Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Walford Web, the online home of EastEnders' discussion since 1997. We cover EastEnders news, discussion and spoilers. Join the discussion and make your voice heard! We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're wondering what EastEnders is, click here to see what all the fuss is about.

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Who Killed Lucy?; All the theories
Topic Started: 20 Apr 2014, 05:49 (367,827 Views)
MrJames
Member Avatar

FLASHBACK EPISODE:

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/tv-radio/who-killed-lucy-beale-eastenders-4919336?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MrJames
Member Avatar

YYYYYEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Other Slater Cousin
Member Avatar

YASSS!!!!!

Hurry up February. Event television at its best.
"I loved it in the Olden Days because you talked more. There’s more action now. You know, we would do scenes in the Rovers of me, Bet and Doris Speed with a cup of coffee each before we opened the pub, talking about absolute rubbish. But it was something, and it was what people do." - Betty Driver
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dave Sullivan
Default Avatar

It was the only way they could believably 'reconstruct' the events of Good Friday 2014 as there are so many details that need to be shown in the context of that one night and confirm the true timeframe of those events and I suspect that people like Hetti Bywater, Jamie Lomas and Tanya Franks were informed of this at the beginning of shooting the Lucy plot.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan
Member Avatar


They had to do it really. No matter how good the actors involved are, so much happened that they are going to have to do it just so we can keep up.

I wonder if it was filmed at the time. I would imagine it was in case actors changed their appearance, cut their hair or anything like that but then, the actor playing the killer doesn't know it yet apparently.

Hmm...




Posted Image

Walford is about to change, lives are about to be destroyed, alliances will begin and the residents will never be the same again. Welcome to "Dungeon". New fan fic, coming soon...

Thanks Nick M for the brilliant sig!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MrJames
Member Avatar

Dave Carter
4 Jan 2015, 22:39
It was the only way they could believably 'reconstruct' the events of Good Friday 2014 as there are so many details that need to be shown in the context of that one night and confirm the true timeframe of those events and I suspect that people like Hetti Bywater, Jamie Lomas and Tanya Franks were informed of this at the beginning of shooting the Lucy plot.
I just adore the thought of Hetti, Jamie and Tanya knowing right from when they left that they would be coming back. I *knew* Jamie Lomas was hinting at a flashback with his comments at the Soap Awards.

Amazing, amazing, amazing.

I reckon this will be the Friday episode. It definitely won't be the full live episode as they would need to use some locations... and it wouldn't feel right having the Feb 19th episode be a flashback.

This may just be my favourite *midnight announcement* ever. Huge apologies if I've done wrong by posting it early though.
Edited by MrJames, 4 Jan 2015, 22:47.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
WalfordE20
Member Avatar

I'm FREAKING OUT over here. Amazing news!!!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mrs Peel
Member Avatar

Ross
4 Jan 2015, 16:58
Mrs Peel
4 Jan 2015, 15:13

Quoting limited to 2 levels deep
Exactly. Anna Acton's interview could mean anything. Ian isn't the only member of the Beale household. If the killer is somebody THAT close to Lucy, then Peter, Jane, Cindy, Max and Lauren - maybe even Denise - all fit the bill in the exact same way that Ian does.

Acton stated the bleeding obvious when it comes to police and investigating a killing such as Lucy's. The victim is usually killed by a close family member, and that's where the investigation begins. The actress doesn't know who the killer is; no one does. She speculated that the killer may be Max or Abi, but she said when she filmed the scenes where she spoke to the killer, she could only imagine, and played the scene as such, that she was talking to Ian, Jane or Peter.

If the killer comes from the Beale dynamic, it's one of those three. Peter, I would rule out, because we know, and the show has revealed, that the actor is leaving. That would make him as the killer too obvious. Jane's behaviour is murky, but it's more along the lines of covering something up - for herself, maybe, but also for someone else - hiding Lucy's phone and purse, poo-poohing the idea of going to the police over the jewelry case, insinuating an alibi onto Lauren. OK, Jane may be the killer, but what is her motive? She's not one to argue openly with Ian's children - she always has tried to play the good cop, sometimes stupidly, because they take advantage of her and she undermines Ian. Or is she trying to protect Ian?

Quote:
 
I highly doubt Ian will ever become a killer. It just does not fit in with his character - breakdown or not.


Why wouldn't it? Look at the many Walford residents who have killed. Stacey, one of the few who's expressed remorse for having killed and who was well in command of her faculties when she killed Archie. It was never in Stacey's nature to kill, until she did. Dot and Pam have killed for a purpose and a difficult and dangerous one at that. Ben's a sociopath, and Ronnie's a psychopath. Any of us have the capacity to kill by accident if we lose control of our emotions. No one's saying Ian deliberately killed Lucy - no one can say that Ben deliberately killed Heather. It may have been an accident entirely, but the concealing of the fact makes it an even bigger crime than manslaughter, and Ian could have been in the middle of a psychotic episode.

Quote:
 
There were no 'manifestations' of Ian's breakdown before Lucy was murdered, so this theory just feels like an attempt at grasping at straws.


I'm sorry, but there were, and other people have pointed it out. The most noticeable ones were Ian scratching his left forearm repeatedly and absent-mindedly, sometimes even staring into space in moments of stress. Also there is the way he walks when stressed, the same gait he had when he was in the throes of his breakdown - hunched forward and shuffling. Many commentators have noticed this, both immediately before Lucy was killed and afterward. People forget that prior to Lucy's death, Ian was, himself, in a position of stress - he was opening, again, a re-launch of his restaurant.

Quote:
 
Adam Woodyatt seems happy at EastEnders, and the only way the killer would ever be Ian is if Adam decided to leave. Judging by his comments a few months back about "not being happy if Ian is the killer" show that this is highly unlikely for the time being.


Who says he's leaving? Walford is a haven for people who have killed - Stacey, Ben, Ronnie, Dot, Pam, Nick ... as well as people who cover for killers - Phil, Sharon, Roxy, Shirley. Besides, this storyline is on course to collide with that of the Mitchell-Cotton feud, and you have a perfect storm for the 30th Anniversary - where Nick Cotton is framed for Lucy's death, as a cover for Ian having done it. If Ian accidentally killed Lucy or if his actions led to her death, he may have blocked this out in a psychotic episode and people around him - Jane, Ben, Phil etc - might be protecting him from the knowledge, which, I agree, would be something he could never live with.

Woodyatt's remark is genuinely open to interpretation. He may not be happy that Ian will be tagged a killer for future reference, but if he isn't happy about that, he's just been given the card by which he can leave whenever he wants.

Quote:
 
If anything, making Ian the killer would completely destroy the Beale's. The plot being suggested regarding Ian not knowing he killed Lucy and everyone covering it up for him - and then Ian getting away with the murder - just sounds like a load of sensationalist junk. This show needs to move away from sensationalism, not towards it.


You say that, and yet you are happy that Ronnie swans around the Square, having done the deeds she's done. That's pure sensationalism, because in real time, she wouldn't have been allowed within a ten-mile radius of Albert Square after having kidnapped Tommy Moon. What was the extravaganza we saw at Christmas and on Boxing Day but one shade of sensationalism? What was the car careening across the Square and landing within an inch of the Vic, but a brand of sensationalism? Sadly, this is where all the soaps are heading, and EastEnders, especially, from 2006 onwards. Max being buried alive and treating it like a joke?

It's been established that Ian has mental issues, that seemed to be all to pat and cleared up quickly.

Quote:
 
RE: Jane. It is becoming rather evident to me that she is involved. I believe she murdered Lucy and you believe she helped to cover up the murder.


I'm saying what everyone knows about Jane. She's arrogant, prissy, self-righteous, judgemental, condescending and a hypocrite; but the woman does have a conscience. She emotionally beat herself up after sleeping with Ian the night her husband died. She figuratively wore sackcloth and ashes after having cheated with Grant. There is no way in hell she'd be able to pass this off. Of course, it's evident that she's involved; but her involvement smacks of someone who's covering for someone else who did the deed. The most likely person she'd cover up for would be Ian - she's marrying him, for goodness sake, and this is a man whom she left, saying she wasn't in love with him anymore. They had grieving sex after Lucy's death, and she left, rather than nurture Ian's unreal hopes of re-uniting the family, at the expense of shafting Denise. The fact that she suddenly decides that she loves Ian again and wants to marry him doesn't reek of love as much as it reeks of convenience and protection.

Quote:
 
Fair enough. Please don't pass off my opinion and make out that yours is a solid fact when none of us are aware of the killer's identity yet. Thank you.


Was there really any need for you to say this? Seriously? :huh:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
WalfordE20
Member Avatar

So the flashback episode means we will potentially see:

Ronnie and Roxy's house party
Lucy meeting Jake
Ian and Rainie
Ben, Jay and the robbery
Billy, Lee and Lucy
Lauren heading to the Beales'
Max walking Tramp?
Lucy being killed and moved

I don't think a piece of EastEnders news has ever made me as excited as this has. Well played, Mr Treadwell-Collins.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MrJames
Member Avatar

WalfordE20
4 Jan 2015, 22:55
So the flashback episode means we will potentially see:

Ronnie and Roxy's house party
Lucy meeting Jake
Ian and Rainie
Ben, Jay and the robbery
Billy, Lee and Lucy
Lauren heading to the Beales'
Max walking Tramp?
Lucy being killed and moved

I don't think a piece of EastEnders news has ever made me as excited as this has. Well played, Mr Treadwell-Collins.
Charlie and Ronnie making babies.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Professor Plum
Default Avatar

Why is Jane in such a hurry to marry Ian again? This is something that doesnt sit right with me.
Just livin' in perfect New Zealand!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mrs Peel
Member Avatar

MrJames
4 Jan 2015, 22:57
WalfordE20
4 Jan 2015, 22:55
So the flashback episode means we will potentially see:

Ronnie and Roxy's house party
Lucy meeting Jake
Ian and Rainie
Ben, Jay and the robbery
Billy, Lee and Lucy
Lauren heading to the Beales'
Max walking Tramp?
Lucy being killed and moved

I don't think a piece of EastEnders news has ever made me as excited as this has. Well played, Mr Treadwell-Collins.
Charlie and Ronnie making babies.
After having killed Lucy ...?

Just saying.

Pleased for the flashback episode. I want to see things the way they happened, in chronological order.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
North Korea
Member Avatar

Professor Plum
4 Jan 2015, 23:14
Why is Jane in such a hurry to marry Ian again? This is something that doesnt sit right with me.
Jane's proposal - a cover up for something else entirely.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
North Korea
Member Avatar

Oh dear, not another one...


Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shamelessness
Member Avatar


The news about the flashback episode has got me excited for the anniversary but also quite nervous; I don't particularly want to see any of the suspects unmasked as a killer. And I'll miss the speculation.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MrJames
Member Avatar

Shamelessness
4 Jan 2015, 23:38
The news about the flashback episode has got me excited for the anniversary but also quite nervous; I don't particularly want to see any of the suspects unmasked as a killer. And I'll miss the speculation.
I know. I'm quite devo'd that one of them has to be the killer. They're all decent characters in one way or another.

I suspect they have another headline storyline ready to fire out of the canon once this one is done.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Fehnder
Member Avatar

I want that top
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
WalfordFanatic
Member Avatar

I'd buy that t-shirt if it was for sale in the shop.

I KILLED LUCY!
Posted Image

Thanks Nick
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Fehnder
Member Avatar

Incidentally, a beale murderer is really the only way the killer can be revealed and not gave prison. Without access to lucys stuff, which Jane has hidden, there's no way to frame anyone else (nick) without her.

She wouldn't protect a branning, or Whitney etc. I don't think she'd even protect Cindy.

Without the framing aspect I'd struggle to see how there could be a reveal. And without the Ian/mental health aspect I fail to see why other people would want to help frame nick (by other people I mean Phil, Ben etc)

If it's not Ian, it's going to be one interesting theory. I couldnt see people protecting Jane the same way.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Professor Plum
Default Avatar

Shamelessness
4 Jan 2015, 23:38
The news about the flashback episode has got me excited for the anniversary but also quite nervous; I don't particularly want to see any of the suspects unmasked as a killer. And I'll miss the speculation.
I wont.

I HATE surprises for starters and this is doing my head in.
Just livin' in perfect New Zealand!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · EastEnders Current & Future · Next Topic »
Add Reply