes more sense that way than if it had been the heroic, spur of the moment one-man improvisation I had favored over more rational explanations. At least my gut feeling was correct concerning the fact that Moriarty shooting himself was unexpected and that jumping off the roof and playing dead was not necessarily plan A.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not Plan A, no.  But jameskirk has got me wondering whether Sherlock might have planned to end up "dead" one way or another.

 

In fact, I'm wondering whether the original Sherlock Holmes might have lured Moriarty to the Reichenbach Falls with just such an outcome in mind.  And brought dear, trusting Watson along as his witness.

 

If so, he never told Watson (or Conan Doyle, apparently).  But that'd be nothing new!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In fact, I'm wondering whether the original Sherlock Holmes might have lured Moriarty to the Reichenbach Falls with just such an outcome in mind.  And brought dear, trusting Watson along as his witness.

 

But dear trusting Watson wasn't a witness in The Final Problem! He was called (or rather sent) away to attend to the sick woman and only got to the scene of Holmes "death" much later.

 

As for not having told Doyle, you are absolutely right. His characters really didn't seem to be in the habit of doing that...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

In fact, I'm wondering whether the original Sherlock Holmes might have lured Moriarty to the Reichenbach Falls with just such an outcome in mind.  And brought dear, trusting Watson along as his witness.

 

But dear trusting Watson wasn't a witness in The Final Problem! He was called (or rather sent) away to attend to the sick woman and only got to the scene of Holmes "death" much later.

 

As for not having told Doyle, you are absolutely right. His characters really didn't seem to be in the habit of doing that...

 

But my dear T.o.b.y, Watson was the witness -- after the fact, just like our John.  He found Holmes's note and saw the footprints, and reported Holmes' death to the police.  If Watson had not been more-or-less on the scene (i.e., if he'd stayed in London), it seems doubtful to me that anyone would have thought that Holmes was dead, merely that he had disappeared.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 In the Final Problem, Holmes also leaves a note for Watson. Holmes was sure that the messenger sent to call Watson back to give medical aid was a hoax and that Moriarty was close by. Holmes says that Moriarty is giving Holmes the time to write the note before they join in their last discussion. Sherlock has disposed of all of his assets and worldly goods and given them into Mycroft's hands before they ever left England.

 

  Sounds very much like a kind of suicide note as he was prepared to die as long as he took Moriarty with him.  So it could be that even if Watson was still in England, if Holmes had still been allowed to leave the note even if only for the police, as it states, then he would still be presumed dead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, it could have worked that way if he had left a note "to whom it may concern," and if anyone had happened to find it.  But he did make a point of asking Watson to come with him to Europe, and knew that Watson was well aware that he was headed for the falls.  Seems like it may have been very deliberate.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Seems like it may have been very deliberate.

 

 

  Very much so. Like he never expected to come back alive at all and wanted Watson to be a witness to that event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What the F***? You two think Holmes deliberately pulled Watson out of his happy home and dragged him around the world just so he would have a good witness to convince the world of his tragic death? But - he didn't expect to survive! It was mere chance (and Baritsu) that he did and then the idea to go under cover and just stay "dead" occurred to him spontaneously after Moriarty was gone and he had climbed out! Or... at least that's what he told Watson.

 

Gosh, if you are right, then the original had at least as much to answer for as Sherlock and he wasn't even honest about it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of UseWe have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.Privacy PolicyGuidelines.